Tony, I just thought I'd chime in here with an opinion. I hear your objections to an overly litigious society. The example of the woman suing Mcdonalds is an especially objectionable example, if it's true. But, in many cases I feel very supportive of individuals responding legally to gross corporate irresponsibility. I think there is enough evidence of the consciously negligent manufacture of automobiles, that there is not much reason to automatically assume people like this are "taking advantage" of the legal system.

>
>
> Whatever happened to an individual taking responsibility for their own
> actions?  No one forced that family to get in that van that day!
>

Yeah, and no one forced the residents of Love Canal and Times Beach to live there either, but that hardly has anything to do with what happened.

While I do not wish pain and suffering on anyone, having been through
enough myself, if this husband and father did not believe he was
transporting his family with a reasonable degree of safety, then they
never should have gotten into the vehicle, plain and simple.

I hardly think the consumer should be charged with the job of evaluating the safely of the automobiles they buy. This is the job of these incompetent, corrupted consumer protection agencies that we support and trust. Personally, I think there should be more than the simple manufacturers sued here. Question, what the hell is with me getting a ticket for driving without a seat belt on, yet we can pack 60 kids into a school bus and not require that they wear seat belts?

Logic is does not reign supreme in any segment of our society, I don't think you should suddenly expect the average consumer to reflect ideas that are not taught to them.

Vent window closed.
mark...