A low-time GA pilot buys a hot new ride, gets trained and certified by the company to fly it exclusively in visual meteorological conditions, inadvertently enters IFR and crashes, killing himself and a passenger – pretty much the oldest story in the books.
The NTSB report concludes thus:
Spatial disorientation experienced by the pilot, due to a lack of visual references, and a failure to maintain altitude. Contributing factors were the pilot’s improper decision to attempt flight into marginal VFR conditions, his inadvertent flight into instrument meteorological conditions, the low lighting condition (night) and the trees.
And so of course, a jury awards the pilot’s estate $16.4 million from the company that manufactured probably one of the safest high performance GA aircraft now being built, the Cirrus SR-22:
Some industry observers believed that Cirrus had developed the next “doctor killer,” a nickname once associated with the V-tail Beech Bonanza, another slick, high-performance model involved in a series of fatal accidents in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The fast-for-its-day Bonanza was said to attract pilots who had more money than skill.
And that’s the company‘s fault? In a plane that you can parachute to earth in, worse comes to worst?
I just don’t get it.
Not hard to understand at all, but a natural result of the US jury system of justice.
Each juror sees himself as the possible next person sueing for some company for millions and doesn’t want his chances of winning reduced.
Thus they grant pretty much anything that’s demanded, so as not to limit their own future earnings.
(Expletive), (expletive), (expletive) (self-moderating here) social parasite ambulance chasing lawyers. Disagree Mr. Wenting. This is about these product liability lawyers. The US jury system has evolved from its origins. It is Of the lawyers, by the lawyers and for the lawyers. If you don’t believe it, just check out how many members of the US House and Senate are members of the Bar. And why the congress will not impose a cap on jury awards.
This has very little to do with lawyers. A lawyer, like a gun, can be used for good or evil.
This is the fault of the people who hired the lawyers, and the way the jury voted. The responsibility buck stops right there. It doesn’t continue to the lawyers, to “society”, to the media. That pilot and those jury members must take full and total responsibility.
On the other hand, he fact that every dirty scumbag can get a good lawyer in this country is something that ought to be celebrated.
It also is part of the same mentality when you take your dinged ride into the body shop: “Is your insurance company or are you paying for this?” Yep…”insurance” money comes out of thin air…and it’s free, so if someone other clown with a wrecked ride doesn’t claim it….which then leads to the basically non-existent education in economics to the run of the mill student…who is too busy twittering to hear how that answer number one leaves the insurance companies to raise the rates of the policy holders…
Yep, basic stupidity, supported and cultivated by your friends in the NEA.
This is also the logical result of the loss of a sense of individual responsibility. Non-military folk never say “no excuse, sir.” Instead it is now always somebody else’s fault, and the deeper the pockets of that someone else, the better.
Remember the oft-spoken line of politicians and bureaucrats:
“Mistakes were made.”
Never
“I made a mistake.”
This award reeks. Where is the justice? Let’s see Cirrus – one of the bright success stories of the GA market, sells maybe 100-200 planes in a good year. At average say $300K/pop? So a company with 30-60M in revenue (not profit) a year has to shell out $16M because some jury ignores the facts? (I’m guessing the numbers but am probably not too far off…)
I recall a case years ago where somebody flew a Bonanza into a box canyon and smashed into the wall and died. Heirs won millions from Beechcraft (not sure who parent was at the time).
Fat chance getting anything done to fix this – the Trial Lawyers ponying up for the Dems with such regularity.
Some people need to be shot. Often.
I agree on the death of individual responsibility, starting at near birth. But an accessory to that is that if you say “I made a mistake” or “I’m sorry,” (something most could-be plaintiffs want to hear), you know you’ll be taken to the cleaners for it, even if your role was minor. Lawyers transform innocent mistakes into planned negligence.
As for jurors giving the store away out of greed: I participated on several mock juries for lawyers recently. I was happily surprised at how many fellow jurors did NOT endorse big awards.
Why sue the aircraft company? Simple. They have lots of money and are an easy target.
There’s a reason that Cessna got out of the single engine GA market for several years. It just wasn’t worth it. They get sued every time a plane goes down.
