Statement from Rich Taylor (LACR Lawsuit)

sumdood wrote:

Fair enough. We've been through some injuries with kids but NOTHING like he was faced with. So do I know "For sure" if I was in...

Fair enough. We've been through some injuries with kids but NOTHING like he was faced with. So do I know "For sure" if I was in the same boat  papa bear mode wouldn't kick in and make me want to sue a track ?  I say no, but like you say, you never really know until you're in their shoes. I know I'd be guilt ridden and 2nd guessing myself forever, would transferring some of the blame to the track help ?  Probably to some extent. I hope I never have to find out. At the end of the day I'm glad he's ok and back living an active life. But it SUCKS we may lose another track over it. If a few shops have to eat some goggles I honestly don't care. Seems like disappearing tracks is going to hurt them more than eating a few pairs of goggles but what do I know.   

Dirty Points wrote:

The local shop argument is a strange one. If I'm going to go pick up some goggles, I'll still get goggles. Just not that brand.

The real Sasquatch wrote:

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles. And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just...

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles.

 And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just return them .  They already paid for them. If they don't sell them they will take a loss on them no matter how many pairs You buy of other brands.  

Dirty Points wrote:

The local shop argument is a strange one. If I'm going to go pick up some goggles, I'll still get goggles. Just not that brand.

The real Sasquatch wrote:

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles. And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just...

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles.

 And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just return them .  They already paid for them. If they don't sell them they will take a loss on them no matter how many pairs You buy of other brands.  

Dirty Points wrote:

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want...

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want right there, otherwise I am not supporting them?

Bizarre.

The real Sasquatch wrote:

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles. And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just...

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles.

 And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just return them .  They already paid for them. If they don't sell them they will take a loss on them no matter how many pairs You buy of other brands.  

Dirty Points wrote:

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want...

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want right there, otherwise I am not supporting them?

Bizarre.

Farmer J wrote:

I have yet to see his brand of goggles in a shop. Cant even recall seeing anyone at the track with them.  

The real Sasquatch wrote:

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles. And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just...

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles.

 And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just return them .  They already paid for them. If they don't sell them they will take a loss on them no matter how many pairs You buy of other brands.  

Dirty Points wrote:

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want...

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want right there, otherwise I am not supporting them?

Bizarre.

Farmer J wrote:

I have yet to see his brand of goggles in a shop. Cant even recall seeing anyone at the track with them.  

TalinH112 wrote:

If we made dirtbike tracks safe from these obstacles then we would all be fuckin flat track riders.  

sumdood wrote:

^ "His kid may be fine now. But at the time there could have been a big chance that he would not be fine. Also major...

^ "His kid may be fine now. But at the time there could have been a big chance that he would not be fine. Also major injuries will come back to haunt you later on in life. How many people here have had a major injury and been told there was a chance they would have major complications the rest of their lives, but are doing well now? I would bet many.  So Rich would have had to make the choice early on".

 

Thought that's what health insurance was for ?  Here's to all the ^ "Many people here who have had a major injury and been told they would have major complications the rest of their lives, but are doing well now" (And plenty who may be functioning and back to their lives but aren't really "doing so well" right now), but still chose NOT to sue someone for a payday.  People can swing from RT's nutsack like Tarzan all they want I don't gaf. But don't try to tell me how much he cares about the sport.  A go fund me to cover his (share) of the medical expenses and a track safety movement would have done way more for the moto community. Shout out to all you guys that are gimping around like weebles but would never blame the consequences of your decisions on someone other than yourself. Or try to get a big payday over an injury.  Just a different perspective I guess. 

The real Sasquatch wrote:

Personally, I feel like its much easier to make that decision for myself, than it would be to make for a child or loved one . I...

Personally, I feel like its much easier to make that decision for myself, than it would be to make for a child or loved one .

 

I got an infection and spent over 10 years  getting better after some paperwork mistake resulted in me not getting antibiotics.  Easy enough decision to make for myself not to do anything but get as much better as I could.

 

 But if I put myself in the place of somebody having to make a choice for somebody else, that gets much harder.  I hate the idea of suing anybody . And I'm not defending Rich. Hes going to be fine. If his sales start taking a hit he  can stop supporting racers, let some people go. 

 

 But He himself is unlikely to be hit too hard by any movement .  And is it really worth it to take away all of the other peoples way of making a living?? Not buying the goggles that Your local dealer has on the shelf that they already paid for, is only hurting them. 

 

I don't know him, I don't sell his products at my shop. I just think that people should always try and understand the opposing viewpoint they are disagreeing with.  Try and get into the same frame of mind that it would take for You to make that same choice. Many people say that a tractor on the track would make it OK to sue.   

mxxcdez wrote:

I think you by far have the most reasonable and rationale thought process. You’re clearly much more intelligent than I am and also some others on...

I think you by far have the most reasonable and rationale thought process. You’re clearly much more intelligent than I am and also some others on here. Nobody has to agree with his actions or do it themselves, I get that 100%. I just can’t justify burning someone’s business down when the person doing the burning would never know if they would do something similar when presented with a similar or worse situation. The law wasn’t broken and the person being burned at the stake had an extremely tough and most likely regrettable decision to make for his son. His track record of helping out racers, riders, and supporting the industry is commendable. My inner Dad is kicking too as I have little racers myself and couldn’t imagine working through these decisions in the moment of destruction and rebuilding. This all just feels over the top and I’m not one to judge those actions. 

The real Sasquatch wrote:

Personally, I feel like its much easier to make that decision for myself, than it would be to make for a child or loved one . I...

Personally, I feel like its much easier to make that decision for myself, than it would be to make for a child or loved one .

 

I got an infection and spent over 10 years  getting better after some paperwork mistake resulted in me not getting antibiotics.  Easy enough decision to make for myself not to do anything but get as much better as I could.

 

 But if I put myself in the place of somebody having to make a choice for somebody else, that gets much harder.  I hate the idea of suing anybody . And I'm not defending Rich. Hes going to be fine. If his sales start taking a hit he  can stop supporting racers, let some people go. 

 

 But He himself is unlikely to be hit too hard by any movement .  And is it really worth it to take away all of the other peoples way of making a living?? Not buying the goggles that Your local dealer has on the shelf that they already paid for, is only hurting them. 

 

I don't know him, I don't sell his products at my shop. I just think that people should always try and understand the opposing viewpoint they are disagreeing with.  Try and get into the same frame of mind that it would take for You to make that same choice. Many people say that a tractor on the track would make it OK to sue.   

mxxcdez wrote:

I think you by far have the most reasonable and rationale thought process. You’re clearly much more intelligent than I am and also some others on...

I think you by far have the most reasonable and rationale thought process. You’re clearly much more intelligent than I am and also some others on here. Nobody has to agree with his actions or do it themselves, I get that 100%. I just can’t justify burning someone’s business down when the person doing the burning would never know if they would do something similar when presented with a similar or worse situation. The law wasn’t broken and the person being burned at the stake had an extremely tough and most likely regrettable decision to make for his son. His track record of helping out racers, riders, and supporting the industry is commendable. My inner Dad is kicking too as I have little racers myself and couldn’t imagine working through these decisions in the moment of destruction and rebuilding. This all just feels over the top and I’m not one to judge those actions. 

truck wrote:

You keep saying this like nearly everyone who rides hasn't been injured and had some hospital bills or missed some work as a result. That's the...

You keep saying this like nearly everyone who rides hasn't been injured and had some hospital bills or missed some work as a result. That's the norm in this sport. So yes, many people know exactly what they'd do in this situation because they've lived it. 

Cayden Thompson wrote:

Sheesh, we ACTUALLY have berms with cliffs on the other side where I live (Mountain View MX/Washougal). People have been seriously hurt by going over them...

Sheesh, we ACTUALLY have berms with cliffs on the other side where I live (Mountain View MX/Washougal). People have been seriously hurt by going over them into the ravines, but I guess the riders in the PNW have some decency...

rogers wrote:

Exactly, unfortunately California has a State filled with loosers in more than one way (starting with a 50/50 money and property split if a couple gets...

Exactly, unfortunately California has a State filled with loosers in more than one way (starting with a 50/50 money and property split if a couple gets a divorce), whom refuse to accept responsibility for their own decisions.

In this instance a lawsuit never should have even been allowed by the court. People ride tracks at their own risk as many have mentioned, providing a tractor does not unexpectely pull in front of them and they slam into it etc, as that is obviously a completely different situation. 

TalinH112 wrote:

Sounds like Rich singed the waiver for his of age son to ride and that allowed liability to be placed on the track. This is what...

Sounds like Rich singed the waiver for his of age son to ride and that allowed liability to be placed on the track. This is what Cooksey reported and I have zero way to verify it.

rogers wrote:

Exactly, unfortunately California has a State filled with loosers in more than one way (starting with a 50/50 money and property split if a couple gets...

Exactly, unfortunately California has a State filled with loosers in more than one way (starting with a 50/50 money and property split if a couple gets a divorce), whom refuse to accept responsibility for their own decisions.

In this instance a lawsuit never should have even been allowed by the court. People ride tracks at their own risk as many have mentioned, providing a tractor does not unexpectely pull in front of them and they slam into it etc, as that is obviously a completely different situation. 

TalinH112 wrote:

Sounds like Rich singed the waiver for his of age son to ride and that allowed liability to be placed on the track. This is what...

Sounds like Rich singed the waiver for his of age son to ride and that allowed liability to be placed on the track. This is what Cooksey reported and I have zero way to verify it.

UpTiTe wrote:

I know Rich, I didn’t even know he could sing. 

TalinH112 wrote:

Sounds like Rich singed the waiver for his of age son to ride and that allowed liability to be placed on the track. This is what...

Sounds like Rich singed the waiver for his of age son to ride and that allowed liability to be placed on the track. This is what Cooksey reported and I have zero way to verify it.

UpTiTe wrote:

I know Rich, I didn’t even know he could sing. 

TalinH112 wrote:

He singed pretty good to his lawyer. 

The real Sasquatch wrote:

Personally, I feel like its much easier to make that decision for myself, than it would be to make for a child or loved one . I...

Personally, I feel like its much easier to make that decision for myself, than it would be to make for a child or loved one .

 

I got an infection and spent over 10 years  getting better after some paperwork mistake resulted in me not getting antibiotics.  Easy enough decision to make for myself not to do anything but get as much better as I could.

 

 But if I put myself in the place of somebody having to make a choice for somebody else, that gets much harder.  I hate the idea of suing anybody . And I'm not defending Rich. Hes going to be fine. If his sales start taking a hit he  can stop supporting racers, let some people go. 

 

 But He himself is unlikely to be hit too hard by any movement .  And is it really worth it to take away all of the other peoples way of making a living?? Not buying the goggles that Your local dealer has on the shelf that they already paid for, is only hurting them. 

 

I don't know him, I don't sell his products at my shop. I just think that people should always try and understand the opposing viewpoint they are disagreeing with.  Try and get into the same frame of mind that it would take for You to make that same choice. Many people say that a tractor on the track would make it OK to sue.   

mxxcdez wrote:

I think you by far have the most reasonable and rationale thought process. You’re clearly much more intelligent than I am and also some others on...

I think you by far have the most reasonable and rationale thought process. You’re clearly much more intelligent than I am and also some others on here. Nobody has to agree with his actions or do it themselves, I get that 100%. I just can’t justify burning someone’s business down when the person doing the burning would never know if they would do something similar when presented with a similar or worse situation. The law wasn’t broken and the person being burned at the stake had an extremely tough and most likely regrettable decision to make for his son. His track record of helping out racers, riders, and supporting the industry is commendable. My inner Dad is kicking too as I have little racers myself and couldn’t imagine working through these decisions in the moment of destruction and rebuilding. This all just feels over the top and I’m not one to judge those actions. 

truck wrote:

You keep saying this like nearly everyone who rides hasn't been injured and had some hospital bills or missed some work as a result. That's the...

You keep saying this like nearly everyone who rides hasn't been injured and had some hospital bills or missed some work as a result. That's the norm in this sport. So yes, many people know exactly what they'd do in this situation because they've lived it. 

TalinH112 wrote:

If we made dirtbike tracks safe from these obstacles then we would all be fuckin flat track riders.  

TalinH112 wrote:

If we made dirtbike tracks safe from these obstacles then we would all be fuckin flat track riders.  

LungButter wrote:

Ironically, flat track is dangerous as fuck.  Especially at the pro level.  

 

sumdood wrote:

^ "His kid may be fine now. But at the time there could have been a big chance that he would not be fine. Also major...

^ "His kid may be fine now. But at the time there could have been a big chance that he would not be fine. Also major injuries will come back to haunt you later on in life. How many people here have had a major injury and been told there was a chance they would have major complications the rest of their lives, but are doing well now? I would bet many.  So Rich would have had to make the choice early on".

 

Thought that's what health insurance was for ?  Here's to all the ^ "Many people here who have had a major injury and been told they would have major complications the rest of their lives, but are doing well now" (And plenty who may be functioning and back to their lives but aren't really "doing so well" right now), but still chose NOT to sue someone for a payday.  People can swing from RT's nutsack like Tarzan all they want I don't gaf. But don't try to tell me how much he cares about the sport.  A go fund me to cover his (share) of the medical expenses and a track safety movement would have done way more for the moto community. Shout out to all you guys that are gimping around like weebles but would never blame the consequences of your decisions on someone other than yourself. Or try to get a big payday over an injury.  Just a different perspective I guess. 

TalinH112 wrote:

If we made dirtbike tracks safe from these obstacles then we would all be fuckin flat track riders.  

LungButter wrote:

Ironically, flat track is dangerous as fuck.  Especially at the pro level.  

 

Hammer 663s wrote:

I have a friend that ran a flat track team. He stopped after too many deaths among the riders. Those guys are truly nuts. I went...

I have a friend that ran a flat track team. He stopped after too many deaths among the riders. Those guys are truly nuts. I went to the Sac Mile one time and the level of risk was just mind boggling. 

LungButter wrote:

Ironically, flat track is dangerous as fuck.  Especially at the pro level.  

 

Hammer 663s wrote:

I have a friend that ran a flat track team. He stopped after too many deaths among the riders. Those guys are truly nuts. I went...

I have a friend that ran a flat track team. He stopped after too many deaths among the riders. Those guys are truly nuts. I went to the Sac Mile one time and the level of risk was just mind boggling. 

Philo Beddoe wrote:

I agree. Also, speedway is different right? The bikes with the skinny tires and an insane amount of horsepower. That looks scary as hell too.

Hammer 663s wrote:

I have a friend that ran a flat track team. He stopped after too many deaths among the riders. Those guys are truly nuts. I went...

I have a friend that ran a flat track team. He stopped after too many deaths among the riders. Those guys are truly nuts. I went to the Sac Mile one time and the level of risk was just mind boggling. 

Philo Beddoe wrote:

I agree. Also, speedway is different right? The bikes with the skinny tires and an insane amount of horsepower. That looks scary as hell too.

SonofThor32 wrote:

And those bikes do not have brakes..  LOL  I still to this day do not understand that one.

Philo Beddoe wrote:

I agree. Also, speedway is different right? The bikes with the skinny tires and an insane amount of horsepower. That looks scary as hell too.

SonofThor32 wrote:

And those bikes do not have brakes..  LOL  I still to this day do not understand that one.

Philo Beddoe wrote:

Oh crap, that’s right! What is the thought process there? Lol

SonofThor32 wrote:

And those bikes do not have brakes..  LOL  I still to this day do not understand that one.

Philo Beddoe wrote:

Oh crap, that’s right! What is the thought process there? Lol

TalinH112 wrote:

My comment was meant to be a joke gents 🤣

Philo Beddoe wrote:

I agree. Also, speedway is different right? The bikes with the skinny tires and an insane amount of horsepower. That looks scary as hell too.

SonofThor32 wrote:

And those bikes do not have brakes..  LOL  I still to this day do not understand that one.

Philo Beddoe wrote:

Oh crap, that’s right! What is the thought process there? Lol

JazzyJJ wrote:

Brakes would actually make it more dangerous. Follow me here. If you were able to get hard on the brakes it would cause more erratic movement...

Brakes would actually make it more dangerous. Follow me here. If you were able to get hard on the brakes it would cause more erratic movement and make things even worse. It's similar to track cycling

Dirty Points wrote:

The local shop argument is a strange one. If I'm going to go pick up some goggles, I'll still get goggles. Just not that brand.

The real Sasquatch wrote:

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles. And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just...

The point being that the local shop owner has already paid for those goggles.

 And depending on how long they have had them, they can not just return them .  They already paid for them. If they don't sell them they will take a loss on them no matter how many pairs You buy of other brands.  

Dirty Points wrote:

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want...

So now you are somehow making me responsible to buy the goggles I don't want in the local shop, when they have the ones I want right there, otherwise I am not supporting them?

Bizarre.

Moto_Geek wrote:

Anyone have an update on this case?