Results 51 to 75 of 383
Thread: Knuckledraggers sue Alta
-
01-16-2014, 03:15 PM #51....................
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 5,518
-
01-16-2014, 03:17 PM #52
-
01-16-2014, 03:48 PM #53
There's a basic problem for the snowboarders' 14th amend claim:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.Quando paramucho mi amore de felice carathon.
Mundo paparazzi mi amore cicce verdi parasol.
Questo abrigado tantamucho que canite carousel.
-
01-16-2014, 03:52 PM #54Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Posts
- 2,835
-
01-16-2014, 03:53 PM #55
-
01-16-2014, 03:58 PM #56
-
01-16-2014, 04:54 PM #57Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2013
- Posts
- 339
Stupid shit, silly shit.
-
01-16-2014, 05:17 PM #58
Here, plaintiffs acknowledge the standard is rational basis-- although they try to make boarders sound like a protected class. the Alleged government action is allowing Alta to set the requirements for the necessary equipment to use the terrain. plaintiffs allege that the gov't does so knowing that Alfa is engaged in discriminatory behavior.
But, there is clearly a rational basis for allowing Alta to make those determinations -- they are running the business and know their customer base -- and -- as I am sure you know -- the rational basis standard is incredibly loose anyway: something along the lines of: could a sentient being reasonably thinks this makes sense?
But, in this case, there is a uniform standard and no disparate treatment. Nobody is allowed to ride the lifts on a snowboard -- everybody is allowed to ride the lifts on skis. I personally think it's an outdated policy-- but I don't see any Constitutional Issue. Plaintiffs would be better served by lobbying their elected reps. Or the forest service.HTML Code:https://youtu.be/hhVylFtE2YE
-
01-16-2014, 05:19 PM #59
-
01-16-2014, 05:24 PM #60
This is funny
What did Schmitt say?
"People who sue ski areas should be shot"
Snowboarders kinda ruin a lot of fun resort skiing. I'd pay a premium for a hill with no snowboards, I imagine there's a lot of others who would as well. Probably one of the reasons Alta is so successful.
On a side note, section 2 of the 14th amendment is super contradictory to section one
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.Last edited by ak_powder_monkey; 01-16-2014 at 05:39 PM.
Its not that I suck at spelling, its that I just don't care
-
01-16-2014, 05:49 PM #61
" But there's no place in that book where it says nothing about killing a Chinese." -Sam Dodds
Johnny's only sin was dispair
-
01-16-2014, 05:51 PM #62
I'd think BJ Leines would have better things to do these days. Maybe he should get a job on daddy's pipeline. It's too bad the losers of lawsuits don't have to cover the expenses of the winning party like happens in a lot of other developed countries. I know US lawyers would never let that happen, but it's a shame a ski resort has to defend itself from a bunch of whiney bitch ass snowboard punks.
Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. -Helen Keller
-
01-16-2014, 06:06 PM #63
Everything about this is comical - The lawsuit, snowboarders claiming they're a "protected class," and the reactions to both.
Alta is a rad place that I'd love to ride. I already ski (poorly) there occasionally, and drink there often. The place "feels" good, and it has nothing to do with anyone's method of downhill transportation.
The argument about the traverses is stupid. Next door, there are just as many shitty skiers clogging up the Cirque as there are shitty riders, and IMO the High-T is a much easier traverse. And who gives a fuck if someone postholes your traverse? It's not a skin-track.
Anyone who thinks that snowboarders see themselves as any kind of counter-culture hasn't been paying attention for the last 15 years, and the so-called "skittle thugs" in LCC belong mostly to "freeskiing." Snowboards ruin the snow? Modern ski technology leveled that playing field a long time ago - Beaters of both varieties can now access terrain that they previously couldn't and still shouldn't.
This lawsuit goes nowhere, and it will be status quo at Alta until it isn't.
Until then, I'll keep riding the Bird because no one gives a fuck that I don't ski at Alta.
-
01-16-2014, 06:35 PM #64
-
01-16-2014, 07:18 PM #65
Snowboarders have Brighton, skiers have Alta.
Get over it.
-
01-16-2014, 07:57 PM #66Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Posts
- 77
http://ia700208.us.archive.org/3/ite...45.docket.html
Morman,Morman and Morman
-
01-16-2014, 08:57 PM #67
-
01-16-2014, 09:24 PM #68
JONG SLAUGHTER got it right with the 3rd post. It is leased, maintained recreation land-happens all over the place.
-
01-16-2014, 10:17 PM #69Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Posts
- 25
Alta hasn't sued any of the snowboarders riding down from Snowbird...
-
01-16-2014, 10:18 PM #70
ahhh suck it Alta!
-
01-16-2014, 10:30 PM #71Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Posts
- 2
-
01-16-2014, 11:55 PM #72
-
01-17-2014, 12:12 AM #73Banned
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
- Location
- Golden
- Posts
- 3,379
Working at the extinct Sports Illustrated NextSnow competition for kids...A bunch of guys from around the country were judges...typical shit between snowboarders and skiers in the group...heading to the next venue across a long flat...snowboarding judge buckled in bending over pulling himself along with his hands...fucking hilarious...
'Fucking knuckledragger' as I coast by him...fucking funny as he got pissed but he knew I was right...
-
01-17-2014, 12:25 AM #74
For the legal mags here, what is the typical period in which a defendant must respond? Then how long will the judge have to consider Alta's motion of summary judgement for dismissal?
-
01-17-2014, 12:34 AM #75observing free range rude
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- below the Broads Fork Twins
- Posts
- 5,772
Bookmarks