Sheâs Republican. Thatâs Nazi lite these days. If you can find any place where this person has unprompted criticized 1/6, Hitler or his tactics let us know
She canât control (or search) domestic US Mail, either.
Iâm not sure what protections are in place for courier services like UPS or FedEx, but they canât interfere with the mail.
Heâd better come out of this investigation facing assault charges.
Itâs a feature not a bug. You can.do better predicting the policies adopted by those who espouse RTL by looking to.see what will.hurt women most than by looking to see what helps existing people.
His crime is on tape. We will see.
McDonaldâs must have changed their policies. They used to have a standard minimum holding temperature of 190 F in their urns, and were dinged if the temperature was below that.
At 190 F all the volatile compounds blow off in a hurry, and what youâre left with is a nasty, bitter, brown aqueous solution of caffeine. A good description of it was âundrinkableâ.
She is already a mass murderer of fully formed born adults through the Sturgis super-spreader events.
Liberals should start bringing doors to their political events - no walls or anything, just doors. The Regressives will see them and wonât be able to figure out if theyâre locked, so theyâll just stand around waiting for backup that never comesâŚ
Didnât they lose a lawsuit when a woman was seriously burned by hot coffee?
They profile these miscreants.
The worst and the dimmest.
Before or after the trial?
Yes. Actually, they lost several lawsuits due to scalding coffee.
Back in the day when I was teaching statistics, I used that case as an example of the dangers of decision making with incomplete data. Most students were outraged at the idea that someone could win a seven-figure settlement for a coffee scald (which is how the verdict is usually described in the newspapers).
They changed their tune when they heard what really happened. (Note that this is all from my recollection. Some of this may be a little off, but the gist of it is correct.)
- McDonaldâs had a corporate policy holding coffee urns at 190 F. Industry standard is 140 F.
- The policy exists to reduce the need for cleaning the coffee urns. (I figured the policy existed because someone high in the C-tree liked some coffee with his cream but wanted the result to still be hot. I was disgusted when I learned the real reason for the policy.)
- McDonaldâs had been warned by several experts, retained by the company in some cases of the hazard posed. They refused to change policies.
- McDonaldâs had already lost a couple of lawsuits over the matter.
- The plaintiff was a woman in her 70s.
- She suffered 2nd and 3rd degree scalds to her groin. She required skin grafts.
- Her initial demand of McDonaldâs was that they cover the direct costs she incurred for treatment plus the legal costs. (McDonaldâs could have walked away from this for something a lot less than $30K.)
- The bulk of the award was in punitive damages because the jury found the company guilty of depraved indifference to safety. The punitive damages were based on estimates of McDonaldâs system-wide coffee sales for some period (I donât remember any more if it was a dayâs sales or weekâs sales). (She still got a substantial compensatory settlement, and Medicare was reimbursed, too. But that component of the verdict was less than $1M as I recall.)
I figured the policy had changed when McDonaldâs started advertising their McCafe nonsense. Iâve never tried it, because I avoid McDonaldâs like the plague.
Just a quick note to second your recollections of the âgistâ, @stradivarius50t3. I was working and going to MBA school when it took place and, as you can imagine, it was the subject of many discussions.
I also strongly agree w/ your description of the typical âattention-grabbingâ (I guess weâd call 'em âclickbaitâ, now) presentation(s) in the so-called liberal media (SCLM). If one only heard the headline, yeah, it sounded outrageous; if one heard a sentence or two BEYOND THAT, oneâs outrage would flip 180 degrees!
In Googling the link I provided, I was interested to note its reference to a documentary, Hot Coffee, which apparently discusses how this case became the âposter childâ example for tort reform (aka, âwelding the courthouse doors shutâ) and making it even harder to hold the powerful accountable for damages they cause or contribute to.
(Iâll have to do some checking around Netflix, etc., to try to find that movie, as Iâd never heard of it before. Itâs been an educational day, already! )
I happen to like coffee. Back in my undergrad days, I had a work-study gig in the Biology department teaching labs, doing lab set ups and the like. In those carefree days, we stored our lunch bags and other human-consumables in the research refrigerators. My last duty of the day was put a stirring plate in the refrigerator with a 2L beaker filled with distilled water and I forget how many grams of freshly ground coffee beans. I covered the beaker with a paraffin sheet and turned it on.
Whoever was first in the lab the next morning had to take the cold-brewed coffee out of the refrigerator and run it through a Buchner funnel to clear the grounds from the coffee. We then had almost 2 L of magnificent cold-brewed coffee to dilute 1:1 with distilled water and heat (yeah, usually on a lab hot-plate).
Itâs still the best coffee Iâve ever had, coming on 50 years later.
Thank you for the lengthy explanation. Corporate profit over consumer safety.
âIt was very chaotic, so I canât really tell you right now. Everything happened very fast.â
âI canât imagine how my fist found its way into contact with he face. Chaotic, like I said.â
What makes you think he would buy actual coffee beans, even used ones?
This is the right. Past time to act like we are in a vicious fight with these guys. Kumbaya nothing.