Snowboarder pays $30000 for hitting a kid

Wait... how does a kid half your weight run into you from behind when you're "going too fast"? Whoever was uphill was at fault.
 
This is what happens when you take skiing or snowboarding into the jusice system: you get fucking idiots who don't know shit about how riding the mountains really works telling you what you did wrong. It's like sitting in a room full of gapers who do nothing more than pull their dicks and yell about how it "really happened".

As for that statement about sending us skiers and snowboarders a "lesson" - Fuck that. The only thing i take away from reading that is that you'll encounter idiots wherever you ski. I won't think twice about skiing more "responsibly' after reading that bullshit, and i hope nobody else does.

Justice doesn't belong on the mountain.
 
thats fucking retarded. if i got charged 30k i'd grab that little boy by his broken leg and swing him off a fucking cliff
 
Fuck that. The complete lack of any logical thinking in the case is just plain stupid. How can you blame a guy for going "too fast" on a STEEP SECTION?!? Then to have him be blamed for being hit from behind by someone who is completely fine now....just a bunch of bullshit.
 
this is sooo dumb... 100 bucks the guy couldnt see him and then he went over the bump tried to stop or tarn and hit him... 100% accident and last time i checked u can go as fast as u want on a mtn it said that he was going to fast... fuck that i can go 80 if i want
 
thats just bullshit. Last time I was out a skier came over a rise and totally nailed a boarder who was sitting there like a melon. Boarder got hurt real bad. The guy put his skis back on and skied off without saying anything. At the time I thought it was the ultimate dick move but now I just think "fair enough" if I was gonna get sued 30k I'd ski off too.
 
Wtf Why does the dad get any money?
Also someone should post a pic or the statment on the back of a colorado or any big mountain lift ticket where it says the rules about skiing.
 
thats dumb as hell, im gonna side with a boarder for the first time ever...

and also dad gets 25% son 75%?? wtf? if the kids that young im confused at why hes getting $22500? thats fucked up
 
All this teaches me is that if you ever hit anyone, get up and get the hell out of there and go buy some new outer wear, a lot cheaper than 30k.
 
There is no way I would work through eight years of litigation to get $30,000 from some 18 year old kid for a broken leg.
 
“It’s too bad it took an injury of this magnitude to get that message out”

Man, a broken leg is a pretty bad. Not many people on this site can say they have had an "injury" of that "magnitude"...

protip: check sarcasm meter before responding
 
thats just horrible.

and also, this just shows that other country's judicial systems suck dick, not just America's. If this happened in America everyone would have posted how the U.S. judicial system sucks
 
I think you're confused. The court ruled that the dad was 25% responsible for what happened, and the snowboarder was 75% so the costs of the injury may have actually been 40k but the snowboarder has to pay 75%.

Stupid either way.
 
How dare you speak the name of the beast? The beast's name must never be uttered. Much less in bold.
 
Thats bull shit. How to you go 'to fast'? theres not speed limits on the slopes. the kid was behind a fence, other person obviously didnt see him... thats bull shit, snowboarder should have been able to go on his own merry way...
 
What the fuck? That's so messed up, I wish there were something we could do to prevent this from happening. I mean come on, the boarder is 18, 30k is gonna be an incredible financial burden on him and his family especially with college tuition and such.
 
not at bogus basin. my friend got his pass pulled for "speeding on a run occupied with in-experianced skiers/riders" it's still pretty god damn gay though
 
This is what I was thinking. I mean seriously? First of all, there isn't any kind of conclusive evidence that this is the boarders fault. If he was going 40 mph and was totally out of control, I might concede that he should have to pay the hospital bill and maybe a couple thousands in fines and have a pass revoked, but it sounds like the boarder had mountain knowledge and was just carving and the kid hit him. Maybe I read that incorrectly But $30,000? The kid probably won't make that much in the next three or four years with a part time job.

 
the hospital bill for a broken leg wouldn't exist - our health care system takes care of it. if an ambulance was involved, there would be a bill for that.... but nothing seriously substantial.

and "a couple thousands in fines"... what exactly would he be fined for, and who would fine him? the day the ski hill starts giving out $$$ fines for skiing related incidents is the day skiing dies.
 
wow, just gonna have to say that this is exactly what is wrong with the legal systems. they had some one judging the case who probably knew nothing about the "skiers Code" or even general knowledge of mountain etticate(spelling?)

/threads to bring up in school 2moro
 
Whats fucked up is that the snowboarder even stayed and blocked off the spot where the kid was injured. Where most people would be forgiving and realize that a lot of it was their own fault for traversing past a roped area, these guys sued the shit out of that kid.
Now that snowboarder is 30,000 in debt when the 5 year old kid could have sucked it up and recovered for two months
 
you can go 80 if you wanna but you gotta be able to stop if there is someone below you on the slopes, thats what they mean by to fast

but i still agree this is bullshit
 
A broken leg is clearly an injury of phenomenal magnitude.. was the judge being sarcastic?

Shit like this sucks, it probably was the boarders fault, but I don't think he should be faced with a $30,000 fine. I guess the father got kinda owned in that he is responsible for 25% of the damages. I wonder if he actually has to pay is son 10k?

Makes me glad you can't be sued in NZ
 
Untrue. I consider skiing down a hill with people on the same level of responsibility as driving a car. If you have the ability to seriously injure, even change someone's life, then you should be held responsible for your actions. You actually do agree with the principle I bet, but you just don't see it with this incident. For example, say you were in the park and crashed on a jump and were walking back up the landing to get a ski that you lost when a kid come flying over the jump and hits you causing brain injury which alters your intelligence. Would you then say that he shouldn't be fined or punished? No, you wouldn't. I guarantee you would be upset, as would anyone. So, just because an incident is less serious doesn't mean that someone should all of a sudden be freed from their obligation to follow the rules and watch out for others safety. If someone runs into another skier or boarder and causes injury, their should be a repercussion.

Don't take this way out of text and think I support BS legal cases and lawsuits. I hate greedy people. My point about the couple of thousands was that there should be some tangible punishment. Maybe it should 200 hours of community service. Do you see my point? I am sure you didn't mean to convey it that way, but your comment makes it seem like you think skiing shouldn't have consequences to negligent actions just because it is a fun sport.
 
sorry, i don't agree. the example you gave with falling on a park jump, and getting hit while collecting your gear... personally, when that happens to me and there isn't a spotter on the knuckle, i am terrified of getting smoked by someone hitting the jump. If the situation were to ever happen to me, I 100% don't think he deserves to be charged any amount. Again - I ask you, who would charge them, what would the charge be for, and who gets the money he is charged?

What you are proposing, in a nutshell, would be mandatory insurance for anyone that steps foot on a ski hill anywhere in the country - like driving a car (which you mentioned). Do you really think that necessary for a sport? I for one, don't think we need to get insurance in order to be allowed to ski down a hill. Hell, I have a really hard time accepting car insurance for what it is currently in Canada... why the hell do I need to insure myself against shit I do myself?
 
"Again - I ask you, who would charge them, (THE LAW/GOVERMENT) what would the charge be for(RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT), and who gets the money he is charged?(AGAIN, it doesn't have to be money)"

I am actually incredulous that you think one's actions on the mountain should be without any recompense. Shocked. For real. You are really arguing that someone could be skiing completely out of control, paralyze another rider on the hill, and then shoudn't have any punishment because it is a sport? And don't try to compare it to other sports, it is totally different than someone getting hurt in football or soccer. What is funny about the universal healthcare system as well is that every person is chipping in their hard earned dollars to pay for your neglegence on the ski hill. I can't believe we in the U.S. are following suit. That is for another day, however.

Your insurance analogy is not even close. Not to be mean, but it is terrible. We aren't talking about insuring oneself. We are talking about taking responsibility when your actions have a detrimental effect on someone else's life. Do you get that? Am I being obtuse? I must be explaining it poorly or something because I have seen other posts of yours and you are an intelligent guy, it isn;t like you don't understand me.
 
thats so gay, i feel bad for the kid its not like hes pressing charges, its his shit dad, he just wound up with a broken leg and a shitstorm of reporters on his dick.

it also sucks ass for the boarder, it doenst seem like it was his fault at all...
 
it seems like more the dads fault than the boarder's, PLUS health care is free in Canada, why should he owe the family 30k for an ACCIDENT
 
Ok, well first off - you brought this all up with the original statement of being "charged a couple thousaind", so you were saying it is money they are getting charged... now you seam to be changing your story.

secondly - in your last post i quoted you gave the example of getting hit while collecting your shit off the landing of a jump, now you're saying you're getting hit by "someone... ...skiing completely out of control, paralyzing another rider on the hill"... again, you seam to be changing your story. the snowboarder this thread is talking about was not completely out of control, nor was the theoretical person in the example you gave me involving the park jump.

and if you don't think your thought process doesn't eventually lead up to skiing insurance, you may be mistaken as to how liability and self risk actually work in Canada.

Look, I'm not saying there is no fault and that no one is accountable for their actions when on the ski hill, but as soon as you start charging people (money - from and to whom; criminal - which leads to what? jail time for drinking and skiing?) it will - as I said in my first post about this subject - kill skiing. I DO understand, that under the extreme circumstance, involving a completely out of control skier hitting and paralyzing another skier, there should be something to help/protect the "victim", but surly, there are already laws in place to deal with such an incident, is there not? We have enough useless laws in our society that don't need to be in place, I really, really, REALLY, don't think we need MORE of them. A perfect example of what I mean is the Drinking in Public law. there are a handful of other laws in place that could prevent people from getting drink and doing something stupid, why is the simple act of having a beer while walking down the street against the law? Mischief, Vandalism, Trespassing, Disturbing the peace, Public Nudity, etc, etc...

I think to better our society, we need to have less laws and more freedom to do and choose what we feel is right, and as a group decide what and who is in the wrong. making new laws that, do this day, have never been needed for society to run smoothly are totally unwanted in my world. When dealing with the case of this snowboarder, as far as I can tell, he didn't see the kid, wasn't out of control, followed proper post accident protocol, there was nothing he did that was legitimately wrong, warranting any sort of fine or criminal charge, nor civil suit.

I believe I have stated my opinion clearly, you could maybe try to argue with me about the insurance thing again, but I don't really care so I won't bother responding. take it or leave it. this is how i think.
 
1. they shouldnet have cut the fence, 2. the kid sounds like a weak skier, and was the highest so its technically his fault ?3.???????????? 4. profit?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top