leviramsey

That's the idea... it's a nice giveaway to the police unions to require that any work done on a public road has to have a police officer present to supervise (and get paid overtime).

Juswus

and the one where the woman eats a $5 bill, and the warning says "dramatization, do not attempt" wtf!!!

Ridski

True. My personal preference is for coffee to be made hot, but I wait and drink it lukewarm, but tastes differ. However, in this case, there was a policy at McDonald's not just to make it at near boiling point to serve it at that super-hot temperature because there's usually a lag-time between purchase and drinking. McD's was therefore selling a product at a temperature at which it could not be safely consumed, let alone accidentally spilled on your lap. When I buy a cup of coffee, I don't expect to be able to power a turbine with it, I expect to be able to drink it. The suit itself, IMO, was justified, the stupid warning thing not so much, as it solves nothing. All it says is that it could be hot, not that it's going to take skin off your legs through a pair of fairly rugged jeans.

meauxna

Why are all the $$-eating people in those ads Asian? I think they are the dumbest ads.

hobbes79

Minor tirade on this... I was on my way into work this morning, going through construction, when a policeman prompted a vehicle to cross traffic to turn up a road. The only problem being, the first car in that line of traffic was me, and he didn't do the slightest thing to signal to me that I should stop despite it being my right of way. The first I knew of this decision, was a bloody great truck swinging across my path and me locking up the brakes to avoid him.

Think I'd have had an interesting case if anything had happend

So, anyone driving through Tewksbury, MA, not only are the cops there overpaid to do very little... they almost cause accidents!

Kaffy Mintcake

You're absolutely right, they did, and they won that part of the case.

Usually with product liability 'foreseeable misuse of the product' is key for establishing responsibility. Putting a hot cup of coffee in between her legs while she opened the top and added cream/sugar is foreseeable. (She was not driving by the way.)

Not foreseeable would be one of my favorite cases. Involved a guy who glued cotton balls all over his body as part of a Halloween costume, then proceeded to catch on fire due to the cigarette he was smoking. That is not considered foreseeable misuse.

Kaffy Mintcake

I think you hit it dead on. It shouldn't be so hot that if you spill some while adding cream and sugar you end up in the hospital.

MsElui

it shouldnt be so hot that if you take a big mouthful as you leave the store that you could end up with serious burns inside your mouth.

Bob

That's ingenious though

englishinfl

It's the same here, so I agree.
What I'd really like the answer to,(come on someone) is why when people get pulled over for a minor traffic offence (yes, speaking from experience) does another police car that's driving by in the opposite direction feel the need to turn around and come and park behind the first one, so he can have a nose too and a 10 minute chat while "officer negative" is checking your licence out and deciding that the non-working number plate lightbulb isn't really worth writing a ticket over?
The amount of ordinary cars I see stopped by the police and not only one police car pulled up , but two of them, strikes me as ridiculous.
Something else that's insane? Letting the Tampa policemen (and all the others that it applies to) take their police cruisers home with them when their shift ends like they are their own personal cars, when they live 30 miles out of town. Why not make them drive to work using their own petrol and their own car, like other employees have to. Their petrol budget was increased again this year.
1 car shared would do the same as 3 cars on 8 hour shifts per 24 hours.
It's not only madness, it's an absolute flagrant waste of taxpayers money.

ugacrew

1.) Safety in numbers is the reason why there are two cops or more at a scene.
2.) They can report to a crime when needed in the proper vehicle without spending time reporting to headquarters and then getting in a police cruiser. Time is of the essence and the cost of gas is negligible when you consider it might be a life or death issue they may be reporting to. Plus the there is a benefit of having a cruiser vehicle parked in the neighborhood. It's a crime deterrent.

Bob

Though don't some states, or counties require the cops that do that to at least live within city limits to reduce the piss take? I thought Philly was one of them at least.

Dan725

I absolutely agree. And given the pretty meager salaries for rookie cops, I don't begrudge them at all.

I really can't get into this moaning about too many cops thing. While getting traffic tickets is always a pain, I'd rather have them around when I need them.

Look at the sorry state of affairs in the UK - and how the politically correct and government has pretty much cut a swathe through policing too the point where it appears to be becoming ineffective.

Janek66

The Associated Tax Relief adverts. They all seem so proud that they racked up thousands of dollars of debt and then got off for pennies on the dollar.

ugacrew

Nope. When I lived in Virginia my neighbor was a DC cop and had a cruiser that he parked at home. He was well outside the jurisdiction but was allowed to drive it home. It could be that he was senior in his position as well that afforded him that luxury.