HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ba.general,misc.kids,misc.legal
Subject: Re: East Bay Regional Parks/dog restrictions
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:51:09 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Oct5.160210.18021@netcom.com>, mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers) writes:
> In article <1992Oct5.054209.26486@adobe.com> pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
> >1) A parent may not even know of the existence of an a.n., as in the
> >turntable case prominent in this area of law.
> 
> Well, since we've already begun compromising principles, let's relax
> them a bit further.  Part of your argument is that its impossible for
> a parent to know all the time where a child is and what he's doing.
> Fine; I accept that.  But most parents I know of could do a lot 
> better than they currently do, and this is what bugs me so much about
> AN laws.  
> 
> I'd be less hostile to your agenda if it sounded more like a sincere
> attempt to save lives, and less of an attempt to make the world a
> great-big-safe-and-happy-playground where you can dump your kids and
> effectively alleviate yourself from parenthood for a few hours.  And
> know that should something bad happen in that playground, you've at
> least got the comfort of a lawsuit to fall back on.

> Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984

I agree with Mr. Zimmers.  Too many parents don't supervise their
children when little, and don't raise them to be semiresponsible
when they are old enough to be out on their own.

I would agree that some nuisances are so hazardous, that the owner
is responsible for preventing accidents.  An example would be a 
mineshaft that isn't surrounded by a fence.  A pool that isn't
surrounded by a fence adequate to keep out a 0-8 year old also
qualifies.  So is a circular saw in public view.  I would be
sympathetic to the "leave a handgun where a kid can get it" law 
that California has, if it included and treated other, equally
or more hazardous devices in the same manner (ladders, cars,
bleach & other household chemicals).

But if a child has to climb a fence, or break a lock,
the parents, once they overcome their grief, better be ready to
face up to the fact that they didn't raise that kid very well,
or didn't provide adequate supervision.

I don't expect a six year old to understand adequately the 
hazards of entering an abandoned building.  I do expect a 10 year
old to do so -- and if they don't, the parents had better be
ready to provide constant adult supervision.

-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Lesson learned from Gov. Wilson's signing of AB 2601: if you don't get 
your way, have a riot.  Next time, Gov. Wilson will cower appropriately.
From: maslak@unix.SRI.COM (Valerie Maslak)
Newsgroups: ba.general
Subject: Re: First auto insurance of my life and i am getting screwed. (help!!)
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:06:45 GMT
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, California


If you're emplyed as an electrical engineer, call 20th Century
Insurance. You can get their number from 1-800-555-1212.
They have cheap rates for good drivers and special discounts for
IEEE types.

Valerie Maslak
Newsgroups: ba.general,misc.legal
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Subject: Re: East Bay Regional Parks/dog restrictions
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 00:16:13 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.194813.26078@linus.mitre.org> bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>I would argue that if a child drowns in a pool, it is his/her PARENTS
>who are responsible, for failing to teach them to respect other people's
>property. It is NOT the neighbors responsibility to teach the kids right
>from wrong. It is the PARENTS.

Responsibility is not a binary concept. Both the parents AND the owner
of the attractive nuisance are responsible.

>I have no argument for requiring a fence around pools. But I would argue
>that the purpose is to prevent accidents, rather than protect against
>intentional misdeeds by others.

I don't understand why you think we have a disagreement.

>What bothers me most is that lawsuits have been filed and won after 
>a drowning in a pool that WAS properly secured. This is grossly unjust.

I agree.

-- 
My opinions are my own.
Happy owner of a new Mitsubishi Expo.

Newsgroups: ba.general
From: eap@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Perozziello)
Subject: Re: stupid consumers
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 01:16:53 GMT

[stuff deleted]

>
>articles are not listed in the card catalog ... only complete works are
>listed there.  without the name of the magazine, the title and/or author of
>the article (to be used with various magazine summary tools), going to the
>library won't turn up much.

I saw from your previous message that you found it! -I commend you.
For anybody's future reference, there is a database (called MELVYL)
at berkeley, I think, that lists periodicals, (much like INSPEC,
but also lists non-tech stuff).  I hope this helps others search
for info.

 Also, I hope this can mark the end of a lot of disputing and maybe
we can start posting things that are of interest and value to us
all. 

