I'll repeat, you basicly want to take away rights we grant to absolutely anyone else under any circumstances. Your suggestion would also mean that if someone with a legal greencard or tourist vista gets involved with a INS mistake, they have absolutely no way to go to court and try to prove that the government made the mistake since they have lost all rights to the court sytem. Unlike the normal current process, if someone does something that's technically legal but grossly negligant they get away with it without having to worry about a civil suit at all like they would have to with any other person. Criminals can still sue under the US judicial system, but your suggestion would take away this right for illegal immigrants. If you include the CRIMINAL justice sytem in your remark your one step away from making any illegal immigrants in the US slaves. In some ways your policy change would give US companies MORE incentive to lure in and hire illegal aliens. Currently if a factory has unsafe working conditions, not only does the company have to worry about OSHA fines, which are not always all that high, but they also have to worry about lawsuits from the injured or their next of kin. These sort of companies would view a group of workers who can't sue them as a dream come true and definately be inclined to hire them while saving money by skipping adding safety features in the factory. Your proposal is an unbelievably bad idea beyond the issue of whether you believe that all people should have some basic rights.
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,599
- 19
- 81
My grandmother, think she's 76, said (jokingly) that she's sue McDonalds if the coffee wasn't hot. She loves her coffee just short of scaldingly hot.
That is interesting though about 185 degrees. Do they have problems with contamination or something? That is just a wee bit toasty.
Protection from a Criminal Act and sueing civily is two different things.
These illegal aliens are sueing for $200,000 each for wages they won't get because they were caught!
Funny thing is, they (the illegals) first have to prove that Wal-Mart knew, or should have known of their illegal status. Next, These illegals have to convince a jury (difficult since they have alredy perjured themselves, lied to or avoided federal officers at the Port of Entry, and stole from the taxpayers). If they succeed at this, they then have to prove that they were somehow harmed, compared to their peers (in Mexico) by Wal-Marts hiring practice. This is hard to show since the average worker at a Maquiladora (factory) in Reynosa, Mexico is around 35-50 dollars per week, before taxes. Wal-Mart contract Janitors make far in excess of that, even at three dollars per hour, so they got over on this one.
There is one thing that they can do, and they have a better chance to win. They can win all owed wages, per illegal if they merely show that The Janitorial Company knew, or should have known that they were illegals. That's federal Immigration law. The company at fault would also be fined 10,000 per illegal.
There is one thing that they can do, and they have a better chance to win. They can win all owed wages, per illegal if they merely show that The Janitorial Company knew, or should have known that they were illegals. That's federal Immigration law. The company at fault would also be fined 10,000 per illegal.
Heh, something tell me whichever lawyer these illegals used won't be to anxious to win owed wage. Thats probably constitutes to less than 10K combined for all 20 ppl if they got paid $3/hr, assuming it refers to the monthly wage.
I'll want to see what kind of jury will grant someone whose clearly an illegal that sum amount of money ($200K) when they clearly have broken US laws to be here to begin with.
Now here is a Lawsuit not so Frivilous:
Edit 12-4-2003 Apparently it is a FRivilous Lawsuit as these bopsy twins have done this kind of stunt before. <MAD>
Welcome to Wal-Mart, how can I help you? Would like a DVD player with the footprints on your back?
11-29-2003 Woman Trampled Unconscious While Shopping At Wal-Mart
Patricia VanLester had her eye on a $29 DVD player, but when the siren blared at 6 a.m. Friday announcing the start to the post-Thanksgiving sale, the 41-year-old was knocked to the ground by the frenzy of shoppers behind her.
"She got pushed down, and they walked over her like a herd of elephants," said VanLester's sister, Linda Ellzey. "I told them, `Stop stepping on my sister! She's on the ground!'"
Ellzey said some shoppers tried to help VanLester, and one employee helped Ellzey reach her sister, but most people just continued their rush for deals.
"All they cared about was a stupid DVD player," she said Saturday.
Paramedics called to the store found VanLester unconscious on top of a DVD player, surrounded by shoppers seemingly oblivious to her,
"She's all black and blue," Ellzey said. "Patty doesn't remember anything. She still can't believe it all happened."
Ellzey said Wal-Mart officials called later Friday to ask about her sister, and the store apologized and offered to put a DVD player on hold for her.
Wal-Mart Stores spokeswoman Karen Burk said she had never heard of a such a melee during a sale.
"We are very disappointed this happened," Burk said. "We want her to come back as a shopper."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh she'll be back as a shopper alright, spending millions of Wal-Marts money
Edit: No she won't, Wal-Mart should SUE her and her sister!
Edit 12-4-2003 Apparently it is a FRivilous Lawsuit as these bopsy twins have done this kind of stunt before. <MAD>
Welcome to Wal-Mart, how can I help you? Would like a DVD player with the footprints on your back?
