Gruesome

[Peanutsdad]

Still Brent, I find it ludicrous that McDonalds was responsible because this dumb broad cant drive, add cream and keep from spilling her coffee on herself. McDonalds didnt spill it,, sHE did. She is ENTIRELY responsible for THAT. Yet,,,a corporation was sued and had to pay.


you know,, placing warnings on items has become quite the past time to avoid lawsuits. Buy a hairdryer,, it'll probably have a warning on it like one we bought did. It said, " Do not place this devise in any orifices as it can cause injury".
Now ask yourself,, why on Gods green earth is a warning like THAT needed for a hairdryer.


common sense has taken flight to more reasonable locales. I've known since childhood,, hot coffee will burn me if I spill it on myself.

[Peanutsdad]

Yes I know Sweet,, I was making a point how common such things have become. They are not the exception any longer,, just the everyday news.

It seems everyone of em from the gal in the carolinas, the mom in texas, to the washington snipers, any of the kids that shoot up their classmates, to this wasted piece of dna in this story...its all either " all about me, or its everyone elses fault".

[antonin]

This murder should be added to the stats that 55% of child homicides are committed by mothers.

[Brent]

>Still Brent, I find it ludicrous that McDonalds was
>responsible because this dumb broad cant drive, add cream and
>keep from spilling her coffee on herself.

Read the article. She wasn't driving the car (she was a passenger), and the car wasn't in motion when the mishap occurred.



>McDonalds didnt spill it,, sHE did. She is ENTIRELY responsible
>for THAT. Yet,,,a corporation was sued and had to pay.

McDonalds sold a product that was in an inhently unsafe state, i.e. at an unreasonably and dangerously elevated temperature. It was also supplied in a container that was prone to collapse, as reported in other accounts of this incident. She spent 8 days in the hospital, which seems a bit much to have to go through for spilling a cup of coffee.


>a warning on it like one we bought did. It said, " Do not
>place this devise in any orifices as it can cause injury".
>Now ask yourself,, why on Gods green earth is a warning like
>THAT needed for a hairdryer.

I agree that warning labels are often the result of idiots who misuse a product and then sue, but the McDonalds case isn't one of these. I myself am a big fan of warning labels in general.



>common sense has taken flight to more reasonable locales. I've
>known since childhood,, hot coffee will burn me if I spill it
>on myself.

If you had spilled a cup of this 185-degree coffee on your child, would you blame yourself alone, or would McDonalds have some culpability in  the injuries your child sustained? I think (and the courts have held) that by providing it in a form that virtually guaranteed an injury, they should be liable in some form.

[MYSONSDAD]

I think the stats are actually higher then that.

Wonder what it is with the boyfriends.

[Peanutsdad]

>>Still Brent, I find it ludicrous that McDonalds was
>>responsible because this dumb broad cant drive, add cream
>and
>>keep from spilling her coffee on herself.
>
>Read the article. She wasn't driving the car (she was a
>passenger), and the car wasn't in motion when the mishap
>occurred.
That makes her an even bigger idiot in my book.





>
>
>>McDonalds didnt spill it,, sHE did. She is ENTIRELY
>responsible
>>for THAT. Yet,,,a corporation was sued and had to pay.
>
>McDonalds sold a product that was in an inhently unsafe state,
>i.e. at an unreasonably and dangerously elevated temperature.
>It was also supplied in a container that was prone to
>collapse, as reported in other accounts of this incident. She
>spent 8 days in the hospital, which seems a bit much to have
>to go through for spilling a cup of coffee.

So do car manufacturers. Show me a speed limit tat justifies being able to travel over 100 mph. yet most injuries are sustaioned in high speed collisions. By that rationale, we should all be suing Ford.






>
>
>>a warning on it like one we bought did. It said, " Do not
>>place this devise in any orifices as it can cause injury".
>>Now ask yourself,, why on Gods green earth is a warning like
>>THAT needed for a hairdryer.
>
>I agree that warning labels are often the result of idiots who
>misuse a product and then sue, but the McDonalds case isn't
>one of these. I myself am a big fan of warning labels in
>general.



Im a big fan of common sense myself, also a bigger fan eugenics. The McDonalds case was a supreme example of how stupid people can recoup from others simply by being stupid. Thats part of the problem in todays society, no personal accountability.
>
>
>
>>common sense has taken flight to more reasonable locales.
>I've
>>known since childhood,, hot coffee will burn me if I spill
>it
>>on myself.
>
>If you had spilled a cup of this 185-degree coffee on your
>child, would you blame yourself alone, or would McDonalds have
>some culpability in  the injuries your child sustained? I
>think (and the courts have held) that by providing it in a
>form that virtually guaranteed an injury, they should be
>liable in some form.


First of all, I dont make it a habit waving hot liquids that can burn my children over them so they COULD be burned. IF I did, would CPS blame me or McDonalds?
>
>

[smtotwo]

CPS would blame you, but I agree McD's would have some culpability.
The woman offered a settlement considerably less than she was awarded. McD's in their own arrogance thought this case was a no-brainer and decided to go to trial.  Where they promptly got spanked by the jury. JMHO.

[Peanutsdad]

>CPS would blame you, but I agree McD's would have some
>culpability.

My point exactly,, CPS WOULD NOT hold McDonalds liable,, only me. Why is that? It's called personal responsibility. THAT my friends is exactly what I am talking about. THAT is why I find it ludicrous that McDonalds was held responsible. I dont see anywhere that it is advisable to hold ones hot coffee between their legs. Typically, coffee cups are meant to be held in ones hand.




>The woman offered a settlement considerably less than she was
>awarded. McD's in their own arrogance thought this case was a
>no-brainer and decided to go to trial.  Where they promptly
>got spanked by the jury. JMHO.


They got spanked by the same twisted sense of zero personal accountability that has permeated this country. If I wreck my car at over a 100 mph, Ford should be held accountable,, after all, the crumble zones and other safetly features dont work at that speed. If I buy a chainsaw and cut a tree down that hits my house, the chainsaw company should be held accountable,, after all, they didnt warn me a tree could fall on my house.
As far as I'm concerned, it IS a nobrainer. McDonalds should not have had to pay a dime,, if anything, that woman should have had to pay THEIR attrny fees.

[Indigo Mom]

Something is happening, pd.  Something terrible.  I don't know "why" I feel this way, but I've always felt that there is this "vein" between parent and child.  When our children hurt, the pain shoots through the "vein" and we hurt.  When our children are happy, their happiness shoots through the veing and we get happy.

But you know what?  Something is happening with that vein.  So many parents have either "cut" their vein, or had it cut.  They're detached from their children.  I couldn't EVER detach.  I don't like pain and suffering, but I'll GLADLY take what my children are feeling if it means they get "eased" up on.  

Too many people are having children and become so detached...rather than the "normal" thing...being attached.  

The rise in parents killing their children, or a parents boyfriend/girlfriend killin them is quite alarming.