Ethical Dilemma

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stor...hey-saved.html

While you may think the ethical dilemma is whether or not rescuers should sue the knuckleheads they rescued, which is a valid point of debate, a deep ethical dilemma for me is this:

I see a Hummer (AKA Bane of The US Roadways) on fire with the license plate 5POILED. Do I rescue the occupants or try to make it home in time for Tosh.0? I mean, driving a Hummer makes you a pretty rotten human being to begin with, but by highlighting the fact that you are a douche with a license plate that says "I am a douche", you are making this a very difficult decision for me.

For future reference, people in Hummers who get vanity plates may try to counter-act their douchiness with a licesne plate that says something like "Handicapped" or "NotD0uch3" to improve their chances of survival in the event they need rescue.

The H1 was pretty sweet. It all went downhill after that... Anything GM touches...

You save the person. The problem is that the state should cover the injuries of the rescuers. Then it should be up to the state to decide how and if it will recover the costs.

Why?:

Because the state should be encouraging good behaviour.

It seems a lot like no right no wrong situation.
The girl who tried to kill herself was mentally ill back then, no doubt. The men who saved her were heroes. That they were injured while saving her is sad, the girl owes them her life, so if it is within her means, and if they are truly permanently injured then she must help them. But filing a lawsuit creates bitterness in a case which started with heroism and humanity. That is the saddest part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

I mean, driving a Hummer makes you a pretty rotten human being to begin with

---

Why's that? I was under the impression that macho SUVs that guzzled fuel were quite popular in USA...

....hence why we let the government get big enough to work out stuff like this.

What do you army guys put on yer Hummer's license plates ?

I can't imagine the number plate, but the bumper stickers would be:

My other Hummer has a .50 cal
My other vehicle is a tank.

Que? Someone deserves to burn to death because they can afford a cool car? What's wrong with a Hummer anyway. Guys just smell money, Hummer means rich

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

What do you army guys put on yer Hummer's license plates ?

---

"R3cru1t3r L13d"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

"R3cru1t3r L13d"

---

Brilliant. :2thumbsup:

you should not stand in the way of natural selection.

Are we going to seriously discuss this?

If so, I don't see any dilemma. Under those circumstances, those guys wouldn't be obligated to save the woman's life because they'd be risking their own lives to do so (doing so anyway is indeed heroic). Add the fact that the woman was culpable for the mess in the first place, I see no problem with sueing her.

The heck with you peons, me and my Hummer are SPECIAL.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...89_6946729.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Que? Someone deserves to burn to death because they can afford a cool car? What's wrong with a Hummer anyway. Guys just smell money, Hummer means rich

---

Well, the enviro-types hate the things because of their abysmal fuel economy, but the real reason they should be banished to the trash heap of automotive history is because they suck. The original H1 was a pretty cool truck. IIRC, it was a nearly exact copy of the AMGeneral version used by the military. It wasn't particularly practical, but I knew of people who used them on ranches out West and to ferry people to nearly inaccessible hunting camps in the Rocky Mountains because they were highly capable, bulletproof off-road vehicles.

The new versions, however, (H2 & H3), are cynical marketing exercises playing on the original's street cred. They are built on shared GM platforms with the much cheaper Tahoe and Suburban SUVs, neither of which are known for their extreme off-road prowess. They have awful visibility. They have terrible cargo capacity. The interior layout is one of the most uncomfortable of any vehicle on the roads today. They are super heavy. And, worst of all, because of all that and plenty more, they are not that great off road, or at least not any better than a jacked up Tahoe would be. Not that most would dare take one off the pavement with all that chrome tacked on. I've seen some videos of them taken off road on YouTube, but compared to Jeeps, Land Rovers, and various models of Toyota SUVs, you never see Hummers on the trails.

They literally have become caricatures of themselves. Owners are pretty much driving around in overwrought Tahoes who paid at least double the price for far less usability. And in terms of the off-road crowd, they are seen as the ultimate poseur vehicle.

If you want an SUV to mod extensively and take to the trails every weekend, get a Jeep (of if you're outside of the US, a Land Rover Defender). If you want to project wealth and success and still have a very capable off-road truck, get a Range Rover. If you want to project that you won a bunch of money in the lottery, or, alternatively, that your car note is bigger than your trailer note, get a Hummer.

(Obviously these observations probably do not apply to Europe, where Hummers are somewhat more rare and thus collectable by the super rich.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_01nVs_DxJo

For their price and maintenance cost generally Toyota has some very viable off road vehicles that get the job done. Given how many I've seen in mining, exploration and onsite, and in farming they seem to be the practical choice.

