Just Some Stuff

First off I want to show off this:

I’ve received a lot of comments concerning the loss of Silvus due to the pet food recall.  I wish I could say that everything has been made alright between me and the pet food people but I’ve not had any info from them in a while.  Even the FDA has turned their shoulder against me.  Does matter though as my case, as well as many others is getting national recognition and it’s going to be difficult for the corporations to turn us away.  As far as I’m concerned, the burden of proof is on them.  I have a West’s Business Law book here with me that I got from college and I looked up neglect.  I found a term called ‘the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur’ where a court decides that ‘the facts speak for themselves’ and places the burden of disproving a case on the defendant (ie the corporation)  Here is further a statement from West’s Business Law:”Res ipsa loquitur has been applied to such events as trains derailing, wheels falling off moving vehicles, elevators falling, and bricks or windows panes falling from a defendants’ premises.  For the doctrine to apply, the event must have been caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant, and it must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff.”I cannot imagine that the act of feeding my cat to be considered a voluntary action or contribution on my part.  Much like the act of driving a car when the wheels fell off and injured someone, the neglect is not my own but the onus is upon that middle piece which caused the damage.  [I bought food which should have been fine.  I fed that food to my cat.  My cat died.]  [I drove my car to the store.  The wheel came off.  The wheel hit a pedestrian and hurt them.]  In neither of these cases would I be the causation of the problem.  The problem is the neglect of the company which supplied the object of injury.Lastly, concerning my pet food issue there are a few states in the USA who understand the value of their pets.  Laws are in place which negate the “pets are only property” clauses which so many lawyers are wonton to throw out at people.  In order to save some money and increase their profits, these companies purchased sub-standard products and then sold them as a high-quality item.  These companies must pay with their livelihood for their greed.The world is all back-ass-wards.  Companies import foodstuff from countries which have quality standards far below those of the USA.  Why do this when you can import quality foodstuffs from countries with high standards of quality like the USA, especially when it comes to dietary consumption.  On the other hand, we’re being fed all this information about how the price of milk and beef will be skyrocketting because the Ethanol industries are buying up all the corn, feed-stock for these cows.  Why don’t they import the substandard shit from other countries instead of using up the actual foodstocks?  Duh.


~ by aeroslin on April 14, 2007.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: