If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(How Stuff Works)   "Once used rectally, the thermometer should not be used orally." and other stupid legal warnings that prove we are a nation of total loonies. Legal Warning: slide show   (people.howstuffworks.com) divider line 145
    More: Stupid, instant noodles, warning sign  
•       •       •

10289 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Oct 2012 at 12:27 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



145 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-03 08:58:17 AM  
So you never go ass to mouth?
 
2012-10-03 09:01:28 AM  
You never go ass to mouth.
 
2012-10-03 09:03:38 AM  
You sometimes go ass to mouth.
 
2012-10-03 09:04:13 AM  
Am I too late to make an ATM joke?
 
2012-10-03 09:05:27 AM  
"But the product warning on the side of the iron suggests otherwise. "Never iron clothes while they are being worn."

Sadly, I have seen the after effects of ironing shirt collars while they were being worn more than once.
 
2012-10-03 09:06:47 AM  
Wonko the Sane was right. I'd like out of the asylum now, please.
 
2012-10-03 09:10:28 AM  
This goes in your mouth. This one goes in your ear. And this one goes in your butt. shiat. Hang on a second. This one... uh... This one... this one goes in your mouth.
 
2012-10-03 09:35:17 AM  
I bought a flashlight once that came with a warning that it would be useless in a shark attack. It might have been a bear attack, either way it never came up.
 
2012-10-03 09:35:37 AM  
Q: How can you tell an oral thermometer from a rectal thermometer?

A: By taste.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-10-03 09:39:21 AM  
My brick of cheese has milk in the ingredients list and a separate warning that it contains milk.

When I become chief and sole member of the Supreme Court, I will add a new jury instruction for use in tort and product liability cases:

"A reasonable person is not expected to read silly and stupid warnings, and may disregard the entire context in which such a warning appears."

Then I'll make a rule that the "I won't sue you if I crash" button on car navigation systems is not only legally meaningless as a contract or disclaimer, it is a distraction that is presumed to be the cause of any accident while it is being displayed or acknowledged.

I will spank those corporate lawyers so hard they won't remember which country club they belong to. And after the spanking... the oral sex.
 
2012-10-03 09:44:39 AM  
The dishwasher one made me think. My newish dishwasher has a similar latch as those of old-timey refrigerators that used to kill kids, i.e. once you're in you can't get out. What's with that?
 
Pud
2012-10-03 10:09:16 AM  
t1.gstatic.com
 
2012-10-03 10:19:49 AM  
These stupid warnings exist only because of stupid people...and smart lawyers.

/// Here's Yer Sign!!!
 
2012-10-03 10:31:44 AM  
Football helmet: Must be worn to receive benefit.
 
2012-10-03 10:38:17 AM  
worst slide show format ever?
 
2012-10-03 12:29:34 PM  
Sometimes it's perfectly acceptable to go ass to mouth.

-Rosario Dawson
 
2012-10-03 12:32:15 PM  

TheHighlandHowler: The dishwasher one made me think. My newish dishwasher has a similar latch as those of old-timey refrigerators that used to kill kids, i.e. once you're in you can't get out. What's with that?


It happens.
 
2012-10-03 12:33:50 PM  
Slide show without slides. Photos are clipart level relevance from stock photo agencies. Be warned.
 
2012-10-03 12:34:48 PM  
Paraphrased from a box of fish sticks:

Preheat oven to 450 degrees
Bake fish sticks for 20 minutes
Remove fish sticks from oven
CAUTION: FISH STICKS WILL BE HOT.
 
Zel
2012-10-03 12:35:08 PM  

kiwimoogle84: Sometimes it's perfectly acceptable to go ass to mouth.

-Rosario Dawson


A video of that quote would be worth millions.
 
2012-10-03 12:35:11 PM  
... unless, you know, you're into that kind of thing.
 
2012-10-03 12:35:19 PM  
This all started with the dumb old "COFFEE MAY BE HOT" woman, her sandy old crotch, and a stale yellow light, right?
 
2012-10-03 12:36:17 PM  
We have to have these warnings because Democrats are so litigious. "But your honor, how was I supposed to know that you're not supposed to stick a thermometer in your ass, and THEN in your mouth? Can somebody call John Edwards? I need a lawyer."
 
2012-10-03 12:37:50 PM  
I LOVE that one of the charitable donations suggestions is Planned Parenthood. I'm sure Romney, and other Fox viewers are giving them tons of dough.
 
2012-10-03 12:37:52 PM  

Pud: [t1.gstatic.com image 248x203]


But can you go ass to mouth with them?
 
2012-10-03 12:37:59 PM  

Sybarite: So you never go ass to mouth?


Hell, they've got a school for it...

imageshack.us
 
2012-10-03 12:38:25 PM  
Old Joke:

A nurse walks into the nurses station, bulls a thermometer from behind her ear and exclaims "Oh damn! What asshole has my ink pen!?!"
 
2012-10-03 12:38:47 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Pud: [t1.gstatic.com image 248x203]

But can you go ass to mouth with them?


I think you'd have to change the warning. It's the decent thing to do.
 
2012-10-03 12:39:17 PM  

goodgirl4badboy: I LOVE that one of the charitable donations suggestions is Planned Parenthood. I'm sure Romney, and other Fox viewers are giving them tons of dough.


Wat?
 
2012-10-03 12:53:19 PM  

Why Would I Read the Article: We have to have these warnings because Democrats are so litigious. "But your honor, how was I supposed to know that you're not supposed to stick a thermometer in your ass, and THEN in your mouth? Can somebody call John Edwards? I need a lawyer."


Oh FFS, go back to the Politics tab.
 
2012-10-03 12:54:37 PM  
This is all dependant on who's ass and who's mouth we are talking about.
 
2012-10-03 12:54:38 PM  

mamoru: Wonko the Sane was right. I'd like out of the asylum now, please.


Came for the Wonko The Sane reference. Leaving satisfied.
 
2012-10-03 12:54:52 PM  

Nick Nostril: Sybarite: So you never go ass to mouth?

Hell, they've got a school for it...

[imageshack.us image 500x377]


All I'll say about them is that they have guys in old military style uniforms instead of cheerleaders. That should tell you all you need to know.
 
2012-10-03 12:55:41 PM  
noted

/I won't do it again...promise.
 
2012-10-03 12:56:42 PM  
t0.gstatic.com
 
2012-10-03 12:57:57 PM  
i46.tinypic.com
 
2012-10-03 12:59:29 PM  
I wonder which contains more bacteria: the rectum or the mouth?

I need to write to MythBusters.
 
2012-10-03 12:59:39 PM  
"uh no Mr. Butthead I said I need to look in your EAR"
 
2012-10-03 01:05:38 PM  

nmemkha: I wonder which contains more bacteria: the rectum or the mouth?

I need to write to MythBusters.


Perfectly reasonable. Ask some stunt coordinators about science
 
2012-10-03 01:11:49 PM  
www.funnysigns.net

ARE YOU READY TO ROCK?
 
2012-10-03 01:13:25 PM  
static.rcgroups.net

//someone had to post the classics
 
2012-10-03 01:13:43 PM  
When Ginsu Knives were first sold in the US, they included the warning "keep out of children" on the box.
 
2012-10-03 01:14:52 PM  
50% of the population has an IQ below 100.
 
2012-10-03 01:16:31 PM  

DiRF: [i46.tinypic.com image 375x204]


Came for this, moving on now.
 
2012-10-03 01:18:18 PM  
ytrewq.com
 
2012-10-03 01:19:02 PM  

Valiente: This all started with the dumb old "COFFEE MAY BE HOT" woman, her sandy old crotch, and a stale yellow light, right?


Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot. Seriously. There's no farking reason whatsoever. Eye bleach may be necessary afterwards.
 
2012-10-03 01:19:25 PM  

Maechyll: Paraphrased from a box of fish sticks:

Preheat oven to 450 degrees
Bake fish sticks for 20 minutes
Remove fish sticks from oven
CAUTION: FISH STICKS WILL BE HOT.


So, you're saying you like fish sticks? Do you like putting fish sticks in your mouth?
 
2012-10-03 01:19:54 PM  

TheHighlandHowler: The dishwasher one made me think. My newish dishwasher has a similar latch as those of old-timey refrigerators that used to kill kids, i.e. once you're in you can't get out. What's with that?


Well that's not okay. Things like car trunks, refrigerators and other things children are likely to climb in, shouldn't be death traps, especially considering that there are perfectly serviceable designs that aren't.

Manufacturers reminders to not let kids play in and around major appliances... I mean really so what. On the one hand you could say it's unneeded cover your kiester on the other people, as someone noted about not ironing clothes you're wearing, people unthinkingly do stupid stuff, so reminding them that it's a bad idea isn't out to lunch. One way to not be sued it to remind people not to misuse your products so less people get hurt and have cause to sue.

I'm sure in factories the sticker that says Warning Machine Starts Automatically has saved a few fingers.
 
2012-10-03 01:22:01 PM  
I know some Germans who are into that.
 
2012-10-03 01:22:03 PM  
My personal favorites are "may contain nuts" on a package of nuts, and "may cause drowsiness" on sleep aids. No shiat, if my Ambien didn't cause drowsiness, I'd be pretty pissed.
 
2012-10-03 01:22:24 PM  
dl.dropbox.com


"If you have the fever, there's only one cure: take two tickets and see the game Sunday morning." - Kent Brockman
"Warning, tickets should not be taken internally." - Announcer
"See because of me, now they have a warning." - Homer Simpson
 
2012-10-03 01:23:12 PM  
As seen on a Honda(?) Jetski

Warning, do not aim water jet at anus or vagina. Serious injury may occur.

Now you know they had to put that warning on there for a reason. Some guy, some where thought "Hey! This high pressure water jet that is used to move a 300lb vehicle across the water at 25 mph would feel really good on ol' Mr Brown-eye."

And then he wonders why he has to shiat through a bag for the rest of his life and who could he blame for that.
 
2012-10-03 01:25:25 PM  
i635.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-03 01:26:58 PM  
One of the best white elephant gifts I ever saw given was "one, slightly used,, rectal thermometer."
 
2012-10-03 01:27:02 PM  

Ponzholio: [i635.photobucket.com image 383x657]


NO NO NO NO NO NO... that has to be a photoshop.
 
2012-10-03 01:28:59 PM  

thursdaypostal: Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot.


Tea, perhaps humanity's oldest produced beverage, is correctly brewed and served at temperatures hotter than that.
 
2012-10-03 01:31:42 PM  

I should be in the kitchen: My personal favorites are "may contain nuts" on a package of nuts, and "may cause drowsiness" on sleep aids. No shiat, if my Ambien didn't cause drowsiness, I'd be pretty pissed.


Have a package right here (off brand with a tech company logo I got at a trade show) of peanuts that has a warning that "Contents were processed on machinary that also processes peanuts"

So if it ALSO processes peanuts, WTF is in the bag of peanuts?
 
2012-10-03 01:35:29 PM  

GranoblasticMan: Why Would I Read the Article: We have to have these warnings because Democrats are so litigious. "But your honor, how was I supposed to know that you're not supposed to stick a thermometer in your ass, and THEN in your mouth? Can somebody call John Edwards? I need a lawyer."

Oh FFS, go back to the Politics tab.


It is true that most lawyers are Democrats. It is not true that most Democrats are lawyers. Logic fail, Why Would I.
 
2012-10-03 01:35:37 PM  
I like the little warning embossed on the dollar store carabiner keychains that reads "NOT FOR CLIMBING", yeah, because I go to the dollar store keychain display for all my professional spelunking needs.
 
2012-10-03 01:38:31 PM  
You know this means?

Sometime in the past, some nut said to his wife, "Honey, you been licking the dog's butt again?"

media.ticketmaster.com



/ it could be a law, I don't know
 
2012-10-03 01:38:58 PM  
I would never do that
 
2012-10-03 01:39:59 PM  

moothemagiccow: nmemkha: I wonder which contains more bacteria: the rectum or the mouth?

I need to write to MythBusters.

Perfectly reasonable. Ask some stunt coordinators about science


Meh. Real hard science is pretty boring. People will watch how many bacterial cultures develop on agar plates swabbed with thermometers that have been suck up their rectums and in their mouths (hopefully no the same one). Scientific? Not really, but a lot closer than "Ancient Aliens". Entertaining? Yes, for a lot of people.
 
2012-10-03 01:41:57 PM  

This text is now purple: thursdaypostal: Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot.

Tea, perhaps humanity's oldest produced beverage, is correctly brewed and served at temperatures hotter than that.


But not consumed at temperatures that hot. So, "correctly brewed and placed to cool for a period of time before consumption" would be more accurate than "served".

That's fine - McDonald's primary argument was that most of their customers bought the coffee to bring to work and consume a half hour later... but then they should have warned people that their coffee wasn't fit for consumption yet.
 
2012-10-03 01:45:09 PM  

This text is now purple: thursdaypostal: Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot.

Tea, perhaps humanity's oldest produced beverage, is correctly brewed and served at temperatures hotter than that.


Hot things served in a drive-through or handed over should have a different standard than when served at a table: Thicker cups (McD intentionally made their coffee cups thinner and flimsier to save a few pennies on every thousand), better insulation, adding your condiments (cream, sugar) for you. This is why every company puts the cardboard sleeve around them now. Tea hasn't been served for thousands of years to impatient people in cars by minimum-wagers who don't care, so it's a bit of an analogy fail.

Accidents have always happened and will always happen, but negligently causing them to save pennies is stupid and short-sighted, something big companies excel at.
 
2012-10-03 01:47:53 PM  
I was given a cheap $10 first aid kit a few years ago. It came with a small tube of antiseptic cream with the warning "Do not allow to come into contact with eyes, ears or brain"

If you are ever in the position to be able to apply antiseptic cream to someone's brain then you are going to need more than a $10 first aid kit.
 
Pud
2012-10-03 01:47:57 PM  

nmemkha: moothemagiccow: nmemkha: I wonder which contains more bacteria: the rectum or the mouth?

I need to write to MythBusters.

Perfectly reasonable. Ask some stunt coordinators about science

Meh. Real hard science is pretty boring. People will watch how many bacterial cultures develop on agar plates swabbed with thermometers that have been suck up their rectums and in their mouths (hopefully no the same one). Scientific? Not really, but a lot closer than "Ancient Aliens". Entertaining? Yes, for a lot of people.


And besides, scientists don't usually blow shiat up at the end of the experiment
 
2012-10-03 01:48:06 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I like the little warning embossed on the dollar store carabiner keychains that reads "NOT FOR CLIMBING", yeah, because I go to the dollar store keychain display for all my professional spelunking needs.


I'm sure the target audience of that warning will be grateful when they learn to read it a few years later.

/Sign should say "Watch your damn crotchfruit"
 
2012-10-03 01:48:25 PM  
Caution: cape does not enable user to fly.
 
gja
2012-10-03 01:52:53 PM  

Pud: [t1.gstatic.com image 248x203]


/i dont even...oh for f*cks sake
 
2012-10-03 01:57:43 PM  
How else am I supposed to clean it?
 
2012-10-03 02:00:22 PM  
If you wash them good and wipe them off with a piece of cloth drenched in alcohol - which you should do anyway, then there's no problem.
 
2012-10-03 02:00:26 PM  

Why Would I Read the Article: We have to have these warnings because Democrats are so litigious.


No, we have these warnings because too many people refuse to accept responsibility for their actions and there are plenty of lawyers who are willing to take stupid cases - for a handsome contingency, of course.

These warnings not only add to the cost of products because of the lawsuit settlements, but because of the huge, international industry that has sprung up to write, translate, and print all of these warnings. In some cases, even the packaging needs to be altered to accommodate an instruction/warning manual roughly the size of the Chicago Yellow Pages. (the old print version - the one that doubled as a booster seat for small children before that became illegal and we had to buy legitimate booster seats that came with 27 pages of warnings.)
 
2012-10-03 02:05:24 PM  

The Third Man: Caution: cape does not enable user to fly.


Holly crap. I did that when I was a kid. Don't remember how young, but pretty young. Put on something like a cape pretending to be superman, and jumped down from some high thing. Don't remember any details. Just remembered the fact just now after reading this. Had completely forgotten about it. Will have to ask my parents about it when I visit them in January.

Come to think of it, my parents may not remember it either. I was found of performing stunts when I was a kid, and got injured quite often. Now that I'm in my late 40's, my body often reminds me that I shouldn't have done those things. Oh, to be young and immortal..... And with a full head of hair......
 
2012-10-03 02:06:21 PM  

Why Would I Read the Article: We have to have these warnings because Democrats are so litigious. "But your honor, how was I supposed to know that you're not supposed to stick a thermometer in your ass, and THEN in your mouth? Can somebody call John Edwards? I need a lawyer."


We have these warnings because people do stupid shi'it. Older I get the more I see how things you would think are obvious need to be spelled out for people. Mostly all a label does is reduce the amount someone can sue for, and reduce the number of people we some minor cause to sue. And in some cases it's just corporate habit, all products need a warning label.
 
2012-10-03 02:10:26 PM  

Pud: nmemkha: moothemagiccow: nmemkha: I wonder which contains more bacteria: the rectum or the mouth?

I need to write to MythBusters.

Perfectly reasonable. Ask some stunt coordinators about science

Meh. Real hard science is pretty boring. People will watch how many bacterial cultures develop on agar plates swabbed with thermometers that have been suck up their rectums and in their mouths (hopefully no the same one). Scientific? Not really, but a lot closer than "Ancient Aliens". Entertaining? Yes, for a lot of people.

And besides, scientists don't usually blow shiat up at the end of the experiment


You, sir or madam, are in the wrong kind of science.
 
2012-10-03 02:11:10 PM  
I bought a Dremel tool this week.

In the manual was a warning, stating that this device should not be used for dentistry, for either human or veterinary applications.
 
2012-10-03 02:11:55 PM  

Coming on a Bicycle: If you wash them good and wipe them off with a piece of cloth drenched in alcohol - which you should do anyway, then there's no problem.


I think washing your anus with a cloth drenched with alcohol is a bit excessive.
 
2012-10-03 02:12:17 PM  

foxyshadis: Thicker cups (McD intentionally made their coffee cups thinner and flimsier to save a few pennies on every thousand), better insulation, adding your condiments (cream, sugar) for you. This is why every company puts the cardboard sleeve around them now.


Problem: coffee cups are expensive.
Solution: buy thinner, cheaper cups

Problem: new, thinner coffee cups are too hot to be held when the beverage inside is hot
Solution: buy cardboard rings to put around hot cups

BRILLIANT!

// also, as I understand it, most of these disclaimers/warnings would not hold up in court
// or am I thinking of liability waivers?
 
2012-10-03 02:18:53 PM  
Well sometimes, in the heat of the moment you can go ass to mouth...
 
2012-10-03 02:19:32 PM  
Meh. I found these things hilarious around 1999 or so, when I had a huge collection on my web site. There aren't really any new ones here. "For indoor our outdoor use only." Yeah, I think that was my first one.
 
2012-10-03 02:32:28 PM  

thursdaypostal: Valiente: This all started with the dumb old "COFFEE MAY BE HOT" woman, her sandy old crotch, and a stale yellow light, right?

Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot. Seriously. There's no farking reason whatsoever. Eye bleach may be necessary afterwards.


OMFG MY EYES ARE BURNING WHERE IS THE BLEACH
 
2012-10-03 02:48:38 PM  

thursdaypostal: Valiente: This all started with the dumb old "COFFEE MAY BE HOT" woman, her sandy old crotch, and a stale yellow light, right?

Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot. Seriously. There's no farking reason whatsoever. Eye bleach may be necessary afterwards.


The coffee was prepared at the proper temperature. The severity of her injuries is irrelevant. Have you seen a knife wound? Have you seen a hand that got caught in a slicer? (I won't even link to a Google search!) Sharp things cut... hot things burn. And idiots will hurt themselves no matter how many warning signs there are.
 
2012-10-03 02:57:13 PM  
This is my favorite "Well, DUUUUH!" sign!
press.comedycentral.co.uk


It seems that stupid people are everywhere that need protection from themselves.
www.guy-sports.com


Well, I guess I'll just go wait over there----->
www.guy-sports.com


WHAT??? I can't even do that? Maybe I should just kill myself!
s3.amazonaws.com


Well, CRAP!! Oh, wait. They have a sign for that too!
1.bp.blogspot.com


But this one makes me smile the most!
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-03 02:58:07 PM  

Theaetetus: This text is now purple: thursdaypostal: Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot.

Tea, perhaps humanity's oldest produced beverage, is correctly brewed and served at temperatures hotter than that.

But not consumed at temperatures that hot. So, "correctly brewed and placed to cool for a period of time before consumption" would be more accurate than "served".

That's fine - McDonald's primary argument was that most of their customers bought the coffee to bring to work and consume a half hour later... but then they should have warned people that their coffee wasn't fit for consumption yet.


If it "wasn't fit for consumption" then everyone who bought it and drank it would have burned themselves.

But the actual fact is that only one cup in 24,000,000 caused a burn (of any severity). That means, for every idiot that burned themselves, 23,999,999 managed not to.

Does that sound like something 'not fit for consumption'???

(By way of comparison, the chance of getting hit by lightning is 1 in 10,000 , or about 2400 times as high as burning yourself on McDonalds coffee.)
 
2012-10-03 02:59:50 PM  
it is not 50 percent of the people are below 100 IQ you idiot!!!

it is 50 percent are below average.
 
2012-10-03 02:59:57 PM  
My old car used to have a warning 'DO NOT DRINK THE LIQUID CONTENTS OF THE BATTERY!'
 
2012-10-03 03:00:42 PM  
s8.postimage.org
 
2012-10-03 03:06:03 PM  

nmemkha: moothemagiccow: nmemkha: I wonder which contains more bacteria: the rectum or the mouth?

I need to write to MythBusters.

Perfectly reasonable. Ask some stunt coordinators about science

Meh. Real hard science is pretty boring. People will watch how many bacterial cultures develop on agar plates swabbed with thermometers that have been suck up their rectums and in their mouths (hopefully no the same one). Scientific? Not really, but a lot closer than "Ancient Aliens". Entertaining? Yes, for a lot of people.


Or, put another way:

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-10-03 03:07:23 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: Am I too late to make an ATM joke?


What does a cash machine have to do with this???
 
2012-10-03 03:19:46 PM  

Flint Ironstag: I was given a cheap $10 first aid kit a few years ago. It came with a small tube of antiseptic cream with the warning "Do not allow to come into contact with eyes, ears or brain"

If you are ever in the position to be able to apply antiseptic cream to someone's brain then you are going to need more than a $10 first aid kit.


It's probably also true that if you are looking at someone's brain and holding a first aid kit, nothing you can do is going to make the situation worse. So go right ahead and slather some cream onto their frontal lobe. Can't hurt.
 
2012-10-03 03:20:59 PM  
I remember when I was young--somewhere between the ages of 10 and 30, don't recall specifically--I found a thermometer in someone's medicine cabinet where I was visiting and put my mouth. I'm not saying it had been previously used rectally, since I'll never know for sure, but I am saying that it tasted like ass.
 
2012-10-03 03:21:18 PM  
A favorite.
files.g4tv.com
/hot
 
2012-10-03 03:21:47 PM  

Theaetetus: This text is now purple: thursdaypostal: Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot.

Tea, perhaps humanity's oldest produced beverage, is correctly brewed and served at temperatures hotter than that.

But not consumed at temperatures that hot. So, "correctly brewed and placed to cool for a period of time before consumption" would be more accurate than "served".

That's fine - McDonald's primary argument was that most of their customers bought the coffee to bring to work and consume a half hour later... but then they should have warned people that their coffee wasn't fit for consumption yet.


From what i recall, the MAJOR issue was that instead of stopping, cleaning up the coffee spill and wiping off. Her son gunned it straight to the hospital and she sat in the hot coffee the whole way there. A simple spill and wipe off is not going to burn you as bad as continued exposure to the hot liquid.
 
2012-10-03 03:21:50 PM  

poonesfarm: This goes in your mouth. This one goes in your ear. And this one goes in your butt. shiat. Hang on a second. This one... uh... This one... this one goes in your mouth.


Dr. Spaceman?
 
2012-10-03 03:24:37 PM  
If you haven't seen this before, get off my lawn!

moosevalley.solidwebhost.com
 
2012-10-03 03:26:00 PM  
"Once used rectally, the thermometer should not be used orally."

Bah! Just wipe it off with alcohol; you'll be fine.

/ :)
 
2012-10-03 03:26:49 PM  

I should be in the kitchen: My personal favorites are "may contain nuts" on a package of nuts, and "may cause drowsiness" on sleep aids. No shiat, if my Ambien didn't cause drowsiness, I'd be pretty pissed.


I think the warnings on Ambien are a bit more...weird.
 
2012-10-03 03:28:40 PM  

DoBeDoBeDo: From what i recall, the MAJOR issue was that instead of stopping, cleaning up the coffee spill and wiping off. Her son gunned it straight to the hospital and she sat in the hot coffee the whole way there.


Considering the car was parked at the time, I don't think that's true at all.
 
2012-10-03 03:34:05 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: A favorite.

/hot


Is that the Heisenberg disguise kit?
 
2012-10-03 03:38:10 PM  

DoBeDoBeDo: From what i recall, the MAJOR issue was that instead of stopping, cleaning up the coffee spill and wiping off. Her son gunned it straight to the hospital and she sat in the hot coffee the whole way there. A simple spill and wipe off is not going to burn you as bad as continued exposure to the hot liquid.


On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald's restaurant located at 5001 Gibson Boulevard S.E. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her grandson's Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap. Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin. - wiki pedia

Note that the car was parked, not being driven, as some people think. Note also, she was a passenger, not the driver. The actual cause of the spill was her pinching the cup between her (bony) knees and pulling the far side of the lid toward her, causing the cup to pivot and dump its contents in her lap. If she had put the cup in a cup holder, or between her thighs (where increased contact surface would have cause more friction), or on the floor, or even held it in one hand, the spill would not have happened.

Although you are correct: She took a while (accounts vary from 30 seconds on up) to got out of the puddle she was sitting in and remove the sweatpants she was wearing, thus causing the hot liquid to remain in contact with her skin.

Neither her careless handling of a hot liquid, nor her slow response to the spill was McDonald's fault.
 
2012-10-03 03:38:57 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: If you haven't seen this before, get off my lawn!

[moosevalley.solidwebhost.com image 406x427]


I think I love you.

I'd forgotten all about that.
 
2012-10-03 03:39:30 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: A favorite.
[files.g4tv.com image 600x499]
/hot


Oh my god! No wonder everyone was snickering as I walked by. I wish my hat had come with instructions!
 
2012-10-03 03:39:37 PM  

fredklein: Theaetetus: This text is now purple: thursdaypostal: Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot.

Tea, perhaps humanity's oldest produced beverage, is correctly brewed and served at temperatures hotter than that.

But not consumed at temperatures that hot. So, "correctly brewed and placed to cool for a period of time before consumption" would be more accurate than "served".

That's fine - McDonald's primary argument was that most of their customers bought the coffee to bring to work and consume a half hour later... but then they should have warned people that their coffee wasn't fit for consumption yet.

If it "wasn't fit for consumption" then everyone who bought it and drank it would have burned themselves.

But the actual fact is that only one cup in 24,000,000 caused a burn (of any severity). That means, for every idiot that burned themselves, 23,999,999 managed not to.

Does that sound like something 'not fit for consumption'???

(By way of comparison, the chance of getting hit by lightning is 1 in 10,000 , or about 2400 times as high as burning yourself on McDonalds coffee.)


If I'm recalling this correctly from when I read the synopsis of the case in law school -

The particular franchise in question had -
A) faulty lids that would slip off too easily, and had been made aware of this fact
B) a broken coffee pot in which the temperature limited heating apparatus no longer turned off once the coffee got to the temperature at which it was supposed to be - meaning the broken pot got hotter than it should - and the company was already aware.

Those two things caused liability - and the warning label wouldn't have protected them from that anyway.
 
2012-10-03 03:42:57 PM  

fredklein: Neither her careless handling of a hot liquid, nor her slow response to the spill was McDonald's fault.


So if Target sells liquid nitrogen in sandwich bags, they're not liable when something bad happens?

// has anyone yet mentioned the other times McD's was warned - well before Mrs Sweatpants got cooterburned - about hot coffee?
 
2012-10-03 03:48:02 PM  

Deneb81: If I'm recalling this correctly from when I read the synopsis of the case in law school -

The particular franchise in question had -
A) faulty lids that would slip off too easily, and had been made aware of this fact
B) a broken coffee pot in which the temperature limited heating apparatus no longer turned off once the coffee got to the temperature at which it was supposed to be - meaning the broken pot got hotter than it should - and the company was already aware.

Those two things caused liability - and the warning label wouldn't have protected them from that anyway.


I'm not aware of either of those applying to this case. In fact, if the lid had indeed come off easily, the cup wouldn't have pivoted and spilled. And "During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchisees to serve coffee at 180-190 °F (82-88 °C). "- which is what it was at.
 
2012-10-03 03:56:53 PM  
Old Favorite - from a Fark Photoshop contest (wavion's work)
www.wavion.info

Original Contest
 
2012-10-03 03:57:10 PM  

Dr Dreidel: fredklein: Neither her careless handling of a hot liquid, nor her slow response to the spill was McDonald's fault.

So if Target sells liquid nitrogen in sandwich bags, they're not liable when something bad happens?


Is liquid nitrogen normally sold in sandwich bags? Coffee is normally sold in foam cups.

// has anyone yet mentioned the other times McD's was warned - well before Mrs Sweatpants got cooterburned - about hot coffee?

Stella Liebeck's lawyer was able to show there were 700 previous complaints about burns... nationwide... over 10 years. Of course, he didn't bother to break it down to show how many were minor/medium/severe, or under what circumstances they happened. I already mentioned that means only one in every 24,000,000 cups resulted in a burn.
 
2012-10-03 04:01:39 PM  
dicks don't have this warning. cause in the heat of passion who cares about a little E-coli
 
2012-10-03 04:01:49 PM  

Debby7813

These stupid warnings exist only because of stupid people...and smart lawyers.


The idiots that hurt themselves are only minority idiotic. The true fools and dangers to our society are the 12 idiots in the jury boxes that keep handing out millions.
 
2012-10-03 04:04:00 PM  

OnlyM3



Debby7813

These stupid warnings exist only because of stupid people...and smart lawyers.



The idiots that hurt themselves are only minority idiotic. The true fools and dangers to our society are the 12 idiots in the jury boxes that keep handing out millions.

Farking spell checker... that should be minorly...
 
2012-10-03 04:04:06 PM  

fredklein: Theaetetus: This text is now purple: thursdaypostal: Have you seen her thighs? No consumable liquid has any business being that hot.

Tea, perhaps humanity's oldest produced beverage, is correctly brewed and served at temperatures hotter than that.

But not consumed at temperatures that hot. So, "correctly brewed and placed to cool for a period of time before consumption" would be more accurate than "served".

That's fine - McDonald's primary argument was that most of their customers bought the coffee to bring to work and consume a half hour later... but then they should have warned people that their coffee wasn't fit for consumption yet.

If it "wasn't fit for consumption" then everyone who bought it and drank it would have burned themselves.


I'm not sure if this is selective reading or what, but you've skipped over a crucial part here:
1. No human on earth could possibly have drank that coffee at that instant without burning themselves.
2. "Everyone who bought it and drank it" and didn't burn themselves consumed it half an hour later when it was substantially cooler.
Hence, "their coffee wasn't fit for consumption yet."

Also:
But the actual fact is that only one cup in 24,000,000 caused a burn (of any severity). That means, for every idiot that burned themselves, 23,999,999 managed not to.
That assumes that every person who burned themselves reported it. That's a huge unsupported assumption, and is directly contradicted by things you've said before in these discussions: you have said that you've sipped hot coffee, burned your tongue, and gone on with your day. The coffee vendor wouldn't have had a report of that, so trying to argue that the lack of a report means no burns is false, as you've shown.
 
2012-10-03 04:05:32 PM  

fredklein:
Stella Liebeck's lawyer was able to show there were 700 previous complaints about burns... nationwide... over 10 years. Of course, he didn't bother to break it down to show how many were minor/medium/severe, or under what circumstances they happened. I already mentioned that means only one in every 24,000,000 cups resulted in a burn.


lolz
 
2012-10-03 04:08:04 PM  
Also, you're wrong about not breaking it down, and you're also wrong about Liebeck's lawyer being the one to show 700 previous complaints. Rather, it was McDonald's showing it, and they included severity: "During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard."
 
2012-10-03 04:15:56 PM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
willowfeller.files.wordpress.com
cdn.ebaumsworld.com

And finally, a warning label for Fark.com:

coolrain44.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-10-03 04:22:37 PM  

I should be in the kitchen: My personal favorites are "may contain nuts" on a package of nuts, and "may cause drowsiness" on sleep aids. No shiat, if my Ambien didn't cause drowsiness, I'd be pretty pissed.


Have you seen that the makers of Nyquil have come out with a sleep aid (Zzzquil)? Fark me - I thought Nyquil *was* a sleep aid!
 
2012-10-03 04:31:08 PM  
"No, wait...THIS goes in your mouth, and THIS goes in your ass..."
 
2012-10-03 04:36:31 PM  
farm3.static.flickr.com

Sounds like what they really wanted was a wall, not a door.
 
2012-10-03 04:41:01 PM  

Debby7813: These stupid warnings exist only because of stupid people...and smart lawyers.

/// Here's Yer Sign!!!


This odds are for most of them there is a law suit connected to the warning being their.
/either that or very nervous corporate lawyers.
 
2012-10-03 05:03:10 PM  

fredklein: Dr Dreidel: fredklein: Neither her careless handling of a hot liquid, nor her slow response to the spill was McDonald's fault.

So if Target sells liquid nitrogen in sandwich bags, they're not liable when something bad happens?

Is liquid nitrogen normally sold in sandwich bags? Coffee is normally sold in foam cups.

// has anyone yet mentioned the other times McD's was warned - well before Mrs Sweatpants got cooterburned - about hot coffee?

Stella Liebeck's lawyer was able to show there were 700 previous complaints about burns... nationwide... over 10 years. Of course, he didn't bother to break it down to show how many were minor/medium/severe, or under what circumstances they happened. I already mentioned that means only one in every 24,000,000 cups resulted in a burn.


1 in 24 million. McD's boasts "billions and billions served". 1 in 24 million equates roughly to 41 or 42 in a billion. Is McD's really telling us we can expect 42 (well, 84, really) burnt thighs for every billion people they serve? Is the cost of settling negligence lawsuits built into the price?

And that's just for the first billion people. "Billions and billions", conservatively, suggests 4 billion people or more - about 160-170 people have been burned? How many were burned after McD's knew about this ratio?

// 1/24,000,000 results in COMPLAINTS about a burn
 
2012-10-03 05:22:41 PM  

Theaetetus: Hence, "their coffee wasn't fit for consumption yet."


And 23,999,999 out of 24,000,000 people are smart enough to wait before drinking. :-) Oh- and smart enough to not spill it on themselves.

That assumes that every person who burned themselves reported it. That's a huge unsupported assumption,

Well, considering I could possibly get a multi-million dollar award, why wouldn't I report it??

and is directly contradicted by things you've said before in these discussions: you have said that you've sipped hot coffee, burned your tongue, and gone on with your day. The coffee vendor wouldn't have had a report of that, so trying to argue that the lack of a report means no burns is false, as you've shown.

And if the 'burn' is so minor that no one bothers to report it, then it can safely not be counted.
 
2012-10-03 05:34:39 PM  

Theaetetus: fredklein:
Stella Liebeck's lawyer was able to show there were 700 previous complaints about burns... nationwide... over 10 years. Of course, he didn't bother to break it down to show how many were minor/medium/severe, or under what circumstances they happened. I already mentioned that means only one in every 24,000,000 cups resulted in a burn.

lolz


Again, if it's so trivial that no one bothered to report it, then it's to trivial to discuss.

Also, you're wrong about not breaking it down, and you're also wrong about Liebeck's lawyer being the one to show 700 previous complaints. Rather, it was McDonald's showing it,

Wiki says "Other documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, ..."

"Documents obtained from McDonald's"... by who??? Stella's lawyer. He's the one who subpoena'd McDonalds for them, and introduced them at the trial.

and they included severity: "During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard."

"Some" 3rd degree burns. Does that mean 1 out of 700? Or 699 out of 700? Or 347 out of 700? "Some" is useless.

Also, please note that the circumstances of those previous burns (some of which McDonalds did pay $$$ for) were not disclosed. If a McDonalds employee spilled the coffee on someone, then it is very different than a customer spilling it on themselves.

Simply saying "OMFG! There were, like, 700 previous Cases!!!1!!11!" is not a valid argument.
 
2012-10-03 05:37:46 PM  

Dr Dreidel: 1 in 24 million equates roughly to 41 or 42 in a billion. Is McD's really telling us we can expect 42 (well, 84, really) burnt thighs for every billion people they serve?


Who said they were all burnt thighs? Most were probably first degree burns* on fingers.

*you know, red skin, like a sunburn
 
2012-10-03 05:43:52 PM  

fredklein: if the 'burn' is so minor that no one bothers to report it, then it can safely not be counted.


It should be reported - not sued for, but reported.

like "hey dude, this shiat is too hot, this is too cold, this is just right"

//What's the difference between Mummy Bear's porridge, Daddy Bear's porridge and Baby Bear's porridge?
/Well, one is Mummy Bear's, one is Daddy Bear's, and one is Baby Bear's!
 
2012-10-03 06:13:56 PM  

fredklein:
And 23,999,999 out of 24,000,000 people are smart enough to wait before drinking...
And if the 'burn' is so minor that no one bothers to report it, then it can safely not be counted.


Then why are you counting them in the 23,999,999 column? I think you're not being honest with your numbers.
 
2012-10-03 06:18:25 PM  

fredklein:
Also, you're wrong about not breaking it down, and you're also wrong about Liebeck's lawyer being the one to show 700 previous complaints. Rather, it was McDonald's showing it,

Wiki says "Other documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, ..."

"Documents obtained from McDonald's"... by who??? Stella's lawyer. He's the one who subpoena'd McDonalds for them, and introduced them at the trial.


Oh, come on, Fred, do you think that really fools anyone?
"It was Stella's lawyer who claimed there were 700 injuries, and you can't trust him."
"No, it was McDonald's own internal records."
"Well, yeah, but they only showed them because of Stella's lawyer, so you can't trust them."

and they included severity: "During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard."

"Some" 3rd degree burns. Does that mean 1 out of 700? Or 699 out of 700? Or 347 out of 700? "Some" is useless.

Also, please note that the circumstances of those previous burns (some of which McDonalds did pay $$$ for) were not disclosed.


[Citation needed]. Extraordinary claims require at least some scintilla of evidence, Fred. Isn't it likely that McDonald's internal records, obtained only under a subpoena and threat of contempt, included some circumstances of what those records were reporting? Isn't that why they required the subpoena before they released them?
You claim those records were silent on circumstances of what they were recording... so let's see your proof. Show us the blank records, or admit that you're making things up.
 
2012-10-03 06:19:53 PM  

Theaetetus: fredklein:
And 23,999,999 out of 24,000,000 people are smart enough to wait before drinking...
And if the 'burn' is so minor that no one bothers to report it, then it can safely not be counted.

Then why are you counting them in the 23,999,999 column? I think you're not being honest with your numbers.


Because they didn't burn themselves [in any significant way].

I didn't think I had to spell it out. Don't worry, I'll type slower from now on.
 
2012-10-03 06:32:21 PM  
www.needstolaugh.com

Can we quarantine all McDonald's coffee lawsuit arguments to their own special thread/tab/website/universe, so it doesn't always shiat all over what could've been a fun thread about funny stupid warnings?
 
2012-10-03 06:32:30 PM  

Theaetetus: Oh, come on, Fred, do you think that really fools anyone?
"It was Stella's lawyer who claimed there were 700 injuries, and you can't trust him."


Straw man argument, i never said "you can't trust him". I only correctly pointed out that he was the one who introduced the evidence. And he was the one who didn't break it down as to severity.

You claim those records were silent on circumstances of what they were recording... so let's see your proof.

I never claimed McDonalds records didn't contain the circumstances. I never claimed the data they turned over to Stella's lawyer didn't include those circumstances (although, depending on how the request was worded, they might very well not have. If you want to claim they did, the burden of proof is on you).

I said that the circumstances have not been released to the public. For all we know, 699 of those 700 burns were caused by defective cups (McDonalds fault, if they knew of the defect), OR 699 of them could have been caused by clumsy customers (not McDonald's fault) OR 699 could have been Act-of-God-type accidents(no ones fault). WE DON'T KNOW. So, any claims based on the incomplete data we have are useless.

making things up

Speaking of making stuff up, You sure do seem to be making a lot of strawman arguments.
 
2012-10-03 06:42:07 PM  

fredklein: Theaetetus: Oh, come on, Fred, do you think that really fools anyone?
"It was Stella's lawyer who claimed there were 700 injuries, and you can't trust him."

Straw man argument, i never said "you can't trust him". I only correctly pointed out that he was the one who introduced the evidence. And he was the one who didn't break it down as to severity.

You claim those records were silent on circumstances of what they were recording... so let's see your proof.

I never claimed McDonalds records didn't contain the circumstances. I never claimed the data they turned over to Stella's lawyer didn't include those circumstances (although, depending on how the request was worded, they might very well not have. If you want to claim they did, the burden of proof is on you).

I said that the circumstances have not been released to the public. For all we know, 699 of those 700 burns were caused by defective cups (McDonalds fault, if they knew of the defect), OR 699 of them could have been caused by clumsy customers (not McDonald's fault) OR 699 could have been Act-of-God-type accidents(no ones fault). WE DON'T KNOW. So, any claims based on the incomplete data we have are useless.

making things up

Speaking of making stuff up, You sure do seem to be making a lot of strawman arguments.



Maybe it's just my misplaced faith in humanity, but I'd like to think that the jury, after hearing all the evidence presented, didn't just stick their collective fingers in their noses and decide to fark McDonald's out of spite. I know it's tempting to pin the verdict solely on the stupidity of the jury and claim that it's just a case of "dumb consumer", but I think that's a facile response.
 
2012-10-03 06:50:55 PM  

TheHighlandHowler: The dishwasher one made me think. My newish dishwasher has a similar latch as those of old-timey refrigerators that used to kill kids, i.e. once you're in you can't get out. What's with that?



It's so they sit still for the whole rinse cycle.
 
2012-10-03 07:03:28 PM  

RobSeace: [www.needstolaugh.com image 400x263]

Can we quarantine all McDonald's coffee lawsuit arguments to their own special thread/tab/website/universe, so it doesn't always shiat all over what could've been a fun thread about funny stupid warnings?


THIS
 
2012-10-03 07:11:50 PM  

ScottRiqui: Maybe it's just my misplaced faith in humanity, but I'd like to think that the jury, after hearing all the evidence presented, didn't just stick their collective fingers in their noses and decide to fark McDonald's out of spite.


http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm
"At the beginning of the trial, jury foreman Jerry Goens says he "wasn't convinced as to why I needed to be there to settle a coffee spill.""..."told during the trial of Mrs. Liebeck's seven days in the hospital and her skin grafts, and shown gruesome photographs."...

They were emotionally swayed by the graphic pics of granny's burns. they didn't think logically- they thought emotionally.

I know it's tempting to pin the verdict solely on the stupidity of the jury and claim that it's just a case of "dumb consumer", but I think that's a facile response.

Have you ever been on a jury? I have. Two, in fact. In one, a criminal case, the police had audio and video evidence of the defendant dealing drugs. Two of the jurors refused to acknowledge any of the evidence, and voted not-guilty on all counts. Funny thing- their skin was the same color as the defendant. In the other case, a civil one, a man was knocked down by a car and broke his collarbone. He admitted not paying attention to where he was going, admitted leaving the crosswalk and strolling diagonally down the street, and lied on the stand. Yet the other jurors disregarded the evidence and awarded him money. "Well, if you got hit by a car, wouldn't you want a lot of money?" (That's a direct quote!) 

So, don't think juries are necessarily made of smart, people. They are, after all, filled with people too dumb to get out of jury duty. :-)
 
2012-10-03 07:13:47 PM  
Really?

We live in a country in which one popular television show features a family, made famous by their role in another popular television show in which they fed their female toddler stimulants prior to dressing her up as a sexual object to be judged by others, demonstrates that their favorite dish is white pasta over which a mix of equal proportions melted margarine and ketchup has been poured.

We don't have enough warnings, frankly, to legally protect companies and sane individuals from such sheer idiocy.
 
2012-10-03 07:14:23 PM  

WTFDYW: RobSeace: [www.needstolaugh.com image 400x263]

Can we quarantine all McDonald's coffee lawsuit arguments to their own special thread/tab/website/universe, so it doesn't always shiat all over what could've been a fun thread about funny stupid warnings?

THIS


If everyone would just acknowledge the fact that suing a company because you spilled coffee on yourself is stupid, there will be no more McDonald's coffee lawsuit arguments.

/Next after the break, man sues knife company because he cut himself
 
2012-10-03 07:17:00 PM  

fredklein: ScottRiqui: Maybe it's just my misplaced faith in humanity, but I'd like to think that the jury, after hearing all the evidence presented, didn't just stick their collective fingers in their noses and decide to fark McDonald's out of spite.

http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm
"At the beginning of the trial, jury foreman Jerry Goens says he "wasn't convinced as to why I needed to be there to settle a coffee spill.""..."told during the trial of Mrs. Liebeck's seven days in the hospital and her skin grafts, and shown gruesome photographs."...

They were emotionally swayed by the graphic pics of granny's burns. they didn't think logically- they thought emotionally.

I know it's tempting to pin the verdict solely on the stupidity of the jury and claim that it's just a case of "dumb consumer", but I think that's a facile response.

Have you ever been on a jury? I have. Two, in fact. In one, a criminal case, the police had audio and video evidence of the defendant dealing drugs. Two of the jurors refused to acknowledge any of the evidence, and voted not-guilty on all counts. Funny thing- their skin was the same color as the defendant. In the other case, a civil one, a man was knocked down by a car and broke his collarbone. He admitted not paying attention to where he was going, admitted leaving the crosswalk and strolling diagonally down the street, and lied on the stand. Yet the other jurors disregarded the evidence and awarded him money. "Well, if you got hit by a car, wouldn't you want a lot of money?" (That's a direct quote!) 

So, don't think juries are necessarily made of smart, people. They are, after all, filled with people too dumb to get out of jury duty. :-)


You have a point - the only time I've been on a jury was a military courts-martial. I found the other jurors to be thoughtful and fair, but I have no experience with civilian juries.
 
2012-10-03 07:25:55 PM  

RobSeace: [www.needstolaugh.com image 400x263]

Can we quarantine all McDonald's coffee lawsuit arguments to their own special thread/tab/website/universe, so it doesn't always shiat all over what could've been a fun thread about funny stupid warnings?


I'm just waiting for a discussion on how Doggy Door manufacturers haven't been taken to task for their lethal to children business practices.
 
2012-10-03 07:26:41 PM  
Mine has to be the short stepladder I saw with "Do not stand on or above this step" on the bottom step.
 
2012-10-03 08:07:58 PM  

Joe Peanut: The Third Man: Caution: cape does not enable user to fly.

Holly crap. I did that when I was a kid. Don't remember how young, but pretty young. Put on something like a cape pretending to be superman, and jumped down from some high thing. Don't remember any details. Just remembered the fact just now after reading this. Had completely forgotten about it. Will have to ask my parents about it when I visit them in January.

Come to think of it, my parents may not remember it either. I was found of performing stunts when I was a kid, and got injured quite often. Now that I'm in my late 40's, my body often reminds me that I shouldn't have done those things. Oh, to be young and immortal..... And with a full head of hair......


My uncle broke both of his farking legs jumping off a third story porch onto cement while wearing a Superman costume. My grandmother's first words to him when she learned what happened, "It never dawned on you to try from the ground first?!"

The women in my family have a very low tolerance for idiocy. Unfortunately the males have a high occurrence of idiocy. Somehow they put up with us.
 
2012-10-03 08:31:03 PM  
just be careful out there
 
2012-10-03 08:34:50 PM  

ScottRiqui: You have a point - the only time I've been on a jury was a military courts-martial


That seems a bit... redundant...
 
2012-10-03 08:59:22 PM  
imageshack.us
 
2012-10-04 12:35:38 AM  

Sybarite: So you never go ass to mouth?


+1. You owe me a new keyboard.

/done in one
//that's an ass to mouth joke
 
2012-10-04 06:13:42 AM  

fredklein: If everyone would just acknowledge the fact that suing a company because you spilled coffee on yourself is stupid, there will be no more McDonald's coffee lawsuit arguments.


I actually agree with you... I'm just really sick of reading you and Theaetetus go over the same damn arguments over and over and over and over every time there's a vaguely related thread... You two are never going to convince one another... Just give up...

/Of course, it would help if others didn't provoke the argument in every such thread by bringing it up in the first place...
 
2012-10-04 06:19:04 AM  
About the cases that result in disclaimers warning of the obvious, I've always wondered why the courts don't recognize the "We shouldn't have to warn the plaintiff because it should be obvious, that the plaintiff did not have enough common sense to see the obvious is not our fault" argument.
 
2012-10-04 05:45:22 PM  
You'll pick up more feces just touching other people's keyboards, mice, doorknobs, etc. every day than you will by putting a poop-covered thermometer in your mouth.
 
Displayed 145 of 145 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report