<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Recreation on Connecticut public land	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/04/recreation-on-connecticut-public-land/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/04/recreation-on-connecticut-public-land/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 07:27:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: andy		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/04/recreation-on-connecticut-public-land/comment-page-1/#comment-118104</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[andy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 07:27:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=22383#comment-118104</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[(1) Why does the bill only apply to public or quasi-public lands? Why not private as well?

Private land are already immune.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(1) Why does the bill only apply to public or quasi-public lands? Why not private as well?</p>
<p>Private land are already immune.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Smart Dude		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/04/recreation-on-connecticut-public-land/comment-page-1/#comment-118091</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Smart Dude]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 23:52:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=22383#comment-118091</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Time to re-route the Appalachian National Scenic Trail from New York directly into Massachusetts, bypassing the dangerous hazards of the Connecticut Lawyer Industry.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Time to re-route the Appalachian National Scenic Trail from New York directly into Massachusetts, bypassing the dangerous hazards of the Connecticut Lawyer Industry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: GregS		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/04/recreation-on-connecticut-public-land/comment-page-1/#comment-118060</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[GregS]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:56:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=22383#comment-118060</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Two thoughts come to mind when reading this story. (1) Why does the bill only apply to public or quasi-public lands? Why not private as well? I don&#039;t know about in Connecticut, but there are some places where hiking and biking trails are developed that sometimes cross, with the owner&#039;s permission, private lands. Why shouldn&#039;t those owners also be exempt from lawsuits? (2) Even if the bill becomes law, I have no doubt creative lawyering will find a way to work around it or render it meaningless. The real problem behind lawsuits like this isn&#039;t with the laws that legislatures pass or fail to pass; it&#039;s with a court system that no longer believes in personal responsibility.  As long as courts and juries believe an injured person deserves compensation simply because they&#039;re injured, they&#039;ll find ways to award it regardless of what the intent of the law is.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two thoughts come to mind when reading this story. (1) Why does the bill only apply to public or quasi-public lands? Why not private as well? I don&#8217;t know about in Connecticut, but there are some places where hiking and biking trails are developed that sometimes cross, with the owner&#8217;s permission, private lands. Why shouldn&#8217;t those owners also be exempt from lawsuits? (2) Even if the bill becomes law, I have no doubt creative lawyering will find a way to work around it or render it meaningless. The real problem behind lawsuits like this isn&#8217;t with the laws that legislatures pass or fail to pass; it&#8217;s with a court system that no longer believes in personal responsibility.  As long as courts and juries believe an injured person deserves compensation simply because they&#8217;re injured, they&#8217;ll find ways to award it regardless of what the intent of the law is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason Barney		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/04/recreation-on-connecticut-public-land/comment-page-1/#comment-118058</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Barney]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:38:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=22383#comment-118058</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Washington law allows broad immunity (with some exceptions) when opening up land for recreational use.  

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.210]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Washington law allows broad immunity (with some exceptions) when opening up land for recreational use.  </p>
<p><a href="http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.210" rel="nofollow ugc">http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.210</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
