~*~
Yesterday, I was watching Monday's episode of Dr. Phil (SHUSH! A woman needs her guilty pleasures!), and he had a segment on Richard Camp - an everyday man who took down a bank robber in March of 2010.
Initially hailed a hero, the community turned on him when he filed a negligence lawsuit against the bank, alleging the bank failed to provide a safe environment for its patrons when he entered the bank on the morning of March 5.
He was on Dr. Phil, claiming he went from hero to victim when he filed the lawsuit. He insisted the bank had offered to pay his medical costs, then backed out of the offer. He was "forced" to file the lawsuit when the bank did not hold up their end of the deal.
Ummmm ...
First, why should the bank cover his medical costs when he chose his [idiotic] course of action?
Camp claimed he knew what was going to happen if the bank robber climbed over the teller counter. Since he seems to be clairvoyant, it seems he should have known what was going to happen before he walked into the bank and could have avoided the entire situation.
Second, every news piece (from reputable news sources) that I've read on this story indicates Camp claims he was suing (the lawsuit has been dropped since the Dr. Phil Episode was filmed) for the sole purpose of recouping his medical costs - all $75K of them - yet Camp had insurance coverage that paid more than half of those costs. When I do the math on this one, it sure seems he is getting $40K + over his medical costs.
Here's my take on this. I think the guy was just trying to do the right thing (right defined by his moral compass). His only faults were not doing a mental risk assessment and failing to managing his impulse control.
His choice worked out far better than it should have (statistically) - the robber was taken down - and Camp was only shot in the leg.
Along comes an attorney who assumes the public will want to reward Camp for his hero status and encourages him to file a lawsuit (the attorney fee being 1/3 of what Camp gets).
Then it backfires
Because society only considers you a hero if you sacrifice with no expectation of compensation.
File a lawsuit?
You're just another money-grubbing dirt bag.
What do you think? Hero? Idiot? Or ambulance chaser?
Second, every news piece (from reputable news sources) that I've read on this story indicates Camp claims he was suing (the lawsuit has been dropped since the Dr. Phil Episode was filmed) for the sole purpose of recouping his medical costs - all $75K of them - yet Camp had insurance coverage that paid more than half of those costs. When I do the math on this one, it sure seems he is getting $40K + over his medical costs.
Here's my take on this. I think the guy was just trying to do the right thing (right defined by his moral compass). His only faults were not doing a mental risk assessment and failing to managing his impulse control.
His choice worked out far better than it should have (statistically) - the robber was taken down - and Camp was only shot in the leg.
Along comes an attorney who assumes the public will want to reward Camp for his hero status and encourages him to file a lawsuit (the attorney fee being 1/3 of what Camp gets).
Then it backfires
Because society only considers you a hero if you sacrifice with no expectation of compensation.
File a lawsuit?
You're just another money-grubbing dirt bag.
What do you think? Hero? Idiot? Or ambulance chaser?
~*~
(18/24)
5 comments:
I agree...but the important thing is, what did the all-knowing Dr. Phil say? I love him too. Shhhh.
I think the guy acted on reflex. The bank should have offered to pay his out-of-pocket expenses as good will. An attorney got this guy seeing dollar signs which outweighed the good feeling he had for being a hero.
People - $75K for a gunshot wound to the leg!!!!!! Please make sure you have decent health insurance. A bad car accident or cancer could wipe you out financially.
If he wins a lawsuit for medical costs the insurance company will demand to be refunded what they paid. At least that's how most health insurance plans that I know of work.
Jay
Nobody 'thinks' in a situation like that. They react. He said he knew most of the people at the bank.
I think if the robber would not have dropped the money and not have harassed another person and just left, things would not have happened the way they did.
The lawyer's an ass. The bank is an ass.
Ah. I get it.. So if you do someting stupid and get hurt trying to help others, then it's expected that you should be compensated for your stupid yet indavertant heroic act!
That's a deal! Time to go out to more questionable locations here and see if I can disrupt a few robberies or something, get hurt, and have someone else foot the bills and give me a bit extra for my time, pain and energy!
Thanks for the great idea Dana!
Post a Comment