| Branches of Government Debate topics of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of Government. |
09-01-2007, 06:27 PM
|
#71 (permalink)
| | Citizen
Country: Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: California
Gender:
Posts: 99
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Level up: 15%, 24 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by jasgallo I beg to differ with you here tristan. The lady bears most if not all of the responsibility here. One would expect that, when one purchases a cup of hot coffee, that is what they get. In this case, the woman purchased the coffee from her car at a drive thru window and, after pulling away from the window decides to put sugar in the coffee WHILE continuing to drive. Now, if she pulled over into a parking space to put the sugar in, I might feel differently but to put a cup of HOT coffee between one's legs to put sugar in while continuing to drive is just asking for trouble. | ================================================== ========
However, according to the facts of the case, she was not driving--her grandson was behind the wheel and the car was stopped when the coffee spilled. |
| |
09-01-2007, 06:36 PM
|
#72 (permalink)
| | Citizen
Country: Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: California
Gender:
Posts: 99
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Level up: 15%, 24 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by knot_e_lady $60,000 for appeal value on a tree?
Okay, yeah, I might agree that oak trees are pretty, but the do not increase the value of a house by $60,000. | ================================================== ======
Depends on the house. Nah, I'm just kidding. It's pretty ridiculous to suggest that a single mature tree in front of any house can increase the value by 60K.
When we got hit in our new car, I didn't ask the other guy's insurance to pay for diminished "appeal" to our car prior to the repairs. Just fix the car, cover my rental expenses and take care of the medical expenses. Luckily, my sons were OK, though my older son had a sore neck for a couple of days. The car was fixed perfectly. It was all OK. Sheesh, the extent some folks will go to in order to soak someone else for money. |
| |
09-01-2007, 10:02 PM
|
#73 (permalink)
| | Council Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,203
Thanks: 65
Thanked 155 Times in 73 Posts
Level up: 46%, 181 Points needed | | I tell you, it has really gotten outrageous! Look through your yellow pages, people. There are lawyers who are really perpetuating this curse upon American society! I understand suits to cover medical expenses, lost wages, and damage to property. What I fail to see is this want to financially destroy another person. |
| |
09-02-2007, 06:57 AM
|
#74 (permalink)
| | The Man You Love to Hate
Country: Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Ketchikan, AK
Gender:
Posts: 1,700
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Level up: 53%, 72 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanrobin I don't believe I read your previous post about the lady who spilled McDonald's coffee in her lap.
Though I am NOT in favor of frivolous lawsuits - nor figuring out a way to make your neighbor pay off your mortgage - the woman at McDonald's had 3rd degree burns (burns that are often life threatening) and had every right to sue. I applaud her legal victory. | Once again it goes to show, stupidity pays. Now thanks to this woman, I get luke warm coffee at McDonalds.
Hmm lets see, coffee, is supposed to be hot, something most morons would know. Her legal victory was bunk. She choose to purchase the coffee and then try to drive, hell was is it McDonald's fault that she cannot do two things at once??? Most people would use a cup holder to hold their coffee, but once again we see she was too dumb even for that.
She spilled the coffee, why is McDonalds punished?????
dmk
__________________ Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles -Russell Kirk- |
| |
09-02-2007, 07:07 AM
|
#75 (permalink)
| | The Man You Love to Hate
Country: Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Ketchikan, AK
Gender:
Posts: 1,700
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Level up: 53%, 72 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Fluffmeister Why 212 degrees for boiling, incidentally? Anyone know? It seems a very strange "unround" number! |
Thanks to the conversion formula.
Degrees Farhenheit = (Degrees Celcius) * 9/5 + 32
F = 100 * 9/5 + 32
F = 900/5 + 32
F = 180 + 32
F = 212
That is why 100 degrees C is 212 degrees F.
dmk
__________________ Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles -Russell Kirk- |
| |
09-02-2007, 07:29 AM
|
#76 (permalink)
| | Partisan
Country: Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: New Haven, CT
Gender:
Posts: 6,566
Thanks: 378
Thanked 1,238 Times in 628 Posts
Points: 32,230, Level: 100 | Level up: 2%, 0 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski Once again it goes to show, stupidity pays. Now thanks to this woman, I get luke warm coffee at McDonalds. I've stopped at McDonald's drive-thru window for coffee - it's always hot. You should change McDonald's.
Hmm lets see, coffee, is supposed to be hot, not boiling
something most morons would know. Her legal victory was bunk. She choose to purchase the coffee and then try to drive, No, she wasn't driving.
hell was is it McDonald's fault that she cannot do two things at once??? Most people would use a cup holder to hold their coffee, but once again we see she was too dumb even for that.
She spilled the coffee, why is McDonalds punished?????
dmk | Perhaps because they had been repeatedly warned that the coffee they served was 50 degrees hotter than safety standards allowed? Perhaps because this was NOT the first case that had been brought against them for the same thing? Perhaps because nobody should be handed ANYTHING through a drive-thru window that is capable of creating 3rd degree burns, requiring skin grafts and long hospital stays? Just a few possibilities...
__________________ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* 
"know this is EXACTLY why people think you shouldnt have equal rights" 2/11/08 Grace |
| |
09-02-2007, 11:53 AM
|
#77 (permalink)
| | Council Member
Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: NY
Gender:
Posts: 1,361
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Level up: 41%, 135 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Catus Felidae It was. Anything that holds the heat against the skin allows for more serious burns. | That is true. Also this was an 80ish woman and the skin thins with age.
5-10 seconds in a person that age could potentially be enough to cause a full thickness (3rd degree) burn. I saw this a couple of times with elderly vets when I was in the Navy.
__________________ |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode | |