A stupid cop out.

[golddustdreams]

Some kid in my speech class made me very angry today, and I need to piss and vent.

We are currently working on persuasive speeches. My topic is the infamous coffee lawsuit against McDonald's. I will be defending the verdict. (If you would like to refute this right here and now, I encourage you to read this article first so you know what you're

Comments

[renoryno]

Do you want me to stop over and drop my pants for you?

[virgokid78]

lol.. I knew that was coming from someone.

[renoryno]

Glad I could be of assistance....

[golddustdreams]

Oh no... I do my speech on Monday. I wouldn't expect someone to just come down and remove his pants with no warning, lol. I was asking people in advance if they'd help beforehand.

[golddustdreams]

As soon as I found out that McDonald's knew their coffee could cause worse than average burns, and yet didn't go to greater extents to warn people of this, I had my mind made up.

[sorenr]

It's a classroom excercise; not a grand political statement... And if he felt that strongly about it, then he could've just inserted a disclaimer, saying he disagreed; how hard is that to tell a class of people, right?

Apart fromt that, I really think that lawsuit was ridiculous. Whether it be written on the paper cup or not, one would assume that when a cup of coffee is served, it's actually hot, rather than luke-warm. It's not as if that should come as a surprise to the plaintif...

[golddustdreams]

Actually, the verdict did place 20% of the blame on the woman for spilling her coffee. It's a very uncommonly cited fact. And she simply did not have to sustain injuries that serious. If I were injured as bad as she (3rd degree burns and a 7 day hospital visit), I would damn well want the company to pay for my expenses. And actually, that's all she wanted. $800 in hospital bills and pain and suffering. The company refused. And McDonald's gave a lameass defense. They had it coming. The jury decided punitive damages were at hand

[sorenr]

The ideal temperature for the water when you make coffee is 96 degrees celsius, meaning that, with a bit of cooling and so on, I would expect coffee to be served at 85-90 degrees. That is hot, yes, but when I buy coffee, I expect it to be fresh and not something that's been sitting around

[golddustdreams]

And that's exactly where the 20% blame came in. The jury acknowledged the fact that the woman spilled her coffee, knowing coffee is hot. They never said McDonald's was 100% liable, otherwise the verdict would have been a lot more severe. And don't you think the situation would have been different if McDonald's, knowing that 180ºF coffee can cause 3rd degree burns in seconds, would have done more to inform people the extent to which they could be injured? And is really common sense? I wouldn't expect when ordering a cup of coffee that I might suffer 3rd degree burns and need to have skin graft therapy.

At home, coffee that hot is a different story. But in a commercial setting, I don't think it should be allowed without proper warning other than "Hot"

[virgokid78]

You have to wonder why coffee was brewed and kept that hot to begin with. I'm sure as a business, there was a reason and a policy behind it. Cooler temperatures might run the risk of more complaints... people often get fast food and take it home or wherever they are headed before they dig into it... so food has to be hot enough to stay warm by the time the person does decide to eat it (within reason). If someone gets a cup of coffee and drives 15 minutes to work and their morning coffee is cold by the time they get there (or they consider it to be colder than they'd like it to be) then they may get complaints, which is never good for any business. There are plenty of eager people out there ready to use any excuse to try and get free food or their money back. I'm not saying either is right or wrong, just offering another point of view. It's not easy pleasing the public.... sometimes you just can't win!