Land Rovers were some of the best and as a kid I remember them on big construction sites like dams.

I have a Subaru Forester... yes its AWD... that just means its for suburban potholes, shopping centre speed bumps and rainy days ... not for an off road experience.

For their price and maintenance cost generally Toyota has some very viable off road vehicles that get the job done. Given how many I've seen in mining, exploration and onsite, and in farming they seem to be the practical choice. There is a range of other options for the city and Holden (GM rebadged) and Ford in Australia have options more for traddies (Utes) that go on construction sites.

Land Rovers were some of the best and as a kid I remember them on big construction sites like dams.

I have a Subaru Forester... yes its AWD... that just means its for suburban potholes, shopping centre speed bumps and rainy days ... not for an off road experience.

' If you want an SUV to mod extensively and take to the trails every weekend, get a Jeep (of if you're outside of the US, a Land Rover Defender). If you want to project wealth and success and still have a very capable off-road truck, get a Range Rover. If you want to project that you won a bunch of money in the lottery, or, alternatively, that your car note is bigger than your trailer note, get a Hummer. '

K so it's bad taste, but what's it to you? The circles they want to belong to will pick them right out anyway. I would love to have one, it's big and noisy what's not to like, cooler than a Ferrari imho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

I have a Subaru Forester... yes its AWD... that just means its for suburban potholes, shopping centre speed bumps and rainy days ... not for an off road experience.

---

Yup, I have a sedan with AWD, but that's more about snow, slush, ice and general winter conditions on-road than any fantasies of mudding or boulder-hopping.

Of all the offensive vehicles I saw when I lived and worked in NYC, the chauffeured H1 Hummer had to be the most wrong-headed. Of course, we live in a capitalist society, so if people want to waste their money on that sort of thing they're free to do so. But I'm also free to point and laugh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I would love to have one, it's big and noisy what's not to like

---

why are you asking a question you already gave the answer to? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stor...hey-saved.html

While you may think the ethical dilemma is whether or not rescuers should sue the knuckleheads they rescued, which is a valid point of debate, a deep ethical dilemma for me is this:

I see a Hummer (AKA Bane of The US Roadways) on fire with the license plate 5POILED. Do I rescue the occupants or try to make it home in time for Tosh.0? I mean, driving a Hummer makes you a pretty rotten human being to begin with, but by highlighting the fact that you are a douche with a license plate that says "I am a douche", you are making this a very difficult decision for me.

For future reference, people in Hummers who get vanity plates may try to counter-act their douchiness with a licesne plate that says something like "Handicapped" or "NotD0uch3" to improve their chances of survival in the event they need rescue.

---

You will be happy to know that the rescuers are on solid legal ground with this suit. The 'Rescue Doctrine' is a solidly established aspect of tort law. It says, basically, that if someone negligently causes an accident, they are liable for any injuries suffered by a person rescuing the victim of the accident. It applies to incidents where third parties cause the accident, as well as to incidents when the victim was responsible for the accident. All the rescuers need to do is prove that the victim was negligent in his/her behavior, and they will win damages.

But she wasn't negligent per se, what she did was totally intentional and thoroughly thought-out. They should have minded their own business. Just because she was calling for help doesn't mean she really meant it, it was simple death panic and pain as her fake breasts melted.

I'm just kidding btw. I just hate Hummers is all.

FYI no one who drives a Hummer has ever tipped anyone ever. Fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

BTW no one who drives a Hummer has ever tipped anyone ever. Fact.

---

Scientific research proves that H1 and H2 owners can only achieve erections in the presence of starving orphans. I read it on the internet, so it's true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TinCow

You will be happy to know that the rescuers are on solid legal ground with this suit. The 'Rescue Doctrine' is a solidly established aspect of tort law. It says, basically, that if someone negligently causes an accident, they are liable for any injuries suffered by a person rescuing the victim of the accident.

---

Excuse my Wikidness, but doesn't this doctrine say something different:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

In the USA, the rescue doctrine of the law of torts holds that if a tortfeasor creates a circumstance that places the tort victim in danger, the tortfeasor is liable not only for the harm caused to the victim, but also the harm caused to any person injured in an effort to rescue that victim.

[..]

Essentially, in its pure form the Rescue Doctrine boils down to 4 main elements - all of which must be met in order to bring it to bear for the person asserting its privilege.

