SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   Women sued lottery for not winning (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=117164)

Skybird 06-22-07 01:24 AM

Women sued lottery for not winning
 
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...489959,00.html

If brain would be made of chocolate, some people wouldn't have enough to fill a smartie. :lol:

darius359au 06-22-07 01:37 AM

People are just stupid:nope:

I do love the line about her neighbour "Cruely parking" his new porsche out front of His house , where else was he going to park it? atleast he didnt park it out front of her place , Then I'd say he's being cruel or just going nehnah:rotfl::rotfl:

bookworm_020 06-22-07 01:47 AM

She didn't even buy a ticket!:huh: Did she expect to just be handed the winning ticket? I hope she is forced to pay court costs:shifty:

P_Funk 06-22-07 01:53 AM

At least the court decided that she was full of it. I'm not sure if it wouldn't be different had it been a Florida women or sommat.

Skybird 06-22-07 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P_Funk
At least the court decided that she was full of it. I'm not sure if it wouldn't be different had it been a Florida women or sommat.

In Florida's courts she probably would have won the lottery jackpot plus twice that sum as compensation for the cruel pain from the stress - because money cannot really compensate for that, you know... :lol:

Reaves 06-22-07 02:16 AM

They really need to start punishing people who try to scam our legal systems. In my opinion it's similar to fraud.

Hitman 06-22-07 02:19 AM

Quote:

In Florida's courts she probably would have won the lottery jackpot plus twice that sum as compensation for the cruel pain from the stress - because money cannot really compensate for that, you know... :lol:
No, in Florida's Courts she would have been declared President of the United States with the majority of valid votes :rotfl:

Skybird 06-22-07 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaves
They really need to start punishing people who try to scam our legal systems. In my opinion it's similar to fraud.

:yep:

kiwi_2005 06-22-07 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaves
They really need to start punishing people who try to scam our legal systems. In my opinion it's similar to fraud.

In this ladies case they have punished her, she would feel a right fool now than before she sued. What was she thinking!:nope:

KevinB 06-22-07 03:36 AM

Similar to those morons who sue the tobacco companies after getting lung cancer because they were'nt warned smoking can be harmful.

P_Funk 06-22-07 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinB
Similar to those morons who sue the tobacco companies after getting lung cancer because they were'nt warned smoking can be harmful.

Well thats not quite the same. The tobacco companies have secretly for decades been amping up the lethality of smoking in the pursuit of increasing the chemical dependency of nicotine in the human body. That definitely isn't part of the deal, even if smoking is bad for you.

The Avon Lady 06-22-07 04:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P_Funk
Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinB
Similar to those morons who sue the tobacco companies after getting lung cancer because they were'nt warned smoking can be harmful.

Well thats not quite the same. The tobacco companies have secretly for decades been amping up the lethality of smoking in the pursuit of increasing the chemical dependency of nicotine in the human body. That definitely isn't part of the deal, even if smoking is bad for you.

Agree.

:rotfl:

:p

:rotfl:

:p

:rotfl:

:p

KevinB 06-22-07 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P_Funk
Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinB
Similar to those morons who sue the tobacco companies after getting lung cancer because they were'nt warned smoking can be harmful.

Well thats not quite the same. The tobacco companies have secretly for decades been amping up the lethality of smoking in the pursuit of increasing the chemical dependency of nicotine in the human body. That definitely isn't part of the deal, even if smoking is bad for you.

All very well, but when did the first warnings appear on packets? sometime in the 70's or earlier?

P_Funk 06-22-07 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinB
Quote:

Originally Posted by P_Funk
Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinB
Similar to those morons who sue the tobacco companies after getting lung cancer because they were'nt warned smoking can be harmful.

Well thats not quite the same. The tobacco companies have secretly for decades been amping up the lethality of smoking in the pursuit of increasing the chemical dependency of nicotine in the human body. That definitely isn't part of the deal, even if smoking is bad for you.

All very well, but when did the first warnings appear on packets? sometime in the 70's or earlier?

And what of the emphatic denials by the tobacco industry before congress that nicotine is addictive? Its one thing to be warned or not warned generally, but to manipulate the reality behind it in an obviously devious way and a way that is against the benefit and safety of the public is or should be illegal.

Tobacco isn't a good comparison here. They actually are bloodsucking sons of bitches.

KevinB 06-22-07 04:37 AM

[quote=P_Funk][quote=KevinB][quote=P_Funk]
Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinB
Tobacco isn't a good comparison here. They actually are bloodsucking sons of bitches.

Totally agree mate!:up:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.