A few weeks ago I had to testify in court for a company that I used to work for, about a machine that I helped to design. This machine was being used in a shop that paid its employees by the number of parts produced per shift. This guy figured out that if he disabled the door interlock and removed three guards, he could squeeze out another ten parts per shift. Well one day he tried to grab a part before the machine had completed it’s cycle and he lost two fingers on his right hand. The funny thing is that he wasn’t the one sueing us, it was the insurance company who had to pay for the surgery to re-attach the fingers and the rehabilitation. About two days after I testified my ex-company’s INSURANCE company settled for $800,000.
They settled because of the design flaw: the guy was able to disable/disengage the door interlock plus remove three guards and the machine was still operational…
Product liability laws that were created to protect regular folks from the shoddy manufacturers/builders has turned into an absolute responsibility to predict and prevent every single stupid thing a potential user might do…
One can only hope that Cirrus will appeal the verdict. This madness has to stop.
It certainly will not under BHO, and probably not under the current congressional makeup. Maybe after the 2010 or 2012 elections- maybe. Depends upon how bad things get.
With about 50% of congress critters being lawyers, intent on staying in power and increasing their wealth, it is hard to see this changing without a soft (Iran-lite) revolution. Those currently in power are not going to give it up, or change the “system” for the public good, unless they percieve that their seat is at risk.
The Jimmy Stewart “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” days are but a dream.
And if BHO is able to place 2 or 3 ultra-liberals/socialists on the Supreme Court? Fuggit about it.
“This madness” has been going on for the last 40 years or so, at least.
Driving most general aviation manufacturers out of business is just one of the more visible results; I recall the small flying school I once worked for (*somebody* has to pump gas and wash planes, they won’t do it themselves, you know) acquiring a Piper Cherokee 140 trainer for $21,000, new. Four years later, they bought a slightly larger Cherokee 151, with slightly a slightly nicer panel. For $107,000.
It wasn’t *that* much nicer. But they did need to cover rising liability issues.
T6, you can kill them, but they’ll still vote…
More than once probably…..
AT least in Chicago and much of Texas
This is such a crock of s*#t. Cirrus, PLEASE appeal this decision!
Anyone with a VMC qual only who decides to fly into IMC and then augers in without a proven malfunction of any kind on the a/c’s part has nobody to blame but himself.
I wonder if the passenger’s estate is suing the pilot’s estate for some of that dough…
Echoing the above, I only hope Cirrus appeals this all the way to the Supreme Court. Can you imagine what will happen when the VLJ market starts in earnest?
For those that might be interested, here is the case as reported by the Jury Verdict Reporter:
The Estate of Jim Kosak sued Cirrus Design Corp., University of North Dakota Aerospace Foundation and Estate of Gary Prokop on a negligence theory for the wrongful death of Kosak, age 51, as a result of a plane crash on January 18, 2003. The National Transportation Safety Board investigation concluded the cause of the crash was pilot error. Plaintiffs claimed that Prokop had not been properly trained to fly the aircraft for IFR conditions by the University of North Dakota Aerospace Foundation which has contracted to provide the pilot training. Prokop and Kosak were flying from Grand Rapids to St. Cloud to watch their sons play in a hockey tournament when the crash occurred south of Hill City. Prokops’ Estate cross claimed against Cirrus and the University of North Dakota Aerospace Foundation. Prokops purchased the plane from Cirrus but has limited experience flying the SR-22 aircraft. His family claimed that he had not been property trained to fly the aircraft.
The defenses asserted by Cirrus and the University are not available.
Outcome: Plaintiffs’ verdict for $19 million with a finding that Cirrus and the University were each 37.5 percent at fault and Prokop was 25 percent at fault.
Prokop’s estate awared $6 million for loss of counsel, guidance, aid, advice, comfort, assistance, protection and companionship and $6 million for economic losses, which would include past and future wages lost. Because the Prokop was found to be 25 percent negligent the award was reduced to $9 million.
Kosak’s estate was awarded $6 million for loss of counsel, guidance, aid, advice, comfort, assistance, protection, and companionship and $1.4 million for economic losses.
There’s a well grounded principle that when a pilot takes command of an aircraft he is certifying himself fit to complete the flight. That is why that the day after I get my flight physical and I come down with a nasty head cold that would impair my ability to fly I “ground” myself until I am well even though I have a perfectly valid piece of paper in my wallet that says I am medically fit to fly. Likewise regarding flight in IFR conditions. If I decide that based that is 200 and a quarter and while at minimums and my IFR rating is valid and I’m current on recent experience, etc. I decide that my last three IFR approaches weren’t things of beauty so I pack it in for the day. The phase “pilot in command” means something no matter what some bunch of yahoos on some jury say and no matter who some grieving heirs want to make pay for the poor decision making of the pilot in command of the aircraft in question.
