Originally posted by bonoman:
Get your facts straight before you go and make an ass of yourself. If you knew the facts of the mcdonalds case then you might have a little creditablity.
Its called satire, get over it, my intention was to look foolish but yet still get my point across. As for some of the other comments about water temperature, in most peoples posts, I will explain a few things that I assume would be quite obvious... basically, the more energy, in this case in the form of heat, that something has, the more it expands. In doing such, it gets to a point where it is able to contact more surface area. Case and point, steam burns are much MUCH worse then say touching your finger to a hot frying pan - in that they affect a large surface area of skin, and that you cannot simply force off the steam where you can take your finger off the pan. Regardless of whether the water is warm at 50 degrees or boiling at 100 degrees, or even at 110 degrees where it continues to turn to steam longafter its stopped heating, if you pour any of it on yourself of course itll burn. In the case of these liquids, there is always a point where water is going to burn, and if you pour coffee or something on your leg and it is nearing boiling point, its going to burn, and the fact that its probably through a garment, which will now also be hot, and holding it to your skin, is not going to help. So, long story short, I dont give a rats ass why the water is hot, because hot water is going to burn anyway, and if people cannot put something cold on it, cannot even remove the source of heat from their leg, then of course its going to burn - point is, hot is hot, you dont order drinks for the sake of consuming them cold, or else you'd order them cold. Its hardly mcdonalds fault for serving hot drinks, if someone is too incompetent to realise, 'hey maybe I
shouldnt spill this on myself be it intentional or accidental, its not something I should do', because when you order something hot you accept the risk that it will be hot, and if you try and do too many things at once and ooh darn you knock over your coffee onto yourself then its still your own fault, not the person who served you. By that logic, people should be sueing the labourers who grow the coffee beans, because without them, they wouldnt have been able to make coffee and subsequently wouldnt have burned themselves, key word there being 'themselves', the other people didnt burn them. If people dont like the temperature, then they should make it themselves where they are the ones in control, a company is going to make coffee at a temperature suitable to keeping it hot and keeping people who enjoy
hot coffee in good spirits. These situations could be avoided so easily, I mean even if the person would just say hmm this is too hot I think Ill let it cool down first. There is always method to my madness... or at least usually... The fact of the matter is, I dont want to be jumped on for saying that people are responsible for themselves and if theyre too stupid not to burn themselves then they shouldnt have right to sue someone who sure as hell didnt walk up to them and pour coffee into their laps.
In a post somewhere else a long time ago, I said injury is sometimes comical in that people are stupid and inflict it upon themselves because of lack of logic, and probably deserved what they got. To that someone replied, so a person who tips over a pop machine and gets crushed to death deserved it? thats funny? My answer, which I never bothered to post, is yes. The first person it happened to, yes that is a tragedy and is not funny, but we learn from our mistakes, and if theres a warning label on the side of a pop machine as a result of that accident, and some idiot tries to steal pop out of the machine by tilting it/shaking it, then if they get crushed, they accepted the risk of doing so, and they deserve what they get. Told not to, they do it anyway, they dont use common sense, and perhaps its better that their genes are removed from the gene pool anyway because theyre too stupid to realise 'hmmm, an appliance in excess of 500lbs, this might just crush me to death if I ignore the sticker and pull it towards myself'. Im probably going to take heat for that last statement, but I mean come on... Accidents should only happen once, then people should look back and say hmm well this happened to the person as a result, so maybe I shouldnt do this. Granted, small accidents like spilling things happen every now and again, but its noones fault but the person who is in control of whatever was spilled. If you buy a good tempered dog from someone, and you beat it around and treat it like shit, and it bites you, thats sure as hell not the breeders fault, nor is it the dog for defending itself. If someone attacked me, Id surely defend myself. Its all a matter of reason, and people seem to lack the ability to think in a manner of action -> consequence. If so, thats noones fault but their own, not the producer of the product. I could continue to support my argument, but Ill just wait for someone to try and refute my points before I bring up more situations of idiocy before I continue with the responsible for your own actions thing.