A Litigious Nature So. by now, we've all heard of the woman who sued McDonald's (and won) because she spilled her own coffee in her own lap. More recently, we've seen lawsuits against the tobacco industry. Now, I can almost see people suing who are much older, and who remember doctors selling cigarettes on television. They might (strong emphasis on the word 'might') have a case. Those who have smoked in the last 25 years, however, have no excuse. They have been bombarded with advertisements and information about just how bad smoking is for you, and they still chose to smoke, and now suffer ill effects for it...well, whose fault is that? As a society of victims, we would rather sue others, than take responsibility for our own actions. And, like so many other aspects of our society, we will take it to the extreme. Take this item, for example, culled from the Sunday paper. A gun maker is being sued, because the weapon they sold was used to kill somebody. I've always felt I was a pretty good writer, but I could not make up the following, uttered by the plaintiff's lawyer in the case: The defendants should have reasonably known that these kits, as they are sold, that some violent kind of person could use it and would use it in some horrible, violent act. Of course, the same could be said of a six inch hat pin, if properly applied. In fact, you could probably extrapolate that out to infinity. Take, for instance, auto manufacturers. How many people are killed by cars every year? Certainly enough that auto manufacturers would know that, in the hands of a violent person, a ton of plastic and cheap Korean steel is a dangerous weapon. Yet they continue to manufacture automobiles in callous disregard of those facts! It's criminal. And, apparently, it's actionable. Chainsaws? I mean, who hasn't seen The Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Twisted, no doubt, but still a primer for the improper use of an automatic cutting device. Yet, despite the fact that this movie was made decades ago, chainsaws are still on the market. Just think what a violent person...well, if you've seen the movie (or Scarface, for that matter...the one with Pacino), you don't have to think too hard. Or the simple version...the axe. Go all the way back to Lizzie Borden. She gave her mother 40 whacks. Fortunately, that was before film, so the pictures of that crime scene have not been painstakingly reproduced in a "true crime" book. That was well over a century ago. And still, today, you can walk right into any hardware store and buy an axe. Imagine the class action suits these three items could muster. The 20% of our society that is not currently in court could be. Surely, before we are done with this exercise, we could have a lawsuit prepared against enough product manufacturers that every person in the country would have an interest in the suit. For instance, simple items, such as bricks, could be blunt instruments. Baseball bats, a lead pipe - in the library, with Colonel Mustard - could be used as weapons. Some violent people don't even require an instrument to cause damage - as is attested to in each week's police blotter. Who will we sue if the violent person uses their own hands? Hey, here's an idea. How about suing the violent person?! Seems to me that the one who actually perpetrated the crime is the one to blame, not the manufacturer of the iron, the bowling pin, the steak knife, or whatever else was used in the act. Or, does that make too much sense? So sue me.