DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Death by Water Intoxication...ouch
Pages:  
Showing posts 76 - 94 of 94, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 01/18/2007 06:02:13 PM · #76
I didn't think it was.
 01/18/2007 06:08:47 PM · #77
yes, stupid accidents happen all the time--that's what the darwin awards were established for.

here, though, i think the discussion in this thread bears out what's called the "reasonable man" rule: essentially, what would a reasonable person do if put in a similar situation. when a large portion of the population is ignorant to the dangers of drinking too much water, it could easily be established that a reasonable person could over-drink. as for the radio station, i don't think it would take too much to establish that they did nothing reasonable in terms of how they handled it...at all.
 01/18/2007 06:12:06 PM · #78
I have to admit that I have never heard of such a condition and when I reported here to Okinawa they told us to hydrate, hydrate, hydrate but never once mentioned the risk of this (now I understand why the guy was vomiting the other day at the gym, he said he just hydrated too much but I thought it had to do more with being a payday weekend and drinking the night before). I wonder how many military members over in Iraq and similar places suffer from this, I know they are told to hydrate all the time too.

Sad that people have to learn about stuff from other people's misfortune.

Got to go add this to our weekly training schedule.
 01/19/2007 06:33:05 AM · #79
Originally posted by Shakalaka:
I would say any craving would usually indicate that your body needs something that is contained in whatever you are craving.


I only mention this as a point of interest. However, I have read in a couple of places that salt itself does not generate a craving, although the body can experience cravings for other trace minerals that may be found in the same foodstuffs. Contrary to my earlier understanding, this is also how cow saltlicks work - the craving is for other trace minerals, not the salt.


01/19/2007 06:48:00 AM · #80
Originally posted by kirbic:
If her death were "accidental" I can see the police saying that there's nothing to investigate. Accidents, however unfortunate, do happen. This, IMO (note the IMO) was anything but accidental. The DJs were warned and did not heed the warnings. They had coercive power, in that they could award the prize. This lady did choose to participate, but there was coercion. I don't think that the release will hold up. There will at the very least be a large civil suit, and I would also expect criminal negligence charges.
The audio is heartrending. The DJs joking about someone dying, and just blowing off the sincere warning from the listener. Then on top of that, ignoring the young lady's symptoms. The end result is that three childern have lost a loving parent. Had anyone taken responsibility and even offered transport to get medical attention, the outcome could have been so much different.


I agree. I would add that this is exactly what the crime of manslaughter is about - death resulting from negligence (rather than intention).

A useful analogy might be to consider the position of the organisers of a pass the parcel competition containing a hand grenade. They knew or should have known of the risk, and to organise a physical endurance competition without checking and advising people of the risks, is negligent.
 01/19/2007 11:51:00 AM · #81
Case is now open

//www.gamespot.com/news/6164325.html

I guess it went from stupid accident to they were warned and did it anyway.

Relevent passage of text
"Initially, County Sheriff John McGinness had said that there were no plans to open a criminal investigation, since Ms. Strange had entered the contest on her own free will.

But in audio recordings which have been posted on the Internet, the DJs are heard joking about contestants dying of water intoxication, even referencing the death of Matthew Carrington, a student who died after drinking too much water during a fraternity hazing. A caller, who identified herself as Eva, also phoned in to the show to warn that the stunt could kill, but she was dismissed by being told that contestants had "signed releases, so we're not responsible."

In light of the new information from the audio tapes, an investigation has been launched, stated a spokesperson for the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department.

"

01/19/2007 01:07:39 PM · #82
My $.02, at some point you need to take responsibility for your own actions. She chose to drink that much and she chose not to go to the hospital when she felt ill.

If I drink way too much of your beer at your house and at the end of the night you tell me I'm okay to drive home, is it now your fault if I get in an accident? Should you go to jail for manslaughter if I die? Can I sue you if I survive?

Furthermore, I'd bet a lot of money the people drinking the water were listening to the radio show as they were doing it. I bet they heard the joking about dying and the calls that they could die. Yet she chose to continue, just as the DJ chose to contine.

And... she signed a waiver that probably said something like "you are doing something dumb on your own free will and if anything happens to you while doing the dumb thing you agree to not hold us responsible..."

01/19/2007 01:24:05 PM · #83
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I'd bet a lot of money the people drinking the water were listening to the radio show as they were doing it. I bet they heard the joking about dying and the calls that they could die.


And that is the informed judgement of the masses. Thank god for the legal process and, you know, evidence and stuff.
 01/19/2007 01:32:39 PM · #84
[quote=LoudDog] My $.02, at some point you need to take responsibility for your own actions. She chose to drink that much and she chose not to go to the hospital when she felt ill.

If I drink way too much of your beer at your house and at the end of the night you tell me I'm okay to drive home, is it now your fault if I get in an accident? Should you go to jail for manslaughter if I die? Can I sue you if I survive?

The answers to your question above are probably YES!!!! I f I let you drive, and you hurt yourself YES I could be held liable, even If you chose to drive. A bartender could also be held liable for all of the above, and if someone died could be charged with manslaughter if they served you too much alcohol.