There must be peril or the appearance of peril to a third party, caused by the defendant.
That peril or appearance of peril must be imminent
A reasonable person would recognize the peril or appearance of peril and the plaintiff must also have actually recognized it.
The plaintiff must have exercised reasonable care in effecting the rescue.

---

AII

I think the potential of there being a baby in the back satisfies the third party peril requirement. The guys specifically say that they thought there was a kid in the back, and one of them reached into the flames to feel around for a kid while the other guy was performing CPR on the drivers fake breasts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

I think the potential of there being a baby in the back satisfies the third party peril requirement. The guys specifically say that they thought there was a kid in the back, and one of them reached into the flames to feel around for a kid while the other guy was performing CPR on the drivers fake breasts.

---

It's nice to know we have so much legal expertise on board. :laugh4:

AII

What you really want, if you want an offroader/SUV, is this:

http://www.wimp.com/armoredvehicle/

:yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

K so it's bad taste, but what's it to you? The circles they want to belong to will pick them right out anyway. I would love to have one, it's big and noisy what's not to like, cooler than a Ferrari imho.

---

I was just answering your question: 'What's wrong with a Hummer anyway.'

If you know all the issues associated with Hummers and still want one, more power to you. I don't think anyone should have to explain their choice of vehicle. The enviro-types have been trying to take the character out of vehicles for years (not for any real environmental concerns, but because they're one of the clearest indicators of wealth disparity), and the Hummer has character in spades. I just think if you're into big, cool trucks, there are better options out there. Just my opinion, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

I was just answering your question: 'What's wrong with a Hummer anyway.'

If you know all the issues associated with Hummers and still want one, more power to you. I don't think anyone should have to explain their choice of vehicle. The enviro-types have been trying to take the character out of vehicles for years (not for any real environmental concerns, but because they're one of the clearest indicators of wealth disparity), and the Hummer has character in spades. I just think if you're into big, cool trucks, there are better options out there. Just my opinion, though.

---

Would be surprised if it wasn't, but generally speaking people seem to take offence with Hummers and the people driving them. It's just a (cool) car

Somebody has to explain to the broccoli-brigades that a Toyota Prius (these things in which people drive 40 km/ph where you can go 80 km/h to project their greenliness gawd) is actually more polluting by the way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

I was just answering your question: 'What's wrong with a Hummer anyway.'

If you know all the issues associated with Hummers and still want one, more power to you. I don't think anyone should have to explain their choice of vehicle. The enviro-types have been trying to take the character out of vehicles for years (not for any real environmental concerns, but because they're one of the clearest indicators of wealth disparity), and the Hummer has character in spades. I just think if you're into big, cool trucks, there are better options out there. Just my opinion, though.

---

Would be surprised if it wasn't, but generally speaking people seem to take offence with Hummers and the people driving them. It's just a (cool) car

Somebody has to explain to the broccoli-brigades that a Toyota Prius (these things in which people drive 40 km/ph where you can go 80 km/h to project their greenliness gawd) is actually more polluting by the way

Jeep>Truck>Hummer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Would be surprised if it wasn't, but generally speaking people seem to take offence with Hummers and the people driving them. It's just a (cool) car

Somebody has to explain to the broccoli-brigades that a Toyota Prius (these things in which people drive 40 km/ph where you can go 80 km/h to project their greenliness gawd) is actually more polluting by the way

---

Hummers are too wide. They are a bane to the roadways. Neither they not Dually trucks should be allowed to drive in a city with proper folk.

During the Bush administration a tax loophole existed that allowed people to buy Hummers and get a full credit of the cost to their taxes over subsequent years. Note I said credit, not deduction. So yes, Panzer, while they are a sign of wealth and some people will hate them for that reason alone, they also became a sign of taxpayer funder excess driven by people who had the time and means to obtain bogus small business license with no intent of ever turning a profit, and only the intent to have an 80k wagon paid for by the government. Way to reward people who are definitely not in need. This loophole was soley responsible for the spike in Hummer sales, and car dealers encouraged its abuse.

So aside from their awkwardness on the roads and in parking lots, and aside from their overwhelming unselessness as a vehicle, they are a stark reminder at the abuse that comes with certain types of tax breaks.

Ah yes, good old Section 179. Hummers were the end result, but all of the luxury SUVs benefited from this farce. I think every real estate agent in the country used this credit before they clamped down on it. :yes:

Finally, someone who knows what I am talking about.

I resisted the temptation, although when I went car shopping in 2005 virtually every dealer tried to get me to, except good old Hyundai.

Oh how that law was abused.