(Don't get me wrong, it's ok to argue. we all can learn from that-
but it must be constructive argueing.)

Thanks!
-Eric

PS: Henry, some folks in rec.travel were interested in the stats.
Perhaps you could post some of the stats there, including HOW
the stats were collected.  I don't remember reading about HOW
they were collected, so I'll take it you're right.  Just goes
to show you, you can mislead with stats.



Xref: sparky ba.general:4270 misc.kids:25452 misc.legal:18261
From: dab@ism.isc.com (Dave Butterfield)
Newsgroups: ba.general,misc.kids,misc.legal
Subject: Re: East Bay Regional Parks/dog restrictions
Date: 8 Oct 92 00:22:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: x
NNTP-Posting-Host: change

owens@jonquil.uchicago.edu (Christopher Owens) writes:
>>> All you have to do is put a fence around your swimming pool.
>>> If it saves just one life, it's worth it.
>
>> Exactly to whom is it the worth the cost of a fence to put the
>> fence around Mr. Sohl's swimming pool?  Let that person speak up.
>
>I'd be happy to pay the cost of fencing *my* pool.

And *I* would pay the cost of fencing *my* pool.  But no one seems
interested in paying the cost of Mr. Sohl's fence, not even the
people who believe that their children are at risk.
-- 
                     Vote for *anybody* but Quayle!
Newsgroups: ba.general
From: gwu@tcsi.tcs.com (George Wu)
Subject: Mover Recommendations Sought
Originator: gwu@nujoizey
Keywords: movers recommendations needed
Organization: Teknekron Communications Systems, Inc.
Distribution: ba
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 21:41:38 GMT


-
     I will be moving from Richmond to Campbell.  Does anyone have
recommendations for local movers?  I'll post a summary of email responses.
Thanks much in advance.

							George

----
George J Wu, Software Engineer         | gwu@tcs.com or uunet!tcs!gwu
Teknekron Communications Systems, Inc. | (510) 649-3700
2121 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA, 94704  | Never be the first to believe . . .
-- 
----
George J Wu, Software Engineer         | gwu@tcs.com or uunet!tcs!gwu
Teknekron Communications Systems, Inc. | (510) 649-3700
2121 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA, 94704  | Never be the first to believe . . .
Newsgroups: ba.general
From: eap@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Perozziello)
Subject: Re: stupid consumers
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: ba
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 18:24:15 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.230421.1082@ads.com> henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch) writes:
>eap@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Perozziello) wrote: 
>->Yeah, like I heard that Japanese ONLY fly Japan airlines because 
>->(they boast) some wonderful safety record. Fact is, the US airlines
>->are (as a whole) much safer on all counts than Japan's airlines. Yet
>->the Japanese citizens are hell-bent on using ONLY their airlines.
>->It's called "brainwashing".  Now they move the "brainwashing" 
>->to rthe US.
>
>honey, your rant is tired.  
>
>the japanese airlines cater better to japanese needs than us airlines
>do ... it's only recently that passengers could routinely get a
>non-western meal (without making a special request) on many usan
>airlines.  whether or not japanese airlines are  safer is hard to tell
>without hard data (do you have such data?  if so, then put up or shut
>up.)

I hardly care about the meal service on aplane- I rather care about 
safety, when such a substantial difference exists.

>

Ignoring the rude attitude of your request, In fact, I do have the data.
The data was compiled by a private firm, and they 
logged such things as "passenger fatalities per flight", and "passenger
fatalities per passenger carried".  the Japanese airlines were
almost four times higher (worse) in each catagory.

>->I couldn't say for sure, but this is MOST likely due to EPA regs. 
>->They probably spew out garbage that our environment doesn't need-
>->Japan is less concerned about the environment than we are.
>
>how do you know this?  substantiate your statements.
>

Someone else brought up the issue about the US not importing certain 
vehicles. i know nothing about these vehicles that  they are refering to.
I don't even know if they exist! Let them find out why. I DO know that the 
US doesn't allow many imports on the basis of emmissions regs (EPA). One
 example was a new type of Porsche a few years ago (I don't remember the number
of that one). I remember reading about it- a very fine (fast) car, but 
the HC's and CO's and NOx's were far to high for US standards, and WAY out
of CA's stds!
 

