do we get an ******* crew member safely returning home and then immediately suing his employer because they "sent him into pirate-infested waters without adequate protection".
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/27/...tes/index.html
and of course the rational question presents itself:
what would have been more 'adequate protection' than the brain-piercing bullets that the US Navy provided? do we really think this could have had a better outcome if the cook had access to a weapon??
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/27/...tes/index.html
and of course the rational question presents itself:
what would have been more 'adequate protection' than the brain-piercing bullets that the US Navy provided? do we really think this could have had a better outcome if the cook had access to a weapon??
Comment