It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Hot Coffee"

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: jrflipjr

not to take things of-topic here, but, for the most part, and in all honesty/reality, we typically bring upon ourselves that which we bitch about here daily..... and with the advent of the internet and social media, even more so.


???

and yet we [people] still bitch about the same, all the while.

we 'create' the 'need', someone creates the 'product', then 'we' complain about it's properties to 'monitor' it's tracking, monitoring abilities at the same time 'we' use them.


expand/expound on that to your heart's content, it truly does apply near universally.

some orchestrated/organized. others just come into play and are co-opted for another's ofty nefartious intent.

i'm out.

"Hot Coffee"





posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
So, my pocketknife did not come with a warning about not poking my eyeball out with it. Maybe I should stab my eyeball, sue the knife company and retire!

My employer has not warned me about putting my fingers in the paper cutter. Maybe I should cut my fingers off and sue both my employer and, since I see no warning on the paper cutter, sue the maker of the paper cutter as well and retire very rich!

I could go on and on with these dumba$$ed statements, but I think you get the point (well, after reading some of the comments I guess I have to assume that most of you don't get the point).

Suing a corporation for your own idiotic mistakes just because you can is:
1) something one should be absolutely ashamed of and
2) a major part of what is wrong with this country.
We have come to the point in the USA where there is literally no such thing as personal responsibility anymore! I will watch the video this weekend just to keep my opinion honest, but I really can't see any reason why a video from the people who have an agenda to force down our throats is going to make me think that the stupid mistakes we make are someone else's fault/responsibility.

And for the record I was 27 at the time of the McDonalds coffee thing and, while I do feel sorry for the woman, it was idiotic and a defeat for humanity that she won - regardless of what all the keyboard experts here tell me about the "proper" temperature of coffee should be. The intelligent person knows that coffee is hot, so don't set it near the sensitive regions!
I have also had 2nd and 3rd degree burns all over my back as a young teen when my mom took the radiator cap off of our overheating car after I told her not to. I was showered with boiling radiator fluid and water, had months and months of recovery, and I am a back sleeper and couldn't sleep on my back for those long recovery months. Still have the scars too. Yes, my mom was kinda stupid at the moment - and I paid the price for not stopping her - but that is in no effing way the fault of General Motors or anyone else but us!

I am just stunned and baffled at how the people in this country feel like they do not have to have any personal responsibility. SMH at this whole idea of suing someone else for your own stupidity - and at the people who think it's ok because "evil corporations"! OMFGosh people!




posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I respectfully disagree. When we get food and drink at Mcdes it is suppose to come as ready to eat/drink. 195 degrees is not ready to drink.

Of course coffee is hot. But how many of you avid coffee drinkers have ever spit their coffee on themselves? I am sure a lot of you have so how many have suffered 3rd degree burns from it?
edit on 3-7-2014 by alienjuggalo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
When we get food and drink at Mcdes it is suppose to come as ready to eat/drink.


we 'assume' it to be that way. if not happy/satisfied, you have the freedom to patronize another fave establishment.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: 12m8keall2c

So in other words it is no longer "buyer beware".

It is buyer be damned.

So if you, on your way home from work, get plowed into by a truck losing limb and causing extreme financial hardship then you just suck it up, don't lawyer up and just take it as a lesson on personal responsibility because you shouldn't have been where trucks drive?



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
When we get food and drink at Mcdes it is suppose to come as ready to eat/drink.


we 'assume' it to be that way. if not happy/satisfied, you have the freedom to patronize another fave establishment.



Well that is supposed to be a safe assumption. Is McDonalds' really suppose to hand us something through a drive through window in a flimsy cup that can give us 3rd degree burns?



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Terminal1

ludicrous assumption/comparison.

of course not. TRUE NEGLIGENCE, FAULT, FAILURE should remain uncapped.

as i've said repeatedly previously.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: alienjuggalo

i'm basically in full agreement with you, with the excepttion of what 'you' choose to do with that 'product' after having taken 'possession'.

put a 'knowingly' hot drink between your legs and driving away...=== nut on the handle failure.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: alienjuggalo

I think your post is being lost in translation. Alas, ignorance doth rule...



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c
a reply to: alienjuggalo

i'm basically in full agreement with you, with the excepttion of what 'you' choose to do with that 'product' after having taken 'possession'.

put a 'knowingly' hot drink between your legs and driving away...=== nut on the handle failure.



