>In a message dated 2/13/01 9:36:47 PM Central Standard Time,
>extropy@russo.org writes:
>
>> At 21:10 -0800 2/12/01, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> >Thus my suggestion that a malpractice lawsuit for failure to notify,
>> >inform, recommend, or apply cryonic suspension as a 'final meliorative
>> >clinical intervention against irreversible morbidity'.
>> >
>> >Let's see Peter Jennings smirk at that!
>>
>> Just what Americans need - more reasons to be litigious.
>>
>> I sincerely hope that Extropians can approach their problems more
>ethically.
>
>While it is true that Americans may be "too litigious" about some things, I
>have to speak up in favor of my profession here.
Ya know, I knew you would. :)
While I basically agree with what you said about using lawsuits to
resolve actual grievances - Mr. Davis was suggesting the use of
lawsuits as a publicity stunt to promote awareness of cryonics.
Frivolous lawsuits in the US are just plain destruction of property.
You take your pile of money and then go cancel out someone else's
pile of money, creating three losers: the plaintiff, the defendant,
and the people in the US who deserve a better justice system - and
you get two winners: the plaintiff's attorneys and the defendant's
attorneys.
As I understand it, the British use more of a "winner takes all"
method in deciding legal disputes. Is that correct? Although I'm
not real hip on the wigs, I think that we could do well to adopt some
of those methods.
Regards,
Chris Russo
--
"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in thought
or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth, which never yet
hurt anybody. It is only persistence in self-delusion and ignorance
which does harm."
-- Marcus Aurelius, MEDITATIONS, VI, 21
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:39 MDT