Comments on: Lawsuits from tragedy, ubiquitous security cameras, and IRS torpor Steven Brill Tue, 19 Aug 2014 18:30:28 +0000 hourly 1 By: ModernDad Thu, 02 May 2013 06:17:51 +0000 Wow. How quick you are, Mr. Brill, to jump to the defense of the big corporation.

So, they are totally without responsibility here. Really?

– Could they have made sure that each and every door into the theatre was locked and/or monitored?

– Could they have noticed something different, some unusual, such as…a man in costume walking into the theatre carrying weapons and ammunition?

– Could they—knowing there were already lots of reports about violence—have beefed up security just a bit? (I worked as a minimum wage security guard during my college summers, told just to be watching every moment in case anything suspicious occurred. Could they have afforded to pay someone $10 an hour for this?

And why is the gun manufacturer, distributor and retailer immune from a lawsuit? Same for the ammunition maker. Do you think that’s a good thing?

I’d like to believe that you’re always calling it as you see it, Mr. Brill, regardless, and that informing us of the truth is your paramount concern.

But, after reading most of “Class Warfare”, I have real doubts about your judgment and your integrity.

Maybe you’re doing here, what you did in writing that “education” screed; promoting the view of the side that has lots more money—with the hope that you can access some of it later, as a “writer” on their behalf, doing “special projects” or whatever name you choose to give to obsequious fawning in public.

Talk about a new form of “Ambulance Chasing”…

Some of us can see right through it, Steven. And it won’t wash. It just won’t wash.

By: triviaguy Tue, 23 Apr 2013 16:24:15 +0000 The Colorado ruling is no where near the travesty of justice that the commentator is claiming. A basic tenet of law in the US is that business have a duty to protect their customers from reasonably foreseeable harm.The only thing the judge is allowing is for the defendants to submit evidence that the theater knew or should have known about the danger the shooter presented, when they invariably fail in this proof, the Defendant will be granted summary judgement and be released from liability. Yes, it is annoying for the theater to have to spend money defending this case, but guess what, that is why they purchase insurance, to cover such contingencies.