YES!

I really can’t debate you on a legal stance...having no training. Although, my arguments stem from more of a moral stance. (Some of the following is in more detail in the previous post)...but...

-Unless she was unaware of the method by which coffee is made (requiring a boiling temp at some point during the process) why is it unreasonable for her to assume that the coffee could be served at any temp below (but including) 212 degrees...which would cause third degree burns.

-I am suspect that the fact that “many people practice” something frees an individual from liability. People practice incredibly unsafe things all the time. Just because people aren’t injured the majority of the time does not make the practice unsafe to any reasonable person. I.E. People run with scissors all the tie (which is why its a cliche’) yet only a teeny fractino of them are actually injured. This does not mean it is safe to assume the practice is “harmless”

Granted...just as many states have no requirement to wear a helmet when riding motorcycles, sky diving, or other risk activities...however, no one would argue this is a “safe and acceptable” practice.

Placing known hot coffee, which reached at least 212 degrees sometime during its production, between your legs seems to constitute an unsafe practices...just as riding a bicycle in dark clothing at night seems to be an unsafe practice. Common sense type of thing :-)

But this argument does not speak to the safety of the act at all. The act is still unsafe, however as existing statues regarding driver liability cover accidents (thus there is no need to make an additional statute) and the unpopularity of the statute makes passing the statute unlikely regardless of whether it is safe or not...the lack of statues bears little or no correlation to the actual safety of the act.

Also, many states DO have these statues.

And finally, again, many people engage in extremely unsafe things constantly...but the fact that they get away with them 99% of the time does not mean they are safe. People “walk in traffic” constantly (J-walking, walking along the sides of the interstate, ETC.) and get away with it the high majority of the time... yet this would be a classic example of an “unsafe practice.”

The argument that “people do it all the time” does not morally (and I suspect legally) make it a “reasonable practice.”

Then apparently, some Mescalero Apache traditions are not compatible with some "normal modern activities". They may want to educate themselves so that they know what they are getting into since they appear to have made their daughter available to this studio. Ignorance is not a good argument, IMO. I would be surprised if there wasn't something in the contract stating that the studio would have the right to apply make-up or change the extra's appearance at their discretion.

Sorry, I was being a little facetious there. But since you left out this part :

you missed my basic point, which was that, though stupid, such an action would not assume 100% of the risk - because normally it wouldn't be any where near as dangerous. The point was not the risk of scalding (normal minor surface burns) but of full-thickness third-degree burns. It would not be reasonable for a consumer to expect such risk, but McD's was fully aware, and had settled 700 fucking cases already over excessively hot coffee.

Bullshit. Reasonable people do it all the time. Have you never actually had a cup of coffee in a car before?

One more time: She. Was. Not. In. A. Moving. Car. The car was stopped specifically as a reasonable precaution while she was preparing her coffee.

Actually, 158 was a typo. It was actually 185. At Least 20 degrees hotter than anyone else in the area.

No restaurant, anywhere, serves coffee at 212 degrees. In most cases, the coffee itself never reaches that temperature even during brewing. The water might have been that hot beforehand, but never the coffee itself. Assuming that you would get a cup hotter than anyone, anywhere serves it is hardly reasonable.


[Edited on Mar 19, 2006 by skeptik]

[Edited on Mar 19, 2006 by skeptik]

I, for one, am shocked that McDonald's would hire an old woman to direct a movie about Steven Spielberg driving over a Native American child while burning the child's hair off with scalding coffee!

I mean, just how culturally insensitive can you get?!

Um...yes. I do, actually, always know where my crotch is without looking. As I do my hands, feet, ETC. I also know where my cup holder is without looking. Your brain is very adept at finding objects that have not moved since the last time you set them down.

The fact that the car was not moving makes it neither safe, nor properly equipped for handling hot coffee in a safe manner (especially considering there is no place to put the different items you are handling – so you are “juggling” them - and no way to position your body safely in relation to the hot item. “Over your lap” is the only place the item can be held.)

My source is me...I used to work for the NTSB. You can look it up on their site.

The point of the source is, they state that the distraction of driving can cause you to burn yourself with a cigarette (and then cause an accident. WHY they are concerned with your burning yourself (causing an accident) is immaterial. They still state that the distraction of driving might cause the burn (and thus, the accident.) As the distraction of driving is likely to cause you to burn yourself with a cigarette, it is reasonable to assume the act of driving could cause you to burn yourself with coffee.