But that quaint notion of responsibility for one’s actions has no place according to the Trail Lawyer’s Bar. Pity for us, pity for all of us who pay for this s*** every d*** day.
Sometimes, I weep for the American justice system. . .
Guess the gun manufacturers can expect more lawsuits now, too.
We don’t have a justice system. We have a legal system, and never the twain shall meet.
The problem will be that the insurance company will make a business decision calculating the amount of money required to appeal this through state and federal court, figure some odds on winning (or not),and decide its cheaper to settle. They can always just raise their premiums anyway, right?
Best hope is some judge sets aside the verdict, as wrong, or the award, as excessive. But that is a long shot at best.
Looks like Lex’s dream machine just got more expensive.
S.A.M. ,
BS cubed. The system is now is to/fo and by lawyers. How much of those awards go into the pockets of lawyers? Minimum of 1/3. Do a couple of cases after winning one and you are in fat city. It wouldn’t surprise me to find out you are a lawyer.
Dust, heartily agree.
Deleted – enough blood pressure rise for one topic. Virg – you got any booze left?
The guy that owns the flight school I go to used to be a lawyer. He got out of the business because it had become so cut-throat and uncivilized. Proper decision, I think.
This court case sets forth the legal precedent that a drunk driver can sue the car manufacturer when he crashes. Tort reform is desperately needed in this country.
The trial lawyers fight tort reform tooth and nail. Ohio got it, but the Ohio Supreme court ruled it unconstitutional. No surprise at all. Had I been the Ohio General Assembly, I would have strictly limited the jurisdiction of the courts in the matter.
This case will not appealed any further. Cirrus’ insurance company settled. When that happens, it’s over. A shame, but it’s over.
Apparently, the court never heard of a concept called “proximate contributory negligence.” Or, the fault of the plantiff/petitioner is greater than the defendant’s. Certainly true in this case as Cirrus was not at fault at all.
Tort reform is good, but a requirement for a competent jury would be better.
Remember, the way the jury system works, they grab a pool of jurors – about twice as many as are required. Then the attorneys take turns removing people until they reach the required number.
This is a good way to stack a jury. Because if you are the attorney who knows the facts are against him, you get to kick any juror who might have a clue off the jury. You may bet long odds that not one of those jurors was a pilot, or had any other connection to aviation.
With a Competent Jury system, all jurors in a technical case (such as product liability) must have knowledge in the field. They have enough experience to figure out when they are being lied to. Remember, John Q Public has NO idea of how an airplane operates – he sits in the aluminum pipe, watches the in-flight movie, and trusts that the guys in front know what they’re doing. He’s got as much business on a jury deciding an aviation issue as my cat.
Mike M/
Re: competent jurors. GOOD LUCK!
(reminds me of a good friend, college room-mate and fraternity brother who is an attorney and at one time did a lot of personal injury business. On the phone one day to a fellow attny while I was visiting as he was trying to line up a physician specialist to examine a new client who had been injured in some sort of accident, I heard him saying: “You just don’t understand, I don’t need a physician that tells it like it is, I need a physician that tells it like it ISN’T!” LOL!!)
(Actually, he said it with a wink towards me, but was probably only half-kidding! LOL some more!)
Wouldn’t it be great if every client found guilty of a crime or adjudged at fault in a civil procedure sued their lawyer for “misconduct”, and even won a monitary judgement? Perhaps then, lawyers, many of whom do good, would realize what price we all pay for the ridiculous awards made in our legal system.
A candidate for the Stella Award IMHO. Almost every NTSB accident report ends with the conclusion -”pilot error” not “helpless victim”. It’s why more than 30% of light airplane costs are devoted to insurance and litigation.
Shakespeare was right.
The tort terrorists are doing far more to ruin this country than to produce justice. The whole tort system is nothing but a con game to them, especially if the victim (not the plaintiff, but the VICTIM being sued) has deep pockets.
“Loser pays” is a darn good solution to reducing these frivolous lawsuits, but as noted above the sheer numbers of lawyers in politics are unlikely to ever pass it.
However, in a few years Obama will have so decimated the economy and capitalism, there will be no deep pockets left to pick. At that point some politician will make the GOVERNMENT liable for everyone’s real or imagined mistakes. Thus the trial lawyers will continue to prosper.