Well she was not driving away she was not even driving. They were parked and as she tried to add cream and sugar
it spilled.

But TPTB wanted you to believe she was driving when she spilled it and we all bought it hook line and sinker. You are still buying it


After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap


www.lectlaw.com...
edit on 3-7-2014 by alienjuggalo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

The first comment on the video says it all about how well the manipulation works.



This is madness, I don't care how bad she got burned, it was her own fault for spilling it in her lap. If I bought a coffee and it wasn't hot I would want my money back.


You do understand that if you purchased a cup of coffee. it would be hot... right?

Now, the lids have on the coffee..."WARNING! CONTENTS MAY BE HOT!"

Now, picture a lid with the following label..."WARNING! CONTENTS MAY BE SCALDING!"

Would you buy that item? Let me know the answer to that...A person buys a cup of coffee, they do not expect nearly boiling water...and that was what McDonald's was peddling...the lady was damaged by malfeasance and negligence on the part of a major corporation...
edit on 3-7-2014 by totallackey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: alienjuggalo


As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap


user error.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c
a reply to: alienjuggalo


As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap


user error.


That is not the point.. The point is we all thought she was driving, we all thought the burns were not that bad , we all thought she got millions.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: 12m8keall2c

Thing is... because there are a few that would game the system, I got the impression that you would still lump the ones that aren't "frivilous" with the gamers and drive on with life. That is the impression I got.

Besides, I am sure you know, that there is a huge amount of people on this planet that are, for whatever reason, be it just tired of long hours or just plain ignorant, that can "test" the civil justice system (and our own patience). After all, we are human and not flawless and one would expect that the products we buy should be almost fool proof or face a lawsuit.

What I have a hard time bending my mind around is, even if a person was mostly negligent in a products use, should it be a life sentence without any form of recourse or method of sustaining some sort of life?

I guess I am looking at it in a moral light more than a light of pure reason.

I do apologize by the way I came off in my last post to you.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c
a reply to: alienjuggalo


As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap


user error.


That is not the point.. The point is we all thought she was driving, we all thought the burns were not that bad , we all thought she got millions.


I didn't.

Not that i followed the case that closely, but I do remember the judge's overturning of the monetary amount/punitive damages quite nicely.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c
a reply to: alienjuggalo


As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap


user error.


That is not the point.. The point is we all thought she was driving, we all thought the burns were not that bad , we all thought she got millions.


I didn't.

Not that i followed the case that closely, but I do remember the judge's overturning of the monetary amount/punitive damages quite nicely.




Ok 3 posts ago you still thought she was driving lol. which btw is what they wanted you to think.

reason given)

edit on 3-7-2014 by alienjuggalo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Terminal1
a reply to: 12m8keall2c


I guess I am looking at it in a moral light more than a light of pure reason.



i thinks that's waht they [the attorneies/law firms rely on Heavily]

they play on people's emotions and the like.

poor so and so can't do this anymore, can't do that anymore, can'tr do etc..... all because they spun a twister board the wrong way, fell, broke their sacroiliac, etc.

frivilous type shyte nonsense.

i'm all for righttful wrongs being upheld, but this has just gone beyond the pale.... even beyond the absurd...

when you have prisoners suing themselves just because they spent a few hours in the penitentiary library.

nuckin. futZ!???



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: alienjuggalo

pedantic.

i don't care if she was or was in the passenger seat, nestling it closely as she opened the lid.

how is a given company/corporation legally, financially responsible for what you the consumer do with their product.


i guess, personal responsibility has gone completely out the window anymore.




posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: 12m8keall2c

Honestly the fact you still thought she was driving shows you did not watch the video. So why are you so adamant lol?



edit on 3-7-2014 by alienjuggalo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: alienjuggalo

uhm... didn't have to watch the video to ascertain that.... knew it long-since from back in the day. why must you continue to remain adamant on that one particular aspect.???


i could care less if she was or wasn't and it truly plays no part whatsoever with regards her ability to sue the place she bought it from.

????

yeah. the jury found her '20%' culpable.... when in fact I still feel, think, believe she and or her driver. 100% culpable.



i buy a gallon of muriatic acid from lowes or home depot. open it between my legs on the way home and it spills. ... basically melting my manlihood (s)...

i should have the right and ability to sue lowes/ home depot !!???

OR, EVEN .... the manufacturer


nah .... that's the type shyte which finds us where we are now.

????



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join