(And, yes I know she wasn't driving. You asked for clarification of how smoking a cigarette and driving was related to drinking coffee and driving...so I am offering it to you.)

Just because the race card might be over played doesn't mean it CAN'T be played. Believe it or not, there is still a lot of racism in America. In fact, there seems to be a lot of it on this website.

Bullshit. As I have stated many times...just because people do dangerous things all the time, and get away with it, does not make it reasonable or safe. The HUGE majority of people who drink and drive get away with it (not just don’t get busted, but get home safe.) This does NOT make it safe.

Sorry. That was a typo. I meant to say a NON-MOVING VEHICLE IS BY NO MEANS SAFE AND STABLE. See the post about my friend who got creamed in a stopped, non-running, vehicle in a parking lot.

Regardless, the rest of the statement was that sitting in a car does not give one the appropriate room, surfaces, or body position for handling hot coffee.

No...I do not attempt to prepare my coffee in my car. I generally do not attempt to drink hot items in my car (or eat in my car) but on the rare occasion I just can’t wait to wrap my lips around my Starbucks...and spill it on myself...I have no one to blame but myself.

OK...185 degrees is EVEN HOTTER...but it is still less than 212 degrees, which is the assumptive temp I make about coffee since it has to reach that temp AT SOME TIME during it’s prep. A reasonable person should assume the coffee could be any temp 212 degrees or below.

Umm...coffee drips function by heating the water to boiling, which forces the water up through the drip which is then trickled down through the coffee. Percolators do basically the same, but the boiling of the water is pressed up through a center tray. Camp stoves work by boiling water in a pan, and dropping in a cheesecloth of coffee.

The water, during the preparation of coffee, reaches 212 degrees. When I worked for a caterer in college, I would never serve coffee directly from the “pan” to the table...and simply pouring the coffee will cool the liquid considerably. However, having a knowledge of the preparation of coffee...I assume the temp of the liquid could be anything from 212 degrees or below. Which is why I test it before drinking it or placing it over my genitals :-)

Knowing that people do something all the time and don't get hurt is, in fact exactly what makes it "reasonable." It might not be perfectly safe, but then what ever is?

And thank you, I think everyone is perfectly aware of the boiling temperature of water. But since most commercial coffee brewing is done with large machines that drip temperature-regulated water (not boiling) through grounds, and since - as was mentioned in several of the links posted to this thread - nobody but McDonald's regulates that temperature anywhere near that high, knowing the boiling point of water is not really relevant.

And you may be a very responsible person, but that doesn't mean that people who don't assume that their tasty beverage will put them in the fucking hospital and scar them for life are unreasonable.

Look, I'm not sure what you're failing to grasp. You do NOT do anything physical to a child without asking the parents first. Yes, that includes giving one a haircut. The fact that it was culturally important is just part of the case, not the entirety.

He's not "failing to grasp" the difference between something that could pose a danger to a child - like a hiking trip, for which you would need and get parental clearance - versus something like costuming and hairdressing on a movie set, which is a standard part of such activities.

Look, nobody's saying the Ponces (love that, btw) can't have whatever weird beliefs about hair they want to. But it is not reasonable to expect everyone else in the larger, wider world to keep track of every subculture's approach to coiffure.

If some PETA-type parents threw a hissyfit over the costume dept putting a leather or deerskin vest on their kid - How DARE you put the flayed skin of a murdered animal on my child! - should the wardrobe people be fired?

If your beliefs and "culture" are so different from the mainstream as to cause this kind of trouble, the burden is on YOU to make things clear so such incidents can be avoided. That's just how the cookie crumbles.

While that may be true, I don't see how it applies here anyway. I don't think anyone is saying that they cut her because they don't like Apaches.

Oh yeah, SG is a regular Klan meeting.

Criticism of culture is not "racism." You might believe, for example, that the traditions of the Pennsylvania Amish, New England WASPs or Lubavitcher Hasidim are wrong, stupid and ridiculous but that doesn't make you a RACIST unless you also believe the people themselves are inherently inferior by birth.

In the immortal words of Jeff over at Beautiful Atrocities, "Racism refers to a theory of biological determinism, not anyone who thinks Jesse Jackson is a clown."

[Edited on Mar 19, 2006 by BrainFromArous]

What do helicopters have to do with this, anyway?