01/19/2007 02:13:07 PM · #85
Originally posted by LoudDog:
My $.02, at some point you need to take responsibility for your own actions. She chose to drink that much and she chose not to go to the hospital when she felt ill.

If I drink way too much of your beer at your house and at the end of the night you tell me I'm okay to drive home, is it now your fault if I get in an accident? Should you go to jail for manslaughter if I die? Can I sue you if I survive?


Actually, yes, in most states. The person who is intoxicated is not in an adequate mental state to make decisions for themselves, (as evidenced by the fact that alcohol is considered a mind-altering substance in rape cases) and in most states the person hosting an event/party/bar owner can be held responsible if they knowingly allow an intoxicated person to drive.
 01/19/2007 02:15:57 PM · #86
call me naive, but isn't here a big difference between beer and water?

01/19/2007 02:22:19 PM · #87
Originally posted by karmat:
call me naive, but isn't here a big difference between beer and water?


There is, but the question isn't about the substance, really, it's about responsibility.

If you knowingly (they were warned repeatedly) allow someone to do something which will injure them, and they are not in the right state of mind to make decisions (or are completely unaware), you are responsible for not (or at least making a reasonable attempt at) stopping them.
 01/19/2007 02:26:23 PM · #88
Cool, so if I get hammered then get busted for DUI I can blame it on who ever gave me the beer. SWEET!
 01/19/2007 02:27:49 PM · #89
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
Originally posted by karmat:
call me naive, but isn't here a big difference between beer and water?


There is, but the question isn't about the substance, really, it's about responsibility.

If you knowingly (they were warned repeatedly) allow someone to do something which will injure them, and they are not in the right state of mind to make decisions (or are completely unaware), you are responsible for not (or at least making a reasonable attempt at) stopping them.


I think that was my point. If it were a beer drinking contest instead of water, I think probably 99% of the population would understnd the inherent risks and dangers and what to do. Most of us laymen and women, though, have been taught to "drink water, drink water, drink water" "hydrate, hydrate, hydrate" and don't realize there is still that danger.

When the first person called the radio station to report there could be problems, the responsibility shifted (in my opinion) from the participants to the station. Maybe even before. Those participants had good faith that the radio station wouldn't deliberately hurt them. and I do not doubt the the dj's meant no harm. But, when someone called in, and they were warned, someone should hav said, "hold it guys, lets check this. Just in case."
 01/19/2007 02:35:15 PM · #90
Originally posted by karmat:
When the first person called the radio station to report there could be problems, the responsibility shifted (in my opinion) from the participants to the station.


But... every radio event such as this I have ever been to had their station blaring during the event. Chances are pretty good the lady heard everything the DJ's heard. Maybe not, but I'd bet money on this.

So, shouldn't the lady have been informed at that point and made the decision to stop? Wasn't the waiver the radio stations way of saying, this may not be good for you, do this at your own risk.

I've done lots of things where I needed to sign a waiver because there was a chance of serious injury or death. To blaim them after i agreed to their terms is just stupid.

Note: i'm not defending the radio station as this was a very stupid stunt. I just don't think they are guilty of manslaughter.
 01/19/2007 02:53:06 PM · #91
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Cool, so if I get hammered then get busted for DUI I can blame it on who ever gave me the beer. SWEET!

you can try, and you might got lucky, playing our nation's favorite game, 'litigation lottery'...

actually, if you google up 'dramshop acts', you'll find that the concept of holding bars responsible for their drunk patrons goes back centuries.

and to disagree with you, this situation is totally different than some of the things you've signed waivers for. fortunately, it's not up to either you or me to decide who will be held accountable for this woman's death.
 01/19/2007 03:30:15 PM · #92
Now I remember where I heard this stunt before! Howard Stern did a stunt just like this years ago (only the contestants were strippers) . Drink a bottle of water every 15 minutes, last one to pee wins. Maybe the DJ̢۪s should point the finger at Howard Stern? Has to be Howard̢۪s fault because the DJ̢۪s should be able to assume that if Howard did it, clearly it had to be an okay stunt to do?

01/19/2007 04:38:25 PM · #93
You can get away with whatever you can get away with.
Next contest may be their plea in court.

I have listened to and watched Heward Stern on TV, but mostly I boycott listening to crap like that. Some of it is such as waste of time talking of the most irrelevent things anyone can think of.

Please remember professional stunts and controlled risks may be okay for the professional and experienced.

Boycott the rest and save someones life.
 01/19/2007 04:41:20 PM · #94
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I've done lots of things where I needed to sign a waiver because there was a chance of serious injury or death. To blaim them after i agreed to their terms is just stupid.


Believe it or not, a waiver does not get someone out of all responsibility. Even if there's a waiver involved, the people hosting the event are required to keep people as safe as they possibly can. The waiver covers "acts of god" and "accidents", not criminal negligence.

To use an example; People who participate in SCA fighting are required to sign waivers in case of injury. The SCA is still required to set down rules and regulations to prevent any forseeable problem. (e.g. all participants must wear armor that follows regulation, all weapons must be padded according to regulation, you can't perform certain actions, etc.)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/20/2025 07:26:20 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/20/2025 07:26:20 PM EDT.