Google is NOT my friend :-\
in [Mac Applications]
|
Prev: spam
Next: "Canceled opening the page" (Safari)
From: dorayme on 19 Nov 2009 19:56 In article <191120091919333113%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <doraymeRidThis-40CDAB.12015419112009(a)news.albasani.net>, > dorayme <doraymeRidThis(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > Coffee > > > is supposed to be sold at a drinkable temperature > > > > You just make things up as they suit you. It is not *supposed* to be > > this at all for reasons I have given. > > it's a legal requirement that food sold be safe to consume. that > includes not just being free of dirt, insects and pathogens, but also > at a temperature that won't injure the consumer. Keep saying it. It does not include serving it at a temperature that allows folk to gobble it all up in a second or two, or to spill it onto their bodies. In your nanny state there is a tendency for laws to be enacted and/or construed by folk unaware of the infantile state they are in when continually protected by massive paternalism from the rest of society. -- dorayme
From: dorayme on 19 Nov 2009 20:04 In article <191120091919343156%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <he3ouj$ss1$1(a)news.albasani.net>, AV3 > <arvimide(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > .... > > Part of MacD's irresponsible behavior was to ignore numerous complaints > > about the excessive temperature their coffee was served at. This was a > > matter of record and part of the evidence against MacD, and they were > > held liable for it. Justly, I think. > > that's what did them in. > It was not excessive and they merely admitted this for commercial reasons. > > All sharp knives are dangerous, and their manufacturers are not liable > > for damage from careless handling. Coffee served at restaurants other > > than MacDonald's is not prone to cause serious burns. MacD was held > > liable for escessively hot and dangerous coffee and for ignoring > > complaints about it. Spilling coffee out of a styrofoam cup is > > commonplace and not analogous to cutting yourself while using a knife. > > correct. If it is so commonplace to spill it despite the *extra care* that is due to it being very hot very hot, then perhaps a notice to take care or to supply much better cups and lids with notices on them at greater cost is the correct way to proceed to avoid inflicting merely warmish coffee on everyone. But no such refinements are possible in the nanny sate, all must be protected by the will of the mob. -- dorayme
From: Wes Groleau on 19 Nov 2009 20:15 Mike Rosenberg wrote: > Meanwhile, one topic that hasn't been brought up is that of proportional > liability, and that's something that is always taken into consideration > in such cases. Actually, that depends on the jurisdiction. In some states, if the plaintiff is 51% at fault, they get nothing; 49$ and they might as well be completely innocent. -- Wes Groleau Walls Around the Poor http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/russell?itemid=1520
From: Wes Groleau on 19 Nov 2009 20:18 dorayme wrote: > If it is so commonplace to spill it despite the *extra care* that is due > to it being very hot very hot, then perhaps a notice to take care or to > supply much better cups and lids with notices on them at greater cost is Actually, due in part to this case, most to-go coffee cups in USA now have printed on them warnings that the contents are hot, handle with care in English, French, and Spanish. I've seen some that also have it in German. -- Wes Groleau You always have time for what you do first.
From: dorayme on 19 Nov 2009 20:19
In article <191120091919312982%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article > <jeg-3FCC1D.16024217112009(a)190-207-246-207.dyn.dsl.cantv.net>, Julian > Gómez <jeg(a)polished-pixels.com> wrote: > > > She placed the cup of hot coffee between her legs. It sloshed out and > > she got burned. How anyone got to her age without being aware of the > > risk of her action is amazing. > > the issue is not that she got burned but that the burns were so severe, > and had occurred some 700 times before to other mcdonalds patrons. How many people have car accidents where speed that they cannot safely handle is the big culprit? Should car manufacturers be liable for not making their vehicles unable to go past 30 mph? The mere numbers of irresponsible people is no key to understanding issues. You are thinking too simplistically. -- dorayme |