Helmets again but with a twist.

[Tom]

It's on the football level but at least it's American based so if the lawsuit is successful they won't run.

http://www.athleticbusiness.com/high-school/mother-levels-wrongful-death-suit-against-helmet-manufacturer.html?eid=96660005&bid=1559526

http://www.riddell.com/history/#

[tris]

There was a case a while back whereby the maker of ice axes was being sued due the ice axe not holding when the user was climbing a mountain

In this helmet case and the ice axe one it strikes me that there is a body of people who think that the protective equipment will act as some sort of force field preventing all eventualities.

Its unlikely it ever can and the maker can't ever be sure that the user was using the equipment correctly

Funnily enough there were similar discussions over here this week re Rugby and concussion where no helmet is worn
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/concussion-does-rugby-union-need-to-learn-from-the-nfl-a6804191.html

[Sasquatch Jim]

 If you are going to twist the helmet, make sure your head is not in it.
 As for the ice axe, How can the plaintiff prove that the ice was safe enough to climb or that he drove it in deep enough before trusting his weight to it?  I have climbed with ice axes before and there are numerous techniques to be mastered.
 None of which are foolproof.
 BTW, even  a kevlar soldiers' helmet won't protect against concussion, and it can stop some bullets.

[Tom]

It would seem that the burden of proof would be on the plaintiff to show that the equipment was used in accordance with the manufacturer's requirements/procedures. 

[Sasquatch Jim]

 Since he drove the ice axe into ice, which is in fact a liquid albeit a slow moving one,  He really should have had no expectation that it was a fool proof anchorage for whatever he was going to need it to support.
 It is a case of a climber who fu&*() up and wants someone else to pay damages.