No Medical Bills for Some Colo. Shooting Victims: Should Warner Brothers Pick Up the Whole Tab?

by Chris D Posted 2012/07/26 19:00:00

Related Topics: Warner Brothers, Dark Knight Rises, Colorado Shooting, Colorado Shooting Victims

859 votes
Read all 607 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	170 votes	20%
	No	689 votes	80%

The film studio that produced "The Dark Knight Rises" has donated more than $2 million to help pay for the medical bills to ease the suffering of the Colorado shooting victims. As the film is likely to make hundred of millions of dollars, do you think the studio should pick up the tab on all the medical costs or have they been generous enough?

ABCNEWS.GO.COM reports:
No Medical Bills for Some Colo. Victims

abcnews reports medical bills colo victims

+26

Add a comment above

Heisenberg 2012/07/26 20:20:22

No

+16
No but if they did, it would be the most awesome PR campaign in movie history.

Even right-wingers like me would respect them more.
>> See Replies

More polls by Chris D

CHUCK to Centuri... 2012/07/29 21:01:12

+1
SHE WILL GET SUED AND LOSE..SHOT TO KILL ,YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT..

reply
Centuri... to CHUCK 2012/07/30 18:18:40

I'll tell her that. Thank You.

reply
ComeOnNow to Centuri... 2012/07/29 21:07:04

+1
She fill find herself sued and she better at a minimum be prepared that if they do have a gun, she may have to use lethal force. I would not take that chance. My wife likes my 40 XDm

reply
Centuri... to ComeOnNow 2012/07/30 18:20:54

+1
Yeah,

I agree. I'm trying to train her to shoot for center of mass. We can't afford lawsuits from dirtbags who want something for nothing.

reply
CHUCK to ComeOnNow 2012/07/29 18:29:43

+2
YOU ARE SO RIGHT..

BAN THE ROCK..

reply
CHUCK to Phantom 2012/07/29 18:27:19 (edited)

+2
GOOGLE JIM JONES ,TIM MC VEIGH , CHARLES MANSON.. NONE OF THOSE CRAZIES USED GUNS..PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE ..WE LIVE IN A DAY AND AGE WHERE PEOPLE FEEL BACKED INTO CORNER WITH NO WHERE TO TURN.. EVERY 30 MINUTES A SERVICE MAN ATTEMPTS SUICIDE. IVE BEEN TOLD..BECAUSE THEY ARE IN THAT CORNER..

BAN THE ROCK..

reply
CHUCK to ComeOnNow 2012/07/29 18:17:09

+1
GREAT COMMENT..

reply
Ian 2012/07/28 16:36:51

No

They should not be required to do so, but it would be a wonderful gesture if they did.

reply
joan.sloane 2012/07/28 16:22:50

No

No sooner had the tragedy happened and there was talk about suing the theater as if they were responsible for a mad man coming in there to start shooting.

Now the question asking if the Warner Brothers should pay all of the medical bills of the victims. Why? It would be wonderful if they want to contribute but why does anyone think they should as if they, in some way, caused this to happen?

This was unforeseeable and only the shooter is responsible. Nobody can insure complete safety anywhere at any time.

reply
jabo to joan.sl... 2012/07/28 20:39:21

The theater was at fault because they should have had an alarm on the emergency door, and it would have sounded when he opened it to retrieve his weapons, which were outside the door, and then he started shooting..

reply
joan.sl... to jabo 2012/07/28 22:34:55

I didn't know that. That could possibly change things a bit. Do you know if alarms on emergency doors are mandated by law in Colorado?

reply
raine to jabo 2012/07/29 02:32:54

I agree. I know if anyone is going in and out the emergency door the theater is not paying attention. . fault by default

reply
Seeker of Truth - War Wizard 2012/07/28 15:18:46

No

+2
It's not the fault of WB, or the theater, or the city, or the movie-goers, or Bat Man himself... It's the fault of one man. Stop trying to shift blame to other people!

reply
dennisg40 2012/07/28 15:15:13

No

+1
The movie company shot no one in Colorado an idiot from California did. Society it the loser now days every one is looking for some to sue for every misfortune in their life. Lawyers promote it on the internet.

reply
john Kills 2012/07/28 15:02:29

Yes

They attracted people in but made them give up any means of defending themselves. A guard or even a cop would not be able to stop this kind of attack especially if they were wearing a uniform. Catch the gaurd unaware and take him out first and the people are still defenseless. Unless people want to pay $100 per ticket to employ 6 guards on duty at all times.

reply
Romanknite 2012/07/28 14:32:18

No

I think the NRA should flip the bill, they are the ones who control the guns.

reply
john Kills to Romanknite 2012/07/28 15:04:20

+1
The NRA has no control or say so of my guns.

reply
Romanknite to john Kills 2012/07/28 15:12:57

And Warner Bros. has no control over your actions to kill. So then maybe the state will just pick the tab up for those who can't pay their med bills.

reply
john Kills to Romanknite 2012/07/28 15:39:43

It was the business that denied people their constitutional right and the business should pay. I hope people woke up and refuse to do business with any business that doesn't respect the constitution.

reply
Romanknite to john Kills 2012/07/28 15:42:58

What business are you referring to? you lost me.

reply
john Kills to Romanknite 2012/07/28 23:18:20

The misunderstanding was mine. I do not hold grievance toward warner bros. The theater that made their business a gun free zone is where my anger lies.

reply
Romanknite to john Kills 2012/08/04 22:08:54

I'm for carrying guns,.I carry a Colt OHWS better known as the Colt SOCOM The handgun was designed to carry a removable sound suppressor and a laser aiming module . It's dangerous out side the doors of my home.And I don't really like crowded places I never want to get caught naked.

reply
joan.sl... to john Kills 2012/07/28 22:55:41

What business and how did this business deny peoples constitutional rights? Are you referring to the theater? Are you suggesting that they are denying peoples rights because they won't allow them in carrying shot guns?

reply
john Kills to joan.sl... 2012/07/28 23:20:10

who said anything about shotguns? Are you a drama queen?

reply
joan.sl... to john Kills 2012/07/29 02:54:05

It's called hyperbole. Look it up; you might learn something.

reply
lorenab. 2012/07/28 12:53:10

No

its very generous of them to donate any money that they do!:) but it wasnt their fault that the shooting happened. if he wanted to shoot he would've done it regardless of whether the movie was showing or not.

reply
Dan 2012/07/28 12:39:41

No

No, because all they are doing is setting themselves up for further law suits.

reply
william keegan 2012/07/28 12:30:52

No

If I were a stockholder of Warner Bros. I would be extremely disappointed with management’s decision to donate my money without my permission. There is no obligation or requirement to cover any of these costs. The only obligation of the management of Warner Bros. is to provide a profit to the owners!

reply
Dave 007 2012/07/28 11:49:36

No

That's like asking, should Ford pay for medical costs of the people that their cars hit?

reply
Pam 2012/07/28 07:36:25

No

+1
I think they are doing more than can be expected, maybe a small statement of sympathy at the beginning of the movie may be added, but this was not their fault. It could have been a Harry Potter movie or a Disney movie and this could have happened.

reply
Captain-Morgan 2012/07/28 07:05:54 (edited)

No

The case will never fly on the production company... However, the theater may be liable for the unsecured exit.. No alarm or security camera's covering the door and parking lot.
They could start a large fund to cover hospital bill's for those killed and injury's..

reply
click1695 2012/07/28 07:01:08

No

Why should they pay for someone else's insanity?

reply
nicesteve 2012/07/28 06:40:27

No

+1
It's good that Warner Bros. has done so on their own free will. However I don't belive
that Warner Bros. should be obligated in any way to do so. It could have just as easily
been a Star Wars or Harry Potter movie that was subject to attack. It could just as well
have been some thug styling himself after Lord Voldemort or Darth Vader as the Joker,
and be no less or anymore evil than Jim Holmes. Unlike the Joker, Vader, and Voldemort,
this fiend and others like him are very real and hardly just fictional. These monsters were
not created by Warner Bros., Twentieth Century Fox, MGM-Universal, Paramount, etc.
They are responsible for creating their own evil selves. Not the movie industry.

reply
Walter Harris 2012/07/28 06:32:02

No

+1
but it is the human thing to do and the right thing to do. Batman did not kill those people but at least they are willing to help out. Hopefully someone else will help pick up the tab and none of the folks end up bed ridden for the rest of their lives. God bless them for a speedy recovery especially that 13 yr girl, she needs some serious psych work. But I will say she is a better person than I.

reply
Dyonus 2012/07/28 05:40:38

No

+1
They can if they want, but they should not be obligated to.

If a guy is walking in front of my house in the street and gets hit by a car, am I obligated to pay for his hospital bills? No.

reply
Dickens 2012/07/28 04:18:14

Yes

..just call it another publicity cost...and why aren't we just letting them die as is done all over America to people without money??

reply
Dave 007 to Dickens 2012/07/28 11:50:36

I think that the hospitals have to treat a person, insurance or not.

reply
jabo to Dave 007 2012/07/28 20:44:27

The hospitals should not get stuck with the bills, and the taxpayers have to pay, when the movie people have much more money than we do.

reply
Dave 007 to jabo 2012/08/04 12:21:17

You are right, BUT why do doctors make a ton of money?

reply
teigan to Dickens 2012/07/28 15:51:30

People always get treated when they come to emergency rooms. Money or not, it's the law. You should really think before you speak.

reply