As I drove back from court this morning, I thought of an example that might drive home my point.
Many of us on this board, myself included, put no limit on the value of our pets' lives. No amount of money could 'make me whole' if I lost one of my beloved animals to the negligence of another. The justice system, in many states, DOES place a value, sadly, usually at the cost of the pet. I think this is wrong. Very wrong, and needs to be changed (an example of 'tort reform').
But, there are more people out there that have the 'get over it, it was just an animal' attitude. So, is their valuation of my 'loss' right? Not in my eyes.
So as to this situation. The slight twist here is that this guy is trying to send a message, and had this been a big chain retailer/manufacturer (uh, how about Iams, for example?), this would have been applauded by some, I imagine.
This truly is not about the value of the pants.






Reply With Quote
Bookmarks