Hunting Dog Accident as an Example of Corporate Corruption, the new Organized Criminal Enterprise
Attorney
(866) 735-1102 Ext 335
We are all sheep being lead by the insurance industry to the Promised Land. The insurance industry has become the new religion. Plaintiff attorneys are being portrayed as the devil.
The lead has us all wetted for what is going to be a funny story. And you can almost hear the writer say: Let me tell you a funny story. A new SUV for Christmas, a bunch of guys out to duck hunt first stop for a few drinks; then onward to a frozen lake take out dynamite to create a hole, the dog takes off to do what's he's been taught, to retrieve what has been tossed and bring it back to it's owner who is now running and yelling at the dog to drop it, but the dog gets frightened, turns and runs, then hides under the brand spanking new SUV with the dynamite and after it ignites both go down into the frozen lake.
Funny?
Not really, but it sounds funny when told like only a story teller can. In fact it's about as funny as the myth of the frivolous lawsuit. Here's another story:
On the first day of pheasant season in Iowa, the pheasants and hunter James Harris wound up on the wrong end of the shotgun. After his party shot a bird north of Grinnell on Friday, 37-year-old Harris put his gun down and crossed a fence to retrieve it. That's when things went to the hunting dogs, who stepped on the weapon and bang! Harris was hit in the lower left leg. He was treated at a nearby medical center and then airlifted to Iowa City. Authorities are investigating. No word on whether the dogs have been interrogated.
Of course the SUV and dog aren't covered under the auto insurance policy due to illegal use of explosives and the owner continues to pay $400.00 per month to the lender. Is this the really funny part? Let me know when we get to there because as of yet I'm not seeing humor. Just gullible people finding humor in stories made up by the tort-deformists to make money by persuading juries that we, the injured Plaintiff are all stupid.
Okay, time to go to law school and have to deal with reality of today's society. Everyone laugh and get it over with because if the person who was shot were someone other than the guy whose gun was laid down, no relative or dependent would be laughing. But would you cry with them at the funeral? And would you side with those dependents by supporting them if they chose to file suit and seek compensation? Or would you chime in the well oiled gun-lobby saying it's un-American and frivolous?
And what about the guy's SUV? Is it toast along with the auto insurance policy he's been paying between $4,800 and $10,000 to insure the SUV?
Like most tort-deformer stories this story isn't true, but it's so easy to believe isn't it? Why is that? Why are you so willing to buy into the truth of it even though it's not true? I too hate paying insurance premiums. I wonder how it is that so many insurance companies can have record profits and still tell us they are going broke and that's the reason for the high premiums?
Ask yourself why the insurance executives smile every time a Plaintiff wins a large medical malpractice verdict. Is it because it scares all the doctors into raising their insurance limits and paying gobs of money every month in premiums? Who really needs $100,000,000.00 in liability coverage?
The insurance industry thinks all of this is funny but not the story, because they paid to have it made up. Heck it's their writers who come up with these stories. Madison Avenue at its best creating advertising that is insidiously currupt but effective at generating profits. The story conditions us all for the real life story that comes close to real claims. And in the end, doctors fighting with lawyers, lawyers suing doctors and getting awarded large verdicts, juries scared, Defense minded judges being appointed and juries calling us all stupid - It's all so good for business.
Is the story still funny?