Oooookay
Kantalooppi
Was that supposed to make sense or something.
:dubious:
Hey, spogga, when I was a kid, I drank anti-freeze, set a tent on fire in Boy Scouts, cut my finger off in a door, tried to jump from a moving bike onto a tree branch, tried the Indiana Jones “crawl under a moving car” thing…and I lived.
I’m a little strange, but alive.
Sweetums, Kantalooppi was capitalizing on a funny typo in the thread title.
Heehee. Doo damn!
Whoa! I didn’t do that one!! :dubious:
Damned pesky keyboards. :smack:
Tripler
Must’ve happened when the threads got merged.
[rant]Sorry to go on a bit of a tangent, but for some reason it really irritates me when I hear ignorant people rail on Stella Whatsherface for the coffee lawsuit. The issue was not that the coffee was hot, and hurt her. The issue was that it was much hotter than coffee should be–hotter than you would get anywhere else, whether you went to Burger King or Starbucks or a local coffeeshop (or, probably, brewed your own)–and instead of just hurting, it did permanent damage to her legs and genitalia that coffee should not be able to do. Had she spilled a normal cup of coffee on her legs, she would not have suffered the kind of permanent burn damage she suffered from the excessively (unsafely) hot McDonald’s coffee.
It’s not that the coffee was hot. It’s that the coffee was much hotter than it should’ve been for safety’s sake–much hotter than what one would expect from a cup of hot coffee.
Yes, it’s her fault she spilled it. But they shouldn’tve made the coffee that hot. It didn’t need to be that hot.[/rant]
All of that may be true, fetus, and IIRC the Mickey D’s in question had been warned about this problem repeatedly over a multi-year period. But that doesn’t change the underlying, monstrous stupidity of inserting a very hot liquid - whether ~180F or a more-typical ~160F - between one’s legs. A vendor or manufacturer should not be responsible for a user’s stupidity, regardless of how predictable that stupidity might be. Sadly, that’s not the direction in which the law has turned.
[hijack]
True, but McDonald’s wasn’t really being held responsible for Stella’s stupidity, but for the corporation’s callous attitude toward their customers. The lawsuit was bound to happen sooner or later-if it wasn’t Stella contributing to the injury by holding the cup between her knees, it could have been someone slipping on the wet restaurant floor.
http://www.vanfirm.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm
Evidently it was the severity of the burns suffered by Stella, coupled with the company’s blase attitude, that struck the jurors. Incidentally, the punitive damages award was eventually reduced to $480,000.
http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm
[/hijack]
As far as the OP goes, c’mon, lady, the kid was just being a kid. Growing up is all about cuts and scrapes. How am I supposed to know I can’t jump through a moving swing if I don’t try?
Let’s not forget why McDonald’s chose to implement the “absurdly hot coffee policy.”
By maintaining that dangerously high temperature, they were able increase their profit margin by using substandard beans. If the coffee were served at the usual temperature, customers would be able to taste the coffee, and the company would have to spend more on decent beans, or suffer loss of sales.
Starbucks / McDonalds / Hot Coffee…How ironic.
I think the link and headline Woman Files $10M Suit Vs. Starbucks, that was on the wires yesterday, speaks for itself.
Sorry, WE…already been there and done that…except we would through dirt clods, rocks, oranges and lemons at each other when they would trench new housing tracts…30 years AGO…
My brother and I were pioneers when it came to childhood trench warfare…
through = throw:smack:
Seeking lost wages? I’m right here, fergoodnesssake.