'Murica! FUCK YEAH!unreal that you can sue a company who made a product that you are using like a moron.
unreal that you can sue a company who made a product that you are using like a moron.
unreal that you can sue a company who made a product that you are using like a moron.
They should make a filter that only works when they jump off of a bridge. That should clean up the gene pool a bit.The victims were not using the product like a moron, they are suing the company because the product essentially encouraged moronic and dangerous behavior.
True, the idiot driver is the one most responsible, but anyone that designs an app like that should be able to predict how its going to be used and what sorts of problems it will cause. Why should they get a pass?
they should make a filter that only works when they jump off of a bridge. That should clean up the gene pool a bit.
Snapchat says it found evidence in McGee's activity logs that she had not been using the app around the time of the crash. This information has prompted both sides of the civil case to jointly file a motion to put the civil lawsuit on hold for further investigation.
Is it possible to open a class-action against a company for creating a feature like this that actively encourages reckless endangerment of the public?
I don't see any alcohol companies providing a technology that tallies the number of beers you've had, while driving, and broadcasting that live to your retarded "social media" accounts. That would obviously result in a disastrous fine against these companies.
Why, then, is a company allowed to create the exact same feature regarding an activity that is in-arguably far, far, far more dangerous than drinking and driving?
Is it that these dillhole tech companies are equally stocked with braindead millenials that have no capacity for thought before sending out these idiotic features?
The victims were not using the product like a moron, they are suing the company because the product essentially encouraged moronic and dangerous behavior.
True, the idiot driver is the one most responsible, but anyone that designs an app like that should be able to predict how its going to be used and what sorts of problems it will cause. Why should they get a pass?
Why blame the company and not the individual?
Cars are capable of going well over the speed limit. Should all car manufacturers be held responsible for high speed crashes, or any accidents for that matter?
How many emergency maneuvers is it safer to temporarily speed up to 80 mph or 90 mph?
The increased top speed of cars is a safety feature, not a criminal business ploy.
Furthermore, under whose jurisdiction of speed limits would all these car manufacturers have to be complying with?
I imagine very few. In my 250k miles of driving, I never ONCE had to accelerate to 90 to avoid an accident.
You'd be far safer traveling at 55mph and brake, benefits coming from increased reaction time and less momentum which means the brakes are more effective.
And the speed filter on Snapchat is a criminal business ploy?
Why blame the company and not the individual?
Cars are capable of going well over the speed limit. Should all car manufacturers be held responsible for high speed crashes, or any accidents for that matter?
...and it's perfectly legal to go fast on private tracks. Freedom and all.How many emergency maneuvers is it safer to temporarily speed up to 80 mph or 90 mph?
The increased top speed of cars is a safety feature, not a criminal business ploy.
Furthermore, under whose jurisdiction of speed limits would all these car manufacturers have to be complying with?
...and it's perfectly legal to go fast on private tracks. Freedom and all.
Darwin missed his chance this time, next time who knows ?
"A feature that for some reason exists." LOL, I don't think it's possible to have put that any better. Just idiotic.
I imagine very few. In my 250k miles of driving, I never ONCE had to accelerate to 90 to avoid an accident.
You'd be far safer traveling at 55mph and brake, benefits coming from increased reaction time and less momentum which means the brakes are more effective.
Attempted Murder. 20 Years.
Start handing out sentences to real criminals and people fall in line.
She'll get some sort of Vehicular Battery charge a year suspended and some fines. Get sued by the people who's lives she ruined and claim bankruptcy, which will allow her to start fresh.
Meanwhile Joe Bob is in prison doing 5 years for a bag of pot.
...and it's perfectly legal to go fast on private tracks. Freedom and all.
Ugh, no. I have avoided many accidents with the accelerator. Of course I've avoided many with the brakes too, it just depends on the circumstances.
It's called defensive driving. Nearly everything should be done while accelerating. People who slow down while doing things like merging and changing lanes need to have their license revoked.
Speeding up to 90 to avoid an accident? Do tell... how often? What were the circumstances? What kind of car? You'd need a pretty powerful car to go from 80-90mph quickly enough where it would be useful.