re: #523 Wendya

Since the government sets up the legal system, I can see a responsibility for them to regulate it.

I don’t necessarily disagree with this point, but the idea that setting strict limits on what the victim can recover, regardless of the individual facts of the case, is a “conservative” way of regulating the system is preposterous.

Let’s take a relatively extreme example - A patient needs to have an arm amputated (due to gangrene, cancer, etc.) The doctor accidentally removes the wrong arm in the initial surgery, so then he must go back and remove the right arm as well. (As ridiculous as it sounds, surgeons operating on the wrong side is relatively common. When I had to have kidney stones removed, the nurses had me make a large note with sharpie on the right side of my abdomen to make sure they went to the correct kidney).

Now the patient is left with no arms instead of one, all due to the surgeon’s mistake. The pain and suffering this patient has and will continue to go through is probably worth exponentially more than $250K, yet the government is there to tell him that is all he deserves, because if he were allowed more, undeserving plaintiffs might get more than what they should.

Does that sound like a “conservative” government?