Parents forever suing

https://www.yahoo.com/news/team-molly-parents-sue-e-120953641.html

They bought their 12 year old kid an e-bike that was for 16 year olds at least a certain height and she rode it with a friend in LOS ANGELES where biking is very dangerous and was riding on the rack over the back wheel.

"Molly and an 11-year-old friend climbed aboard a RadRunner e-bike that belonged to the friend’s 13-year-old sister, the lawsuit says. The friend was operating the bike as Molly rode atop a flat rack over its back wheel, a feature that “invites a passenger to sit in tandem,” according to the complaint.

The two girls rode to the top of a hill that they most likely would not have been able to climb without the bike’s electric boost, the lawsuit says. After the friend turned the bike around to head back down the hill, the bike “began to rapidly pick up speed, and it began shaking,” according to the complaint. The friend “applied the rear brake, but the bicycle did not slow. She then pulled the front brake, but the bike did not stop, and the front wheel began to wobble.” She lost control, and the girls were thrown. The lawsuit claims that the Rad Runner’s “disc brakes in conjunction with a quick-release mechanism for detaching the front wheel” is “a known safety hazard” in the bike industry"

I honestly do not think a bike rack ever invited anyone to sit on it, but according to the parunts lawyer's that one rack did

Also it was the fault of the electric boost that the bike made it up the hill in the first place.
Funny they did not try to sue the hill.

The bike rack is there for groceries or other items for the adult rider who uses the e-bike in lieu of a car.

Unfortunately, this lawsuit will probably end in a settlement because any judge or lawyer who will ask the parents of all the kids involved -1.) why did you buy an electric vehicle that says it's for riders 18+ for a 13-year-old; 2.) why did you allow an 11- and 12-year old to ride it; 3.) why would you think a rack was an invite for somebody to sit in it when nowhere in the manual does it say this is a tandem bike and the rack was an extra seat; 4.) why was neither child wearing a helmet? - will risk having their professional and personal reputations ruined because how dare you insinuate the parents hold responsibility for their child's death.

------------------------------------------------------------
"Why children take so long to grow? They eat and drink like pig and give nothing back. Must find way to accelerate process..."
- Dr. Yi Suchong, Bioshock

"Society does not need more children; but it does need more loved children. Quite literally, we cannot afford unloved children - but we pay heavily for them every day. There should not be the slightest communal concern when a woman elects to destroy the life of her thousandth-of-an-ounce embryo. But all society should rise up in alarm when it hears that a baby that is not wanted is about to be born."
- Garrett Hardin

"I feel like there's a message involved here somehow, but then I couldn't stop laughing at all the plotholes, like the part when North Korea has food."
- Youtube commentor referring to a North Korean cartoon.

"Reality is a bitch when it slowly crawls out of your vagina and shits in your lap."
- Reddit comment

"Bitch wants a baby, so we're gonna fuck now. #bareback"
- Cambion

Oh whatever. Abortion doctors are crimestoppers."
- Miss Hannigan

Quote
paragon schnitzophonic
The bike rack is there for groceries or other items for the adult rider who uses the e-bike in lieu of a car.

Unfortunately, this lawsuit will probably end in a settlement because any judge or lawyer who will ask the parents of all the kids involved -1.) why did you buy an electric vehicle that says it's for riders 18+ for a 13-year-old; 2.) why did you allow an 11- and 12-year old to ride it; 3.) why would you think a rack was an invite for somebody to sit in it when nowhere in the manual does it say this is a tandem bike and the rack was an extra seat; 4.) why was neither child wearing a helmet? - will risk having their professional and personal reputations ruined because how dare you insinuate the parents hold responsibility for their child's death.

The kid was wearing a helmet…and the parents are suing that company as well.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
"Not every ejaculation deserves a name" - George Carlin

Quote
cfdavep
"rode atop a flat rack over its back wheel, a feature that “invites a passenger to sit in tandem,” according to the complaint.

I say this as someone who worked as a legal secretary back in the day...that is some fine bullshittery right there.

So basically their complaint is that a cargo rack isn't a seat, and bikes go faster downhill than up.

Fuck these yahoos.

Sounds about like parents. "There was nothing saying NOT to let my child ride the rack like a seat! My child got hurt using the bike incorrectly, so that's YOUR fault for not saying what they specifically did was NOT okay!"

Some manufacturers expect people to have some semblance of common sense, but remember this: every warning label exists because some moron did whatever the warning is for and most likely got injured and sued. Human being that are not mentally disabled should not need to be told to not use a hair dryer in the shower, or not to allow infants to play with plastic bags, or not to put plastic on a stove burner. But apparently we do need to be told because we're fucking stupid, and while most companies are good at covering all bases in regard to safety and potential dangers in their instruction manuals, humans can get mighty creative with their stupidity and will injure themselves in obscure ways, only to sue because NO ONE TOLD ME NOT TO DO THAT!

And of course parents can't just accept responsibility for their kids' stupidity and say, "you got hurt because you were dumb, don't do that again." Nope, someone has to pay because not suing might mean Mommy and Daddy have to admit they're shit parents and the last thing they're going to do is admit they raised an idiot.

So now this bike will come with a lengthy warning about how the bike rack cannot be used as a seat for a second passenger and that misusing the rack in such a way can lead to injury or death. But don't worry folks, because some other breeder will find a whole new way to misuse this item and sue the company again. Some idiot will put their kid on the bike and they'll tie another child to the back of the bike with a rope and drag them along on roller skates like dry land water skiing, and if the child gets injured doing this, Moo and Duh will sue because "there is nothing in the manual explicitly explaining that passengers cannot be dragged behind the bicycle on the end of a rope," which of course is interpreted as, "If it's not in the manual, that means it's okay to do it!"

Parents used to be held accountable for their kids' dumbassery. Now they can just sue and be absolved of any lazy parenting because apparently it's up to manufacturers to hold breeders' hands and have common sense for them.