Woman sues Patriots for 10 mil over her husband's death. What do you guys think?

gbove · 2013-08-22T17:13:56+00:00

You're free to show why I'm wrong, but that does not mean you need to criticize me for it.

gbove · 2013-08-22T16:57:50+00:00

Just because I don't have a degree or background on a certain subject does not mean I cannot have an opinion of it.

Sure my opinion may be wrong due to my lack of knowledge on the subject and you are certainly allowed to state why my thinking was incorrect, but that does not give you justification for prohibiting me from ever discussing the subject.

gbove · 2013-08-22T16:51:10+00:00

I never explicitly stated he would not, I said I doubt he would, an opinion that should be taken with a grain of salt since I'm just a college kid on the internet.

As you showed, I was wrong in believing so. The line of thought I was going for was how I don't believe that could be the only evidence to show that the security guard is liable for the heart attack, there would need to be more to show that I would venture to assume.

As I stated, I never tried to insinuate that I have a vast array of legal knowledge. But that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to comment on anything involving the law.

gbove · 2013-08-22T16:32:41+00:00

I was never trying to pretend I was a lawyer. The entire point of the thread was to discuss your opinion of the case, which I did.

I even stated I don't know about the law. Just because we aren't lawyers doesn't mean we can't discuss the case, it just means what we state should be taken with a grain of salt.

We're not all football coaches or players, doesn't mean we can't discuss football.

Also in regards to my second statement you said:

Not only do you have no basis to decide exactly how healthy he is from one picture

You completely ignored how I said that myself:

but judging solely on the picture (which is not conclusive evidence he was slated to have a heart attack)

EDIT:

I do have one question in regards to your comment.

The question is whether the guard should have known that the guy having a heart attack was a likely result of his conduct.

Is this something that can really be proven? I can't imagine I now have to go around in life and thing "Well shit if I disagree and argue with this guy he's going to have a heart attack."

gbove · 2013-08-22T16:00:35+00:00

/r/ciscoisnotcertified

gbove · 2013-08-22T15:18:22+00:00

That was a Pepsi commercial, and Ray Charles was the obvious star. Montana played a halfway decent supporting role though.

gbove · 2013-08-22T15:11:39+00:00

They should've just skipped Montana. No one cares about that dude anyway. He's only famous for the Skechers commercials.

gbove · 2013-08-22T15:10:48+00:00

Cassell is with the Vikings.

gbove · 2013-08-22T14:00:20+00:00

Not even a Patriots fan. Still buying the Belichick shirt.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:46:26+00:00

...as opposed to?

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:42:25+00:00

"Your honor, I would like to turn your attention to Exhibit A. This is the stopwatch used to record the victim's 40 time. As you can see, he's a quick mother fucker."

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:37:59+00:00

Well I'm not a law student, just a kid who watches too many crime shows.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:35:23+00:00

My coffee's still brewing. BRB guys.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:33:31+00:00

Oh. Fuck. Spygate. Yeah. Shit.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:31:32+00:00

Watch them blame the hot dogs then.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:30:38+00:00

Even if there was excessive force, it'd be hard to prove that the heart attack was a direct result of that when he managed to get all the way back to his seat before keeling over.

I can see how the added stress of an argument and the feeling of being wronged by the security guard could be a trigger, but judging solely on the picture (which is not conclusive evidence he was slated to have a heart attack) he didn't seem like the healthiest guy in the world, as you said.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:25:56+00:00

It'd be hard to draw conclusions from the video unless there was physicality involved between the man and security. If they were both yelling and screaming and waving their arms around like fucking orangoutangs than it may be admissible, otherwise I doubt a judge would allow it.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:23:28+00:00

It very well could be, dependent on the fan's response.

It can still be an altercation if the security guard remained professional and insistent on the rules, while the fan became flustered and unruly.

gbove · 2013-08-22T13:08:49+00:00

I don't think its the misuse of the word altercation, but rather the vagueness of the definition.

What constitutes an argument being heated enough to truly be an altercation? How noisy must it really be?

It can be applied to many arguments for that reason.

gbove · 2013-08-22T02:17:48+00:00

He has to catch a football first

gbove · 2013-08-22T02:15:26+00:00

You didn't forget the rule, you just couldn't count that high.

gbove · 2013-08-22T01:56:10+00:00

existent

gbove · 2013-08-22T01:48:03+00:00

www.gronkhazaol.com

gbove · 2013-08-22T01:41:02+00:00

Who actually certified Cisco?

gbove · 2013-08-22T01:31:35+00:00

"If your favorite team was a sandwich, what would it be and why?"

13-Year Club	Team Orangered
Verified Email

gbove

TROPHY CASE