You know, I eat fast food several times a week. On the order of 7-10 meals a week.
I’m 6’3", 185 pounds. According to the logic in this lawsuit, I should be fat. I’m not. Hell, I was fat when I DIDN’T eat fast food that often. Does this mean fast food made me LOSE weight? Further, does this mean I can sue the fast food companies for making me thin so I couldn’t sue them for making me fat?
One word for fat fast food kids: EXERCISE.
Well they’ll get plenty of exercise arranging their new stacks of hundred dollar bills.
Grrrrrr
Food is essential to human existence. That is worse than addictive.
The door WAS opened long ago. Guns = legal, non-defective product. Tobacco = legal, non-defective product. Big Macs = legal, non-defective product.
Precedent. The notion of individual responsibility for open, obvious, well-known risks is seemingly gone. Do I think there is a legitimate cause of action or a question of fact for the jury? No. I’m assuming that it will be based on McDonalds advertising to children. [sarcasm] Parents cannot be expected to educate their children about advertising, or eating properly. They must do what their children demand. [/s]
Dammit, there is no choice! Stop making sense. We need to slap some litigiousness into you.
Anyone want to wager that the obese kids only exercise is video games? Those video game companies are flush with cash, eh? Sue them next.
If one hates a particular position that means that half the lawyers on the case are correct. Furthermore, there are no bad cases without bad clients. Lawyers don’t make this stuff up, ordinary folks do it. Finally, there is no recovery unless a bad jury (usually) or judge plays along. Lawyers get blamed for everything.
Tabouli and Hummus contain the unsaturated fats.
You know, I wonder how long it will be before auto companies are sued over drunk drivers causing accidents.
Whats next, someone choking on a hotdog and sueing Oscar Meyer? I bet the alcohol companies are shitting their pants. Is there no end in sight? These insane lawsuits are becoming the norm instead of the execption. I’m asking again, where will we be 20 years, 50 years from now?
Well, ramen costs about 10 cents a package and has 400 calories. So for 50 cents you have your daily 2000. Calories don’t necessarily cost a lot.
McDonalds does claim that their products are part of healthy diet. Remember the McDonalds France that recommended that obese kids only eat there once a week? The McDonalds head office disagreed with that quite reasonable assessment.
Like the cigarette companies, they are not being quite honest with us.
Like duping us into thinking a triple Big Mac is the zenith of a healthy responsable diet?
I’m so busy salivating of their healthy assortment of food I forgot how to spell.
Oh great, now I’m really hungry. :mad:
Hell, I knew Mickey D’s food was bad for you back when I was a kid in the 70’s, when we didn’t know nuthin’.
Only in America can you be awarded millions of dollars for being stupid.
“Oh, I didn’t know cigarettes were dangerous, even though the warnings are all over the packs.”
“Oh, I didn’t know if I spilled the coffee in my lap it would burn me.”
“Oh, I didn’t know eating Big Macs four times a week would make me fat.”
And this would be a bad thing? Ambulance chasing lawyers are WAY overdue for a gigantic cooler full of iced gatorade being dumped on their overblown egoes.
One of the things I look forward to in the Republican controlled House, Senate and Presidency is TORT REFORM.
Anyone who ever eats at McDonald’s should join a class-action suit against the bozo who filed this claim for making the price of our beloved Big Macs go up. You know, the Big Macs that I don’t eat anymore because they’ll make me FAT??
These kids didn’t wake up one morning suddenly several hundred pounds overweight. Where were these squalling mothers while their little darlings were packing on those pounds, huh? Damn, you’d think when they hit 50 or so pounds over their normal weight a concerned and responsible parent would notice something amiss and make plans to reverse the trend.
Oh wait, I said responsible. Apparently people are no longer supposed to be responsible for themselves or their children. My bad.
I think its in our genetic coding.
Fire = hot
Beer = yummy
Bic Mac = make you fat slob if you eat 3,456 of them a day.
Throw me in the back of a pickup truck, and let me dangle a BM right out of reach. I’ll have those tubby kids back in fightiing shape in no time.
What, no one’s here proclaiming the lawyers as clever entrepreneurs? No one’s in here defending them, saying, “Hey, if they can get millions of dollars from a corporation that can’t defend itself better, more power to em!” After the SaveKaryn thread I thought we had all agreed to admire people who take no responsibility for their own actions and use their own misdeeds to profit from others! Come on, people, which script are we on here?
The simple answer is that it isn’t the judge’s job to do that yet. First, the case has to be filed. Second, the complaint and summons must be served on the defendants. Third, one or all of the defendants will need to bring various motions that will allow the judge to decide whether to pithc the case in whole or in part.
But make no mistake, the Republicans will not take steps to limit the number of torts that occur, they will simply remove your ability to seek redress for the injuries that do happen to people.
No, that would probably provoke some kind of bleating from the fat-acceptance crowd.
Robb minor nitpick but am i missing something or does not “simply removing your ability to seek redress for the injuries” by definition limit the number of torts that occur?
jonpluc, there could be some defect in my language, but what I mean is that the number of injured people will not be reduced.