11-29-2003 Woman Trampled Unconscious While Shopping At Wal-Mart
Patricia VanLester had her eye on a $29 DVD player, but when the siren blared at 6 a.m. Friday announcing the start to the post-Thanksgiving sale, the 41-year-old was knocked to the ground by the frenzy of shoppers behind her.
"She got pushed down, and they walked over her like a herd of elephants," said VanLester's sister, Linda Ellzey. "I told them, `Stop stepping on my sister! She's on the ground!'"
Ellzey said some shoppers tried to help VanLester, and one employee helped Ellzey reach her sister, but most people just continued their rush for deals.
"All they cared about was a stupid DVD player," she said Saturday.
Paramedics called to the store found VanLester unconscious on top of a DVD player, surrounded by shoppers seemingly oblivious to her,
"She's all black and blue," Ellzey said. "Patty doesn't remember anything. She still can't believe it all happened."
Ellzey said Wal-Mart officials called later Friday to ask about her sister, and the store apologized and offered to put a DVD player on hold for her.
Wal-Mart Stores spokeswoman Karen Burk said she had never heard of a such a melee during a sale.
"We are very disappointed this happened," Burk said. "We want her to come back as a shopper."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh she'll be back as a shopper alright, spending millions of Wal-Marts money
Edit: No she won't, Wal-Mart should SUE her and her sister!
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
That is right nice of Walmart. Wonder what happened to the one she was clutching.. The story seems to indicate that this all happened as the doors opened.. maybe she was returning a player and got caught up in the wrong line. My experience is that the lines are longer for returns..
daniel1113
Diamond Member
- Jun 6, 2003
- 6,448
- 0
- 0
Very interesting indeed. Stupid bitches, so I put this in the right thread afterall.
Here is the Linkage:
12-5-2003 'Trampled' Wal-Mart Shopper Has History Of Injury Claims
An investigation by WKMG-Local 6 reveals Vanlester has filed 16 previous claims of injuries at Wal-Mart stores and other places she has shopped or worked, according to Wal-Mart, court files and state records. Her sister, who accompanied her Friday on the visit to Wal-Mart, has also filed a prior injury claim against Wal-Mart, with Vanlester as her witness, a company spokeswoman said yesterday.
Vanlester has for years complained of head, back, neck, leg or arm pain caused by slipping and falling, objects falling on her and other accidents, according to medical records in a public court file examined by WKMG-Local 6. In fact, her sister says she was wearing a neck brace at the time of last Friday's incident because of injuries from a years-old car accident.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This woman has claims dating back to 1987. This woman should be in JAIL!!!
daniel1113
Diamond Member
- Jun 6, 2003
- 6,448
- 0
- 0
Frivilous lawsuits, huh? Here's one of my favorites:
Samuels v. West (as in Togo West, then-Secretary of the Dept. of Veterans Affairs), decided in the U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals on Sept. 23, 1998. I'd give the official cite, but I can't find it right now. Here's the full text of the decision.
Background: Mr. Samuels, a veteran of military service, was seeking VA disability benefits based on PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) resulting from the combat-related horrors he witnessed in Vietnam. Problem was, he was never in Vietnam; he never even left the U.S.
Quote from the official decision:
Here, all of the appellant's PTSD diagnoses are based upon his fictitious recitation of combat experience in Vietnam. None of these PTSD diagnoses refers to any non-fictional in-service incident, such as a fear of weapons, as a potential in-service stressor. Thus, for the purpose of determining whether the appellant has submitted a well-grounded PTSD claim, the alleged stressor is the appellant's combat experience in Vietnam. However, the record is absolutely clear that the appellant had no service in Vietnam, much less saw combat in that country.
Sure, his bogus claim was eventually denied, but he wasted a lot of gov't time and money in the process, and while the VA was busy dealing with him, some vet with real injuries was needlessly delayed. :disgust:
Samuels v. West (as in Togo West, then-Secretary of the Dept. of Veterans Affairs), decided in the U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals on Sept. 23, 1998. I'd give the official cite, but I can't find it right now. Here's the full text of the decision.
Background: Mr. Samuels, a veteran of military service, was seeking VA disability benefits based on PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) resulting from the combat-related horrors he witnessed in Vietnam. Problem was, he was never in Vietnam; he never even left the U.S.
Quote from the official decision:
Here, all of the appellant's PTSD diagnoses are based upon his fictitious recitation of combat experience in Vietnam. None of these PTSD diagnoses refers to any non-fictional in-service incident, such as a fear of weapons, as a potential in-service stressor. Thus, for the purpose of determining whether the appellant has submitted a well-grounded PTSD claim, the alleged stressor is the appellant's combat experience in Vietnam. However, the record is absolutely clear that the appellant had no service in Vietnam, much less saw combat in that country.
Sure, his bogus claim was eventually denied, but he wasted a lot of gov't time and money in the process, and while the VA was busy dealing with him, some vet with real injuries was needlessly delayed. :disgust:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter