[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Woman bough a motor home, started driving on the highway, set the cruise control, and went back to make herself a sammich! When the motor home crashed, she sued because she was not specifically told she had to stay in the seat and steer. She sued and won $1,750,000.00 and a new motor home.[/quote]
Bitches be crazy.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
There’s no problem with tort law. Really.
[/quote]
And no one is arguing that tort law is problem-free. It’s basically a policy decision - allow more access to the courts and have some shitty stuff like this happen, or limit access and have genuinely damaged people get screwed.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
For those of you that are so “amazed” at 165 deg food, please take a look at this standard meat temperature chart.
Ever eaten poultry, or well done beef? Some food even requires it to be prepared hotter than that.
165 deg AND UP food is an entirely reasonable EVERY DAY occurrence.[/quote]
So, no one has a re-“tort” to this post huh?
[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
There’s no problem with tort law. Really.
[/quote]
And no one is arguing that tort law is problem-free. It’s basically a policy decision - allow more access to the courts and have some shitty stuff like this happen, or limit access and have genuinely damaged people get screwed.
[/quote]
A policy that somehow never gets a chance to be VOTED on.
Kinda like most of the “laws” on the books. Ordinary citizens don’t vote for it, but suffer from it, special interest controls it and keeps it in place, but if You or I break it, we get fined or imprisoned.
Our legal system has evolved into a convoluted fucking JOKE that pads state coffers (and attorney’s pockets), and does little to protect people.
/rant
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
For those of you that are so “amazed” at 165 deg food, please take a look at this standard meat temperature chart.
Ever eaten poultry, or well done beef? Some food even requires it to be prepared hotter than that.
165 deg AND UP food is an entirely reasonable EVERY DAY occurrence.[/quote]
So, no one has a re-“tort” to this post huh?[/quote]
Oh, I just skimmed what you were saying after the “Bitch, get your ass into the kitchen” bit.
Why do we not mimic the criminal system, a “grand Jury” type system for tort cases? That way at least “resonable” people of the public can decide if a tort case is worthy.
[quote]DJHT wrote:
Why do we not mimic the criminal system, a “grand Jury” type system for tort cases? That way at least “resonable” people of the public can decide if a tort case is worthy. [/quote]
Have fun paying for that.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
For those of you that are so “amazed” at 165 deg food, please take a look at this standard meat temperature chart.
Ever eaten poultry, or well done beef? Some food even requires it to be prepared hotter than that.
165 deg AND UP food is an entirely reasonable EVERY DAY occurrence.[/quote]
So, no one has a re-“tort” to this post huh?[/quote]
If you’re just looking for a debate, I’d say stop changing what this case is about. While all of that might be REASONABLE and NORMAL standards for those foods, it’s obviously not the case with coffee.
Those foods are required to be brought to temps that high in order to cook them in accordance with the customer’s desire. Serving coffee that hot does nothing for the flavor of the coffee and based on McD’s own research it was undrinkable and their customers wish to drink the coffee immediately.
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
For those of you that are so “amazed” at 165 deg food, please take a look at this standard meat temperature chart.
Ever eaten poultry, or well done beef? Some food even requires it to be prepared hotter than that.
165 deg AND UP food is an entirely reasonable EVERY DAY occurrence.[/quote]
So, no one has a re-“tort” to this post huh?[/quote]
If you’re just looking for a debate, I’d say stop changing what this case is about. While all of that might be REASONABLE and NORMAL standards for those foods, it’s obviously not the case with coffee.
Those foods are required to be brought to temps that high in order to cook them in accordance with the customer’s desire. Serving coffee that hot does nothing for the flavor of the coffee and based on McD’s own research it was undrinkable and their customers wish to drink the coffee immediately.[/quote]
Wait a minute, I thought 165 was unreasonably dangerous. I mean THIRD DEGREE BURNS. Do I need to show you pictures of what that can do?
So 165 is only dangerous when you are expeting something to give you 2nd degree burns when it could actually give you 3rd degree burns.
Please note that those temps are for the inner cooler portion of the meat, not the hotter portions on the outside.
lots of hot foods can give you 3rd degree burns. If coffee at 165 is unreasonably dangerous, shouldn’t we limit all hot food to something cooler. (of course this would effectively outlaw serving chicken.
But since you apparently feel hot solid food is somehow different because people wouldn’t expect hot coffee to have similar burning characteristics to hot food, lets look at something more similar.
