Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

SI - Site Forums : Questions and Answers with SI Admin (s) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bear Down who wrote (3914)	10/20/2013 2:55:36 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	1 Recommendation Recommended By TimF Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4890

I was just touring around in Asia, where I was allowed to climb up the very steep and very narrow steps of many a temple from the 11th century of thereabouts. We're talking five stories, straight up, with no guard rails, on ancient bricks. I asked the tour guides if anyone ever fell, and of course they said "of course", with the obvious attitude of "Duh, any idiot can figure out how dangerous this is." It never even occurred to them anyone but the climber should be responsible for their own decision to take the risk of climbing, and, frankly, the even bigger risk of coming down (I'm not afraid to admit I came down facing the stairs). I found that quite a refreshing attitude. Don't get me wrong-- I do think premises insurance is a good and necessary thing to have. However, there should be a limit IMO to what is considered a reasonable warning such that your liability ends when the other person clearly demonstrates a lack of reasonable common sense, or simply has a lapse of concentration that results in an accident. Yes, I understand we reward "stupid" in the US, but, plain and simple, I find that concept stupid! - Jeff