Possibly the DUMBEST street sign ever!!!

-
When I was driving 18 wheelers, lots of times I would turn down a road only to see a "No Trucks" sign about 100 feet or so from the corner. You wouldn't see it until you had already made the turn. Then watcha gonna do?
 
j par said:
There's a sign here in Portland before you go across one of the steel grated bridges that depicts a motorcycle crashing but you don't get to see the sign until it's too late and you're damn near already on the bridge and nowhere to turn around....
Click to expand...
The steel grates make Yer bike kinda Wobble, a Lil. If Ya don't know to expect it, or have a flake passenger, it can screw You
 
Remember a few years ago someone sued a fast food restaurant for burning their mouth because no warning on they’re coffee saying it was hot. Apparently they won the suit. Listen I EXPECT THE COFFEE TO BE HOT if it’s not money back please.
 
Ahoey said:
Remember a few years ago someone sued a fast food restaurant for burning their mouth because no warning on they’re coffee saying it was hot. Apparently they won the suit. Listen I EXPECT THE COFFEE TO BE HOT if it’s not money back please.
Click to expand...
Same thing happened at the McDogfood drive-thru. A woman got a hot coffee and placed it on the top of the dash and when she drove away it came down into her lap and burned her. She sued for a large amount and won. If I was the judge I would have laughed her right out of the courtroom.
 
Mark Wainwright said:
Same thing happened at the McDogfood drive-thru. A woman got a hot coffee and placed it on the top of the dash and when she drove away it came down into her lap and burned her. She sued for a large amount and won. If I was the judge I would have laughed her right out of the courtroom.
Click to expand...
and held her in contempt of court for wasting my time by even bringing this case
 
When I was driving my 80,000 gvw pulp truck on a class a road, the sign stating a 5 ton bridge ahead, was a half mile past the last turn off to avoid the bridge.
 
Mark Wainwright said:
Same thing happened at the McDogfood drive-thru. A woman got a hot coffee and placed it on the top of the dash and when she drove away it came down into her lap and burned her. She sued for a large amount and won. If I was the judge I would have laughed her right out of the courtroom.
Click to expand...

diymirage said:
and held her in contempt of court for wasting my time by even bringing this case
Click to expand...

That's not exactly what happened.

The real story is that for years McDonalds customers had been injured by their too-hot coffee. Coffee that they served at 180-190 degrees F. Why so hot? Because it takes longer for someone to drink, meaning fewer free refills. Mrs. Liebeck was the passenger in a drive-thru, and when she attempted to remove the lid to add cream/sugar, the drink spilled. Her fault? Sure. But she was handed a dangerously hot cup of liquid which was known to McDonalds (through the admission and boasting of their QC manager) to be capable of severe injury. She had no expectation that she would be handling a near-boiling liquid. McDonald could also reasonably forsee customers wanting/needing to remove the lid to add other items to it.
The coffee was so hot, she required skin grafts over 6% of her body. Up to 16% of her body was burned by the liquid. She spent 2 years going through painful medical care and procedures as a result of McDonalds trying to serve a couple less cups of coffee each day. The jury awarded her $200k in medical and compensatory damages. The $2.7 million additional was punitive damages against McDonalds due to their knowing, admitting, and boasting about just how dangerous their actions were. The award was reduced by 20% - the percentage the jury felt that Mrs. Liebeck was liable for the situation. 80% of the liability went to McDonalds.

I dunno, in my world I'm rather pleased that a company who knew, and admitted that they knew, that their approach to reducing costs was injuring people - often severely - had to pay a significant price as a result. The campaign to smear her during and since is nothing more than large companies trying to disuade people from holding them accountable for their actions which can harm the public. Same way people get called 'conspiracy theorists' for showing any skepticism toward certain topics.
 
When I was growing up I was always told ............"If the coffee is too hot, wait a while and let it cools off, or you'll burn your mouth".
 
Last edited:
Phreakish said:
That's not exactly what happened.

The real story is that for years McDonalds customers had been injured by their too-hot coffee. Coffee that they served at 180-190 degrees F. Why so hot? Because it takes longer for someone to drink, meaning fewer free refills. Mrs. Liebeck was the passenger in a drive-thru, and when she attempted to remove the lid to add cream/sugar, the drink spilled. Her fault? Sure. But she was handed a dangerously hot cup of liquid which was known to McDonalds (through the admission and boasting of their QC manager) to be capable of severe injury. She had no expectation that she would be handling a near-boiling liquid. McDonald could also reasonably forsee customers wanting/needing to remove the lid to add other items to it.
The coffee was so hot, she required skin grafts over 6% of her body. Up to 16% of her body was burned by the liquid. She spent 2 years going through painful medical care and procedures as a result of McDonalds trying to serve a couple less cups of coffee each day. The jury awarded her $200k in medical and compensatory damages. The $2.7 million additional was punitive damages against McDonalds due to their knowing, admitting, and boasting about just how dangerous their actions were. The award was reduced by 20% - the percentage the jury felt that Mrs. Liebeck was liable for the situation. 80% of the liability went to McDonalds.

I dunno, in my world I'm rather pleased that a company who knew, and admitted that they knew, that their approach to reducing costs was injuring people - often severely - had to pay a significant price as a result. The campaign to smear her during and since is nothing more than large companies trying to disuade people from holding them accountable for their actions which can harm the public. Same way people get called 'conspiracy theorists' for showing any skepticism toward certain topics.
Click to expand...
Thanks Phreakish. I knew there had to be more to the story that we never heard. There just HAD to be.
 
I think there was something to do with getting a stronger end product with less coffee use with the hotter water also. McD coffee was a daily occurrence for me and the early AM 65 mile drive to work, but I knew which off ramp on the US 101 that it was cool enough to safely drink :realcrazy::lol:.
 
Phreