Huh? McD most assuredly had been sued before. What makes her unique is that she won.
Later, somebody tried the same crap on the manufacturer of the coffee maker that McD uses. Unlike McD, Bunn pulled out the ANSI specification for coffee makers, showed that theirs were compliant, and that was the end of that.
You hold it in your hand--she wasn't driving, she was a passenger. Or you find a place to wedge it--I've never had any trouble finding one in any car I've owned.
The problem with Welfare isn't the people recieving Welfare. The "leeches" are the ever expanding legions of government bureaucrats who are there to try to keep anybody from cheating the system.
In its first few years Welfare had a real effect. In the 40 or so years since the budget has increased radically but the number of people being helped and the degree to which they are being helped has remained substantially unchanged.
This notion that seat belts or banning tobacco or restricting portion sizes or the like can reduce the death rate is one of the stupidest arguments I have ever seen. The death rate is constant--one person, one death. Everybody dies. The question is not whether, it is when.
Seat belts do not save lives. They may prolong them, which is a different issue. As to "cost", which costs more, to treat acute trauma from an automobile accident or to treat Alzheimer's?
There is always cloning. ^_^
TDD
ge
Excuse me, but YOU are the one bitching that we should not require everyone to have healthcare so that they are covered in the event of an accident or illness that puts them in the hospital. I asked what YOUR alternate system was. YOU responded with you have no problem with people donating to charity. And you also gave a response that indicated you didn't much care what happened to them. So apparently now you agree that is not a VALID alternative and in fact you don't have any workable, real approach.
So, instead of something that could start to address the problem of us all paying for the guy who has no insurance, exactly what is going on now, you'd prefer to hang your hat on empty basic principles. Principles which only sound great to some fanatic, yet that same fanatic can't go through a simple example of how it would work in the real world. You can't because it doesn't work.
A guy with a low paying job has a car crash. He has serious head injuries. He'a laying on the side of the road. What should be done? Should be a simple thing, how would it work? Go ahead, finally answer it instead of running away.
That is about as intellectually bankrupt as you can get. And as I said before, in my experience, the whack jobs like you with alleged simple solutions like, "I shouldn't have to pay for it, let charity do it", are usually the ones that actually give nothing to charity.
Oh what a pile of total BS. Show us any evidence that this is true. That the overwhelming percentage of welfare money is not actually going to recipients. As for the bureaucrats checking up for fraud, there should be more of them. When is the last time you saw anyone prosecuted for welfare fraud?
On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 05:12:14 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"
+1
Isn't there a law against cloning old clowns?
Apparently you don't, you just think you do. The jury knows the story. And that story, in sum, is not that the woman refused to accept responsibility for her actions, but that McD's refused to accept responsibility for theirs.
Now, you want to throw out the jury system, you're gonna have to go bigger than usenet.
Dammit! It's Saturday. Quit cloning around and get out in the shop and make some damn sawdust!
I agree with you on this one. I think a lot of the people just jump to the conclusion with very little of the facts. I looked into it a bit and here are some of the facts:
McDonald=92s Operations Manual required the franchisee to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit;
Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the worst kind of burn) in three to seven seconds;
Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years;
She received third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years.
The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio- mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on burns, the editor in chief of the leading scholarly publication in the specialty, the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation;
McDonald=92s admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years =97 the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail;
From 1982 to 1992, McDonald=92s coffee burned more than 700 people, many receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks;
McDonald=92s admitted at trial that its coffee is =93not fit for consumption=94 when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;
Liebeck=92s treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen. McDonald=92s did a survey of other coffee establishments in the area, and found that coffee at other places was between 30-40 degrees cooler.
In my world, the jury decision was fully justified and the right one. Arguing that it was her fault because she spilled it on herself doesn't absolve McDonalds. McDonalds knows perfectly well what customers who purchase their products at a drive-through do with them. A large percentage of the customers will be opening the container in a car, shortly after receiving it. They knew other people had been burned. It would have been very easy for them to simply serve the coffee at a lower temperature. Even if you buy the argument that the woman bears responsibility, at most it's just some of the responsibility. Maybe 20% her fault, I could see that kind of verdict too. But not one that absolves McD for most of what happened.
I wouldn't mind seeing Red Skelton again. When I was a kid, the family would gather around the giant 23" B&W console TV and watch The Red Skelton show. He was funny without being lascivious, something that doesn't seem possible these days. O_o
TDD
Even though the money awarded was reduced, and the case was appealed.
# # Excuse me, but YOU are the one bitching that we should not # require everyone to have healthcare so that they are covered # in the event of an accident or illness that puts them in the # hospital. #
More ignorant spin and projection But thank you for demonstrating how you did the projection
Rest of stupid shit and repetition ignored
# # Oh what a pile of total BS. Show us any evidence that # this is true. That the overwhelming percentage of welfare # money is not actually going to recipients. As for the bureaucrats # checking up for fraud, there should be more of them. # When is the last time you saw anyone prosecuted for # welfare fraud?
Another fine demonstration of absence of logic A bunch of bureaucrats pushing paper to "insure lack of fraud" does NOT necessarily and automatically lead to prosecution for welfare fraud. It just guarantees more bureaucrats to push more paper, as has been the case
Meanwhile we have undeniable evidence of the unraveling of the social fabric of inner city residents who also happen to be the least employed and most welfare dependent Just look at the increase of single parent families, women never married with multiple fathers for their brood of kids, crime and gang issues, to name a few.
But hey, naturally, according to you, those are not problems. the act that no one got prosecuted for fraud is far more critical
LOL They were responsible for selling her a cup of hot coffee Apparently selling a cup of hot coffee to an idiot is a crime for which they were punished
There are some aspects of the jury system which are flawed in the US. In particular the notion that juries, have not demonstrated a "let's stick it to the corporation since they have money" syndrome.
The Daring Dufas on Sat, 08 Dec
2012 09:40:18 -0600 typed >> The Dar>>>> At her age I think the prospect of future offspring was a moot pointYep. Although it turns out that he knew and told some of the dirtiest stories - but always backstage, never out front. My Dad caught one of his shows while he was in the service. Half way through his act he told the audience "Sorry, I don't have enough material for two complete shows, so any of you guys who were here for the first show will have seen this next bit before." I think that is when Dad became a real fan.
I love his bit about how to drink coffee and donuts. "You must extend your little finger when you dunk. It's to catch the edge of the cup, otherwise you could go into the cup up to your elbow."
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.