maybe you two are getting into the morality of it here, and i agree with you. im telling you, if you push most people into a corner where they only have one option, guess what most people will do? choose the corner, or the option, no matter how unsavory?
and notice how i never said it was brightons fault. i feel like you are taking my words out of context. does this whole system disgust me? yes. do i think its right to sue? not even a little.
if you think that what im saying is made up or not true, or even unrealistic, then you are out of touch.
and ben, we are getting into some deep stuff here. its not enough to say its one persons fault or responsibility or not. If you are a minor at home, you cannot (legally) take responsibility for your own actions. So this kid goes up there and does something retarded, and gets paralyzed. So now what? His parents are obviously obligated to take care of him, that goes without saying. So they do what they have to do (in their eyes). I imagine that if you looked at anyone in the eye and said that you were going to take away proper care for an injured son, as well as everything else you have ever worked for and will work for all in the name of ethics (i.e. dont sue because your son was an idiot), they would walk away from you in the direction of the nearest lawyer. now add in parents that perhaps truly believe in their hearts that there was some fault with brighton. im sure you can relate. perhaps imagine a relative of yours that does not share a passion for skiing. they could probably make a pretty quick case to themselves that Brighton was truly negligent for some reason or the other.
look, this is a fucked up situation, and i would be livid if my park was taken away over someone elses stupidity. im just playing devils advocate here. these people on the other side of the coin may not be the antichrist as everyone plays them out to be. they may even be remorseful for the course of action they feel they have to take. im just trying to throw this out there.
