>Let me weave you an intricate tale.
A man starts his night out like any other night when there is a televised broadcast of his favorite hockey team's game. He calls his buddies to make sure the plan is still on, meets at the same bar at the same time as every other game every other time it has been on. They, of course say yes they'll be there.
This man's name is Dustin, no more extraordinary than any typical American in that bar as he walks in and assumes his typical seat. He doesn't even have to tell the bartender what he'll have, because he's been a regular at this same bar since that bartenders started working there. We'll call the bartender Joe. Joe knows Dustin and his friends, and they happily compensate him for all the time he spends serving them alcoholic beverages.
Over the course of the hockey game, Dustin downs enough beers to acquire a .18 BAC, which happens to be twice the legal limit for driving a car. Dustin realizes this, and so does Joe. So, being a good bartender, Joe of course makes sure that Dustin is not driving home. Instead, he decides to take the train.
Being the drunk that he is, though, Dustin fails to board the train and instead succeeds in falling onto the tracks and gets his leg severed by a train.
This all took place in 2006. It is an unfortunate story, and I feel bad for Dustin because he got his leg severed. But I don't feel sorry for Dustin because he is a bumbling idiot. The reason I tell you this story is because he has been entangled in legal jumble for the past couple of years and the court finally reached it's verdict.
The train company has been ordered to award Dustin $2,336,713. Two million, three hundred thirty six thousand, seven hundred and thirteen dollars. Do not misjudge me here: it is a horrible tragedy that Dustin lost his leg, but he is claiming that the train operator should have seen him laying on the tracks and stopped the train before running him over.
"They don't get a free pass as to why the person was on the tracks. They are trained to be able to look out for people on the tracks ... and people are known to be intoxicated by night," said Dibble's lawyer. It blows my mind that a jury would side with Dibble on this one, to be completely honest. So his argument is that since people tend to drink at night the train operator should be able to see that a man is laying on the tracks...at night... and stop the over 3 ton train in a matter of seconds, possibly damaging the entire train's rig all to avoid hitting a man incapable of standing on his own two feet long enough to not get hit by a train.
Just when I started getting hope for humanity, they go and do something like this. Unbelievable. If you want the whole story, click here or to see other reasons for my loss of faith in the intelligence of mankind, see this. Just the idea that some of these people thought they could win these cases makes me cringe at the fact that they are reproducing.
It's amazing that some people can dress themselves in the morning.