Xref: sparky ba.general:4511 misc.legal:18754
From: mysti@sybase.com (Mysti)
Newsgroups: ba.general,misc.legal
Subject: Re: East Bay Regional Parks/dog restrictions
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:44:00 GMT
Organization: Sybase, Inc.

In article <1b4sqmINNinl@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> larrabee@cse.ucsc.edu (Tracy Larrabee) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.202916.29848@leland.Stanford.EDU> eap@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Perozziello) writes:
>&When I was a child, My parents forbid me to leave the property.
>&Once I was a little older (prob 13 yrs) I could wander the neighbor-
>&hood, but only areas THEY were familiar with. 

Please remember that the existence of children who flawlessly obey
their parents, and the existence of children who do not ever obey
their parents (for whatever cause) does not in any way affect the
validity of the argument that:

Premise One:  Children should be protected from undue danger
Premise Two:  Children cannot *reliably* judge all situations for themselves

Conclusion:  Property owners who have dangerous objects on their land
		shall be required to take *reasonable steps* to prevent
		children from injuring themselves.
--
Friends don't let friends vote Republican
Newsgroups: ba.general,misc.kids,misc.legal
From: brunner@telebit.com (Eric Brunner)
Subject: Re: Attractive Nuisance
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:22:41 GMT

In article <8bBb02A3258o01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.172944.5291@adobe.com>, pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) 
>writes:
>> As for 10-year-olds running around unattended, it seems
>> fairly common to me. 
>
>If your parents let you run around unaccompanied in a neighborhood with 
>unknown dangers at an age when you were incapable of comprehending them, it 
>sounds like they were lax in their parental duties.
>
>Terry Carroll - tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com - 408/992-2152
>The opinions presented above are not necessarily those of a sound mind.

Terry, if you have a copy of Prosser (case and horn) handy, open the horn
to page 400 and have a read. This is not a simple, one-solution-fits-all
area of the law, and to place the burden on the parents and not attempt
to consider the conduct of the property owner invites abuses. Consider the
hidden poised lake footnoted case...

Is there any doubt that the closeness of the guardian's supervision, the
degree of apparent and latent danger and the child's reasonable apprehension
of risk are elastic terms comprehensible only in terms of actual situations?
To conclude that Phil's statement characterizes a breach of duty by the
parents as a matter of course suggests that one thinks otherwise.

There are breaches, I frequently encounter them, but personally, these
seem to me to be the exception, not the rule.

-- 
Eric Brunner Tule Network Services
uucp: uunet!practic!brunner
trying to understand multiprocessing is like having bees live inside your head.

Newsgroups: ba.general
From: brent@telebit.com (Brent Chapman)
Subject: Re: Fry's -- Yet Another Bad Experience
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Distribution: ba
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 04:07:28 GMT

jreece@sousa.intel.com (John Reece) writes:

>Another irritating incident:  One time I grabbed a $19.95 calculator
>off of the rack and headed for the checkout line.  On my way there 
>a salesman intercepts me and says "Here, let me ring that up for 
>you".  Thinking I'm going to be able to bypass the checkout line, I
>cluelessly follow the salesman to a terminal.  I wait several minutes
>while he electronically writes up the calculator so he can boost his
>sales total, then he hands it back to me and directs me to the end of the
>checkout line.  Instead I dumped it in the magazine rack and bought one
>elsewhere.  

Yeah, I really hate that, too.  I've gone in there several times and spent
10 or 20 minutes browsing for something (FAX machine, telephone, answering
machine, whatever), comparing the items and deciding which one I want,
without any sign of a sales critter (which suits me just fine; I prefer to
do my own analysis) until I grab my box and head for the checkout line.

Lately, I've taken to making a stink when the try to do that.  If they
say "let me ring that up for you", I answer "why?  You didn't help me
choose it or anything".  If they insist, I state quite clearly that if
they're going to be that way, I'm going to buy it somewhere else, and
ask to speak to the department manager; that usually makes them back
down.


-Brent
--
Brent Chapman                                   Great Circle Associates
Brent@GreatCircle.COM                           1057 West Dana Street
+1 415 962 0841                                 Mountain View, CA  94041
From: joe@synaptx.Synaptics.Com (Joe Decker)
Newsgroups: ba.general
Subject: Re: Attractive Nuisance
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:37:39 GMT
Reply-To: joe@synaptics.com (Joe Decker)
Distribution: ba
Organization: Synaptics Inc., San Jose, CA

eager@eagercon.com (Michael J. Eager) writes:
> A tresspass, by an adult or
> child, does not excuse the owners liability for consequences 
> which he could have reasonablly forseen and prevented.
[The above was hand-typed in for reasons I won't go into, I take
responsbility for any typos resulting.]

I have a few questions about the attractive nuisance concept which
perhaps some of you could enlighten me about.

It seems to me that the reasonable danger involved in having a pool in
my backyard (assume a normally-sized fence around it) is much smaller
than that posed by any climbable tree.  I have, as a child, watched a
friend get carried away in an ambulance after climbing a neighbor's
tree and falling.

Q1: Of course this would be decided by a jury, but I would be
interested in speculation or precedent about whether a property-owner
would be found liable in those circumstances.

Q2: Should I chop down all the trees in my yard?  [Sadly, this seems
to be far too popular on my street right now, probably for different
reasons.  Sigh.]

Q3: Does San Jose's ordinance requiring me to keep three street trees
on my property absolve me for accidents occuring on those street
trees?

Q4: If so, does that ordinance carry with it an implication that the
keeping of trees (other than those required) is reasonable, and
therefore affect your answer to questions 1 & 2?

[In case anyone wants to try and read my position on previous issues
into the above question, let me quickly set the record staight.
- I believe that the concept of 'attractive nuisance' is reasonable in
  some circumstances.
- I do not believe that it is always properly used (no surprise), and
  often this may be the result of understandably (but not justifiably)
  sympathetic juries.
- I do believe that parents of children have some responsibilty for
  their children, and for this reason I oppose the use of rules to
  make the world safer to support the abdication of this
  responsibility.  
- I believe that the world will never be entirely safe for
  unsupervised children, at least in our lifetime.]

Comments on my questions are welcome.

Joe Decker          
joe@synaptics.com, decker@alumni.caltech.edu       












Xref: sparky ba.general:4407 misc.kids:25814 misc.legal:18520
From: harrison@apple.com (John Harrison)
Newsgroups: ba.general
Subject: Texans Gather in Bay Area
Date: 12 Oct 92 01:33:23 GMT
Followup-To: ba.general
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

Texans Gather in Woodside for the annual South Conference Picnic

Saturday, October 24, 1992  Huddart Park in Woodside
(Off 280 Near Menlo Park.  Take 84 West.  Right on King Mountain Rd. 
Approximately 5 winding miles to the park.)

Noon - 6pm.  (food served at 1:00)

The seething potential for a FOOD FIGHT of epic proportions is just one of
the reasons you won't want to miss the Annual SouthWest PIcnnic.  The
all-you-can-eat BBQ and limitless beer and soft drinks are others.  But
eatin' is just half of it, cause there's a fun filled day of conversation
and competition between Horses, Toads, Bears, Cougars, Owls, Raiders, and
aggies (over 200 attended last years picnic!)  There will be horseshoes,
volleyball, water balloon tosses, and some fun events for the kids too.

This catered feast will cost only $15 per person this year, $7.50 for kids
under 12 (or free if you want to bring 'em a sack lunch instead). 
Reservations need to be in by October 16 to ensure enough food for all.


For more information please contact:

John Harrison   
Chairman Bay Area Texas Ex's
h) 415-960-3383
w) 408-974-7696
email:  harrison@apple.com


!!!!!   HOOK 'EM HORNS   !!!!!
From: lkvarda@sgi.com (Lisa Kvarda)
Newsgroups: ba.general
Subject: Re: First auto insurance of my life and i am getting screwed. (help!!)
Date: 16 Oct 92 21:28:05 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <24482@sybase.sybase.com> mysti@sybase.com (Mysti) writes:
>
>Remember to ask for these discounts:
>
>	over 25 (unless you aren't) (Or did they outlaw this one?)

  From what I hear, females get either "married" or "over 25", where
  males get both.  (Of course, I could have misunderstood)

>	nonsmoker

  Hmm, haven't heard of this one.