Did you know to properly brew black tea you should maintain a heat of about 212 degrees? It is a very similar drink. If the lady had spilled 200 + degree tea in her lap burning her worse than the coffee did, would you or would you not think McDs responsible? Do you really think that there is a huge difference in caution in the way people approach tea vs coffee?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
FTR, I drink coffee everyday that I make from with a French press (yes PMPM, we could insert some sexual objectification innuendo in here if you so desire). I boil the water on the stove. At my 3000’ feet elevation, the water boils at 206 F. I run it through the press and pour it into a preheated coffee mug. Therefore I think it is safe to assume I take my first sip at the 185 F range.
IMO, serving coffee that hot DOES add to the flavor and enjoyment of the coffee. There.
(Fuck OSHA)[/quote]
There are other reasons. It ensures that the maximum time for the coffee to remain drinkable.
Coffee flavor changes as it cools.
I also wanted to point out typical espresso brewing temp is in the 200 deg range.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
It’s essentially like a guy who is allergic to pickles telling them no pickles, getting a burger with pickles, seeing the pickles, and then eating it anyway. She knew that the coffee could burn her and that the cup was full and decided to remove the lid anyway.[/quote]
When I worked there we did this all the time. Someone would order a burger with no pickles and I put nothing but pickles on it…a goddamn handful of them. “Choke on them pickles you pickle hating prick” I would say as I laughed maniacally and licked pickle juice from my hands, arms and shirt. Maybe it was because I wrote ‘I Love You’ on their order slip that they never brought the burgers back. Because I did love them. You know, in a totally psychopathic homo erotic way.
Would you like some pickles? 
Who cares what temperature any particular beverage/food needs to be brewed/cooked at?
What are the advantages of actually serving it to people at temperatures that cause 3rd degree burns within seconds?
At any rate, the woman was aware on some level that she may potentially spill her coffee - hence the request for a medium in a large cup. Whether she was aware of the possibility of being burned or simply didn’t want to stain her sweatpants, she made a reasonable request to offset that risk. Whatever McDonald’s employee who was in charge of pouring her drink was too lazy to follow her orders to minimize this risk… which is arguably the reason she sustained that injury.
While we might not agree with her decision to open her cup between her legs while in the car, she clearly did it under the assumption that her request was honored and that she was dealing with a cup that was about half full.
[quote]anonym wrote:
Who cares what temperature any particular beverage/food needs to be brewed/cooked at?
What are the advantages of actually serving it to people at temperatures that cause 3rd degree burns within seconds?
At any rate, the woman was aware on some level that she may potentially spill her coffee - hence the request for a medium in a large cup. Whether she was aware of the possibility of being burned or simply didn’t want to stain her sweatpants, she made a reasonable request to offset that risk. Whatever McDonald’s employee who was in charge of pouring her drink was too lazy to follow her orders to minimize this risk… which is arguably the reason she sustained that injury.
While we might not agree with her decision to open her cup between her legs while in the car, she clearly did it under the assumption that her request was honored and that she was dealing with a cup that was about half full.[/quote]
BS. who can’t tell the difference between a full large cup and a half empty one. She knew it was full when she opened it. A reasonable person doesn’t rely of on a specialty request from a fast food place to ensure their safety. Like the pickles guy.
[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
For those of you that are so “amazed” at 165 deg food, please take a look at this standard meat temperature chart.
Ever eaten poultry, or well done beef? Some food even requires it to be prepared hotter than that.
165 deg AND UP food is an entirely reasonable EVERY DAY occurrence.[/quote]
So, no one has a re-“tort” to this post huh?[/quote]
Oh, I just skimmed what you were saying after the “Bitch, get your ass into the kitchen” bit.[/quote]
You can post from the kitchen?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Who cares what temperature any particular beverage/food needs to be brewed/cooked at?
What are the advantages of actually serving it to people at temperatures that cause 3rd degree burns within seconds?
At any rate, the woman was aware on some level that she may potentially spill her coffee - hence the request for a medium in a large cup. Whether she was aware of the possibility of being burned or simply didn’t want to stain her sweatpants, she made a reasonable request to offset that risk. Whatever McDonald’s employee who was in charge of pouring her drink was too lazy to follow her orders to minimize this risk… which is arguably the reason she sustained that injury.
While we might not agree with her decision to open her cup between her legs while in the car, she clearly did it under the assumption that her request was honored and that she was dealing with a cup that was about half full.[/quote]
BS. who can’t tell the difference between a full large cup and a half empty one. She knew it was full when she opened it. A reasonable person doesn’t rely of on a specialty request from a fast food place to ensure their safety. Like the pickles guy. [/quote]
Where did you read she knew the cup was full?
I would say a reasonable person doesn’t rely on an unreasonable request to ensure their safety. I don’t consider asking for a larger cup to be at all unreasonable, do you? I mean, the medium and large cups are located about an inch apart.
