posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 09:19 PM
Let us take a look at the case and see what common sense will dictate:
This man, a convicted felon, a pimp, used his shoe to severely beat up a person who did not pay one of his hookers and bet one of his hookers up
violently. He did such without concern, and with malice, intending to take out revenge for non payment. As a result, he was charged with several
felony charges, including using a dangerous weapon.
As a result, he is suing Nike for failing to state that their shoes can be used as a dangerous weapon. There is one slight problem with this. Shoes
are not known for being a weapon, in fact mostly they are used to protect the feet. But then again, like any one who is trained in hand to hand
combat, any shoe or foot wear can be used as a weapon if you are kicking or stomping on a person. Military training for close quarter combat has
demonstrated such time and time again.
There has to be an element of common sense in this aspect, as to dictate on such court cases, as it can be argued that any item can be used as a
weapon, do we now have warnings on all sorts of items, to indicate that they can be used in a way not designed to?
And then there is one other question, if for some wild off chance he wins the suit, what is he going to do with all of that money in prison? After
all would not his victims be entitled to a very large chunk of the money that he would garner? The person who he stomped or the 18 yo prostitute that
he beat so sevearly that her ears were bleeding? Would they not be entitled to take all of the money he would gather and leave him with nothing?