>	good student

Also some give discounts for:
    anti-lock brakes
    air bags
    married   (everyone *knows* getting married makes you more responsible)
    carrying multiple policies with them (this was mentioned below in
            another form)
    car alarms  (sometimes useful in keeping your car insurance from 
                 going up after several thefts/break ins)

>
>"Reasons" you might be paying a lot:
>
>	Your car is allegedly more prone to theft (if you are getting
>		comprehensive)
>	You live in an area that allegedly has a lot of accidents (sometimes
>		the difference of just a few blocks can mean hundreds of $$)
>	Your car is allegedly more likelty to be in an accident

   You have a sports car.
   You have a couple marks on your record.
   You're young (or haven't been driving long)

>
>If any of your relatives have lots of insurance (multiple cars or a car and
>	home insurance from the same agent) you might try asking if they
>	will discount you.  I've never done this myself.

  Usually this works if your relatives add you to their policy.  And
  there may be some rules about this -- like you have to live in the
  same house.

>
>For reference, my minimum-allowed-by-law insurance coverage on an 82 Honda
>is costing me ~600 a year, from AAA.
>		

  I've heard AAA won't insure you if you haven't been driving for 3+ years 
  (this is So Cal AAA).

  Someone mentioned 20th Century.  My parents (and me) were covered by them in
  So Cal.  They won't insure a teenager with a sports car (no matter the year
  of the car).  My father had a 76 Z, and they'd only insure him if his 
  policy was completely separate from mine.  His policy stated that no one
  but him could drive his car.  (BTW, it wasn't fun dealing with them)

  Some insurance companies determine sports cars differently.  Most
  will say if it's only got 2 seats it's a sports car.  Allstate is
  different.  They determine a sportscar by horsepower to weight 
  ratio.... which means a VW Corrado (G60), and a '88 Mazda RX-7 (non
  turbo, 2 seater) are not considered sports cars.


Lisa
From: rhockins@enrico.tmc.edu (Russell Hockins)
Newsgroups: ba.general
Subject: Re: stupid consumers
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:26:41 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization

In article <12735@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.200036.23003@leland.Stanford.EDU>, eap@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Perozziello) writes:
>> >
>> >|> cite a reference that i can check.  an ISBN or a title/author
>> >|> combination will do fine.
>> 
>> Ever hear of a Card-Catalog?  Or don't they teach that in grammer 
>> school anymore?  Maybe you were absent that day     :^)
>
>Many libraries have stopped upating their card catalogs -- you
>better get used to on-line search.
>
>I'm not upset about the development of new techologies, quite
>the opposite -- but I fear for the kids who only get taught how
>to find something with keyword search, and end up in a small
>town library looking for something.  It's much like the generation
>of kids growing up who can't tell time on an analog clock.
>
>-- 
>Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
>Lesson learned from Gov. Wilson's signing of AB 2601: if you don't get 
>your way, have a riot.  Next time, Gov. Wilson will cower appropriately.

Well now C C, just FYI and to bring you up to speed on the modern
technologies,

I now work for a company that makes the some of the online systems for
libraries you refer to.  Keywording is just a part of it.  You can look up
something by :

Title [ or part there of ]
Subject
Author
ISBN
ISSN
Call Number
OCLC Number
BarCode [ assigned to the book by the library ]
Words in the title
Record Number [ internal to the system ]

If you can't find it by one of these, then it probably doesn't exist [ in
the library that is ].

Our systems are in some of the *largest* libraries around, local, state,
national as well as federal [ it is not my place to drop names here so I
will not ]

Once again C C you seem to speak of that which you know naught [ or at
most, very little :-) ].

I think I speak for many present when I say  Please refrain from spreading
your grey [ as in color ] propraganda.  Dis-information [ or
mis-information ] helps noone and can hurt everyone. :)

P.S.
If you encounter a kid who cannot read an analog clock, do what I did for
my niece who could not.  I taught her how.  However, this would only be
possible if *you* can read an analog clock :) .



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Russell Hockins               |  This civilization is recyclable           |
| Innovative Interfaces, Inc.   |              ( well most of it anyway )    |
| My own opinions  no one elses |  packet : ka6foy @ ki6yk.#nocal.ca.na.usa  |
Newsgroups: ba.general