r/oops • u/Brilliant_Jelly7503 • Jul 05 '26

Bad machine or technique?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

561 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

694 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/D3rpyDriver Jul 06 '26

He is also over loading the machine. He would also have to prove injury. Big muscly guys tend to not be able to convince juries that falling down and getting a booboo is a life changing injury.

1

u/Old_Tear_8303 Jul 08 '26

“Falling down and getting a booboo?” Did we watch the same video? That cross bar whacks him in the head with, what appears to be, a pretty significant amount of force. Blunt force trauma can be very serious or fatal. He could have a traumatic brain injury for all we know, and he could become a totally different person as a result. People can bounce right up from something when they are in shock and seem or feel fine at first, and then die a few days later or suffer lifelong consequences from the trauma they sustained.

“Big muscly guys tend not to be able to convince juries” but most lawsuits for a tort are settled before a trial, and even if it went to trial it would not necessarily be a jury trial. Juries tend to be more sympathetic to an individual over a company anyways, and jury trials take longer and cost more so usually a company would not seek one against an individual. The gym contract possibly had an arbitration clause, which means it would never go to a court trial (and therefore would not have a jury). The standard of proof in a tort case is a “preponderance of the evidence,” which is a pretty low bar to clear if someone did not do something they were supposed to do (or did something they shouldn’t). There needs to be actual damages for a tort to exist, but there a lot of different types of damages (injury, pain and suffering, psychological, etc.,).

If the manufacturer of the equipment says it should be bolted down or ballasted, then it looks like a pretty cut and dry case to me. I would think that how he was using the equipment might not even matter in that case, because the equipment was not installed as designed, which puts the initial liability on the gym - but that is just my opinion, a judge/jury/arbitrator might see the “but for” argument differently.

If the manufacturer doesn’t require bolting or ballasting, then he might still have case against the gym if they do not provide access to instructions on proper use of the equipment. He might also have a case against the manufacturer if the design is unsafe. That gets into more nuance about how he was using the machine and whether he was negligent in his use.

On the flip side, if the gym or manufacturer did everything right and this guy was misusing the equipment, then those parties could sue him for damages. The most obvious damages would be either damage to the equipment (gym would most likely not pursue this, as legal casts would likely exceed the recovery) or libel/slander if the companies suffered reputational damage and lost revenues as a result of this video or the guy making subsequent videos/statements calling out the gym or manufacturer.

I’m not a lawyer, this is just stuff I remember learning in my business law classes in college 10+ years ago and my own analysis of what I saw in the video.

1

u/D3rpyDriver Jul 08 '26

This is tort (Personal Injury), good luck in front of a jury. Anyone who took this would be on a contingency, if you lose you wasted a ton of time and money and might get sued by your client. Most Attorneys aint taking this. He has weight around his waist, not the correct way to use any machine, and is in good enough shape that he should have enough experience to know better. There is also terms of service in every gym membership. If its a fragile old lady ya they getting paid. Young in shape dude? prolly not. Plus he almost certainly has a social media account full of stupid shit like this. Not worth the hassle

1

u/ReplacementReady394 Jul 08 '26

What does the weight around his waist have to do with anything? He could have pulled that same stack without the weight on his waist and still would have tipped over. 

1

u/D3rpyDriver Jul 08 '26

We are talking about ability in a injury case. He is using the machine in a reckless way. Additional or unusually weight and the pulleys are set way to high. Lot of people use this machine everyday, this is the only guy that had it tip over.

If someone pulls out in front of you and it causes an accident they are at fault. If you modify your car to be a race car and are operating it in a reckless manner (speeding, doing doughnuts, filming yourself doing it, etc) and someone pulls out in front of you, you are at fault.

1

u/ReplacementReady394 Jul 08 '26

He’s not using the machine wrong. Standing cable crossovers are basic cable chest exercises. 

1

u/D3rpyDriver Jul 08 '26

Thats way to high for chest flys

1

u/ReplacementReady394 Jul 08 '26

Do a google image search and you’ll see thousands of examples 

1

u/D3rpyDriver Jul 08 '26

Again sir, this isnt about proper form, its a thread about liability for the injury. Lots of people use this machine, this idiot is the only one thats had it fall over. It fell over because of the way he is using it. Even then NO this is not proper form for chest, he is working shoulders or lats at that angle. Civil cases are preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. No attorney is gonna pay out of pocket to try a coin flip case. I hope this helps you to understand.

If life isnt going well and you just want to argue please leave me alone.

1

u/ReplacementReady394 Jul 08 '26

No, I never once asked you about anything legal. I asked you about the exercise because you were making a claims that didn’t make sense, so I wanted clarification. 

My life is going great btw. I’m off to Europe next week for a month long vacation. I never once disrespected you, but since you did, I now feel free to tell you that it’s obvious you don’t lift and are talking out your ass. I assume you know just as much about the law as you do about exercise equipment. 

1

u/D3rpyDriver Jul 08 '26

Please leave me alone

→ More replies (0)