The lawsuit was grounded on the car being unsafe, particularly the seat belt which trapped him and he burned alive because of it.
Now I have no idea if that is true in regards to the Porsche Carrera GT, but unsafe specs is grounds for a wrongful death case. Porsche did settle in lieu of going to court.
Always skirting around those safety standards. You'd think that would be the one thing they would be most concerned with squaring away as it is the easiest thing to sue you for.
Gender: Male Location: The Darkest Corner of your Mind
Account Restricted
It's retarded b/c the daughter is only going after money. The coroner confirmed that the driver was going 100+ mph in a 35 zone on 10 year-old dry-rotted tires all while driving a hyper car well-known to be more challenging to handle than your average toyota highlander with lane-keep assist.
It's the equivalent of blaming the gun for mass-shootings. BS like this is why I'm slowly losing the will to live. Cars are becoming ever more regulated and this only adds to the storm.
__________________ "Technology equals might!" "Evolve or perish"
Gender: Male Location: The Darkest Corner of your Mind
Account Restricted
Never thought a californian would be interested in what's deemed by a good majority of people to be "a gas-guzzling, over-sized" car. But hey, at least we share a love for the panther platform. Hopefully they won't be banned by the time I'm old enough to buy one .
__________________ "Technology equals might!" "Evolve or perish"
What is your intent with this statement? Do you disagree with the numbers I put up?
Because some were off over 7.5%. My range of 2%-5% was to capture a majority that were off. If I wanted to mention an average, which would not make my point, I would have mentioned a national average number, like you did (which I could not verify: I could not prove what you posted).
What was my original point? My original point was we would need to show results that would very comfortably beat this polling error average in order for the distrusting American people to trust the results. My point of 2-5% was rather important: definitely have to beat that to instill confidence.
I cannot edit my post. Damn. Oh well, some where off for the average of 7.5% by state while specific pollsters were off by over 18 points (two different types of numbers but very much similar).
Why am I using the polls of states which prove the point I was making about how wrong the polls were?
And why did you overlook the portions I put in there about how far off the polls were for a national consensus (+18 points, at times) and then claim that my point was totally irrelevant when discussing the national consensus?
Gee, I don't know! Derpy dooo!
Now you know what I think you're just a troll. And why I should just ignore you again.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Oct 26th, 2017 at 02:09 PM
KMC Community Forums
Oct 25th, 2017 07:05 PM
.