If anyone disagrees, that would hurt my feelings and you might get sued….
I was in a jury pool about 2 months ago. I ended up being called to be examined for possible inclusion in a case. I was one of the first 12 people who were questioned.
The case ended up being a medical malpractice suit. The plaintiffs were the parents of a dead child, and the defendants were two doctors and the hospital they stayed at. The process was that first the judge asked each of us, one by one, a set series of questions. Some were designed to elicit background; name, age, residence, residential history, married/single, children, educational history, employment history, etc. Then the lawyers stepped up and asked a bunch of general questions: “Have any of you been treated at [the defendant] hospital? Do any of you know these doctors or the plaintiffs? Do any of you have a relative working in health care?” and so forth. Raise your hand and you’d get asked for details.
Well. I was one of two people in that group of 12 that had a college degree – the other was a lawyer. I was just about the only one who had worked for the same company for more than 3 years and had owned my own home or even lived at the same address for more than 3 years. I was the only one who had worked for a healthcare company, the only one that had worked for a hospital, the only one who had a relative working in healthcare, the only one with a degree that had anything to do with healthcare or the life sciences (B.S. Biology and M.S. Biochemistry).
Guess what? I didn’t have a prayer of being on that jury, and was told that by more than one person as we took a break after questioning while the judge and lawyers conferred. Why? Because I knew too much! What the justice system wants – not just the lawyers, but the entire system – is to deliberately select jurors who are completely ignorant of the subject at hand. What they want is jurors who will judge the case based ONLY on what they hear in court. If you sound like the kind of person who might bring some outside knowledge or experience to a case the “Justice” system wants you OFF the jury.
The result? Four people of the 12 I sat with were chosen for the jury. The four least-educated and least knowledgeable people that were questioned (remember that I sat there and listened to their life histories). And this was the desired outcome!
“What they want is jurors who will judge the case based ONLY on what they hear in court.”
Now THAT is a dumb complaint. Funnily enough attempting to ensure potential jurors are not biased by personal knowledge of the case or their background is actually the aim of most western Court systems. As to your non-selection, well the Defendant also has the right to arbitrarily exclude jurors who may benefit the Plaintiff. For instance I’m not sure too many victims of medical negligence were selected in that jury you were empanelled for.
Anyway it’s prettty obvious from your rant that at least in your case the system worked and they were right to exclude you as you obviously are not someone who would have aproached your role without bias.
…and forget it if you note that you are prior military, much less a commissioned officer who had command. That was a very short stay in the box for me that day…
- SJS
Interesting how it has become that if you are knowledgeable, you are automatically biased. What if the knowledge made you more able to make informed decisions? Oh, but I dream….
MikeM and RonF … Your comments on the jury selection process are right on target. That’s the way it always worked for us, my husband and I, when we were called for jury duty, sometimes a couple times a year for each of us. The minute we admitted to being college graduates with responsible jobs it was as if we had “do not use” stamped on our foreheads. Didn’t matter whether the case was civil or criminal, they seemed to fear having capable people on the jury. When one case I was called on was a rape case, I was immediately dismissed when the lawyers learned that my step-daughter had been raped. Actually that was probably a good thing, since I have rather primitive ideas about the proper punishment for rapists. But I would have tried to be fair. Honestly.
Marianne
Marianne – with your comment about “primitive ideas” on punishment for rapists, I now suspect we are related.
Strangely enough, when I got called for a jury duty while studying for the BAR, after I disclosed that I was studying for the BAR, the attorneys wanted to help me get off the jury so I could study without interruptions but the judge was pushing me to stay saying that I could simply study after the day worth of hearing (the old arse quite possibly forgot what it was to take the BAR)… so I am not sure about the college grads being kicked off the jury just for that…
“Let’s kill all the lawyers, kill them tonight”.
Maybe the Eagles were on to something there huh?
But I would suggest we wait and see the outcome of the appeals process. Maybe there will be some sanity left in the courtroom. By extension of this logic we should be suing the car manufacturers for every death in a vehicle, sue the builders for any death in a house or apartment, and obviously sue every booze distiller for any drunken mishaps.
One of Lex’s greatest gifts seems to be opening a new can of the most disagreeable worms.
Lex I think the problem facing the aviation industry in these cases is more a reflection of how most citizens (especially those likely to be called upon to be jurors) have completely lost any respect for or sympathy for corporations in general. Pretty much everybody I know has at some time or other been f..ked over by a modern business and either had to endure a nightmare rectifying the situation or has just given up and worn the losses. Whether it be in their employment, their health insurance (and attempting to get paid legitimate entitlements) or just in terms of customer service, that is getting the product you pay for and not being told bare faced lies.
The average person doesn’t trust or like modern businesses and when the opportunity arises to hurt one they take it, regardless of who that business is. Unfortunately everyone is now tarred with the same brush. The reality is that we have as a society not protected people from the worst types of conduct of the business community and people are pissed off and want to get even when ever they get the opportunity.
Many love to hate Corporate America and some have good reason. I agree that loyalty used to be a two way street on the part of employer / employee. No longer.
However, the slope we are sliding down is an entitlement mentality that seems to grow and I fear the current administration seeks to feed it. Personal responsibility ain’t what it used to be.
A few litmus test questions for lawsuit legitimacy: Are the people involved ..using the courts to redress justifiable grievances that can’t otherwise be settled? Or are they trying to extort money from anyone they can? Are the lawyers involved champions of justice? …Or are they helping to abuse the system in the name of getting a piece of the action?
Are Advokaat and Snake in the house?
I’m surprised I’ve read no mention of how the jury pool is created and how so many “smart” people do all they can to avoid jury duty.
Here in Florida, jury pools used to be selected from voter registration lists. That’s been changed to selecting them from driver license lists, I guess figuring a broader range of people have driver licenses than bother to register to vote.
Have you ever heard a friend HAPPY about getting a jury summons? Seems like lots of smart, busy folks do everything they can to avoid it. So you end up with a jury pool that does NOT represent the best and the brightest.
No, we’ve been discussing jury selection. The jury pool has been based on the driver’s licenses (at least in my area) for decades.
The problem is that in any legal case, one side is right, one side is wrong – and BOTH sides know who is which BEFORE the case gets to the courtroom.
Which guarantees that one side or the other has a strong interest in getting a jury that can be easily duped. And the current system supports this. Engineers, in particular, know that while we may be called up for jury duty, we will NEVER be empannelled on a jury. We’re too smart.
Which is why we need Competent Juror reform. This would take people’s professions into account when initially screening..and would require that all potential jurors for a case involving malpractice or liability have a professional backgorund in that field. In this case, for instance, the jury pool would be limited to individals with pilot’s licenses, A&P certificates, and degrees in aerospace engineering. People who understand aviation…or at least can follow the arguments. Likewise, medical malpractice cases would go before a jury of RNs and MDs. And if you think that nurses will give a bad doctor a pass, you don’t know many nurses.
The intent is to restore the Jury of Your Peers to the courtroom. A lay jury can’t offer this.
I’m a Professional Engineer, Professional Land Surveyor, and Certified Federal Surveyor, and I’ve been empaneled, but not in a Civil Case.
Jury Selection is a strange beast. The jury I was on acquitted the defendant – the Policeman changed his story between times he was in the witness chair. It took less than 5 minutes to return the verdict.
I was still in the pool when the same defense attorney had a case, and he threw me out the next time. I saw him later at the post office and asked how the case turned out. He said he got whipped, and I told him he shouldn’t have thrown me out. We both laughed at that one.
Civil case are a different world. I think much of it is a case of putting the screws to business. Most people haven’t really been screwed, they just didn’t like the rules both have to abide by and blame the business man for it. It’s a shame, but they are cutting their noses off to spite their face as it’s going to come back and haunt them. The they’ll whine about the consequences. I’m sure there will be people who will tell them “I told you so,” but they won’t want to hear because they would have to acknowledge responsibility for their idiocy.
You could always look at it this way.
No one ever said a matter was suppose to be tried by the best and brightest, it’s suppose to be a jury of your peers. And since the plaintiff in this case doesn’t seem all that intelligent …
/snark off
Civic duty and all that….BUUUUT, The last time I was called to jury duty, it cost me about $2000 in lost pay. My jury duty pay was $12. The date of jury duty was on a scheduled 4 day trip and my airline policy would not allow breaking up the trip to salvage as much as possible so I lost the whole four days.
My experience was the same as RonF above. The case turned out to be a drug case and in the jury selection interrogation, I was asked about my occupation and background. When I stated that I was a retired Federal Law Enforcement Officer (all USCG commissioned officers are FLEO’s) and had spent most of my career chasing drug smugglers but felt certain that I could be fair and impartial, I was summarily dismissed.
I have been called many times, but never selected. Go figure.
The stupidity of the pilots involved is just about on par with the stupidity of the jury. Pilots have always managed to bypass the best engineered safety features and best training possible. Our local USAF fly club has lost the use of the 172-RG due to what else? Gear up landing. Guy practicing precision approaches to a spot (not the radar PAR), and left the gear up when he became distracted by another airplane doing a down wind landing on another runway. He had no gear down lights, had the gear warning horn blaring with less than 12 inches MAP, and had the flaps down. Commented that he didn’t hear the gear horn until the scraping stopped. When I see him at next safety meeting I’m going to recommend “sue the idiots at Cessna, they should have made the gear automatically come down below 500 ft” or some such thing. Based on the above he might win.
G-Man/
My all-time favorite classic gear-up landing story was when the 36th TFW Wing CO.,with the Chief, Stan/Eval in his back seat, landed his F-4 gear up over at their home drome at Bitburg. For we JO O-2s & 3s all over USAFE at the time much chortling. BWAHHAHAHAHAHA! ROTFLOAOPIOP!!
Maybe he should have gone ugly early and been able to drive home, by purchasing one of these.
If you have $200K, queue up! They’re in prototype now (maybe some ex-OPTEVFOR guys gan make sure it meets the ORs)
I’ve always liked the old saw that one should try try avoid the courtroom at all costs because most times you will be judged by 12 people too stupid to get out of Jury duty.
The Bush administration worked hard to put in place limits on such liability cases. The Obama administration has already made it a priority to eliminate those limits.
Philosophically, this is consistent with the whole redistribution of wealth theme, with, of course, the legal community and government first in line at the trough.
Anyone remember the Oliver North trial? The jury consisted of 6/12 (can’t remember) unemployed/unemployable (no high school diploma) Washington DC natives who had managed to read no/NO newspapers and see no/NO televised news for at least the preceding two years (because if they had read/heard anything about North, they would be “biased”).
They used to be all of a kin–own property, pay taxes on the property, be responsible for family and schooling of children, thus a voter, hence a citizen of the district who had an interest in upholding the law. The anti-Federalists warned that Madison’s vision wouldn’t hold, and that democracies couldn’t survive in other than small, relatively insular communities. Madison trumped them in the short run (and created the longest suriviving democratic republic in history), but the dragons are escaping.
Zane/
That was the reason the Greeks believed that one could not support a viable democracy in a city much over 50,000 in pop. That the civic culture which bound everyone in a like-minded enterprise was dissipated once populations grew larger. And further, their view of juries was the polar opposite of ours as their was a system of direct–as opposed to representative–democracy. As such, they believed that ALL the evidence–hearsay, rumor, innuendo, etc., would be allowed as it would be in the juries mind anyway as the concept of the “blank-slate” citizen so divorced from the daily warp and woof of the life of the community was totally unthinkable–unlike our concept in which information is selectively fed to juries thru a complex “rules of evidence” which screens out rumor, hearsay, etc. so as to concentrate the juror’s minds on only a highly selective set of “facts.”
The Greeks, I am sure, would consider our system unrealistic insofar as those un-admitted facts are swirling around there anyway on the outside of the courtroom and ever-present in the juror’s mind anyway–unless the “citizens’ are so detached from reality as to be the sort of blank slate (in every sense of the term) that was the case in the North trial–in which case I’m sure the Hellenistic Greeks would say the whole enterprise is at that point a lost cause anyway…
The Best/
Virgil
(Just sittin’ here watching the Dragons roam…..)
VX, if you’re watching the Dragons roam this early, maybe you need to nip a little less. Ciao.
Nah! Given the time of the post he’s just feeling the result of the earlier evening. If it were too much captain Morgan, I’m sure the Dragons would be Elephants of a pinkish hue.
Zane, QM/
LOL! Depends on whether I’m on my early “face-down with a thunk” schedule or the late one..
FWIW I was metaphorically referring to the entropic decay of society as represented by Zane’s escaping Dragons.
(However I’ve been known to see REAL Dragons cavorting around after liberal administrations of various mixtures of certain congers. It’s the congers man, it’s the residual congers dancing around that’ll do ya in the next day–although I’ve also known certain “Cougars” that”ll give you a run for your money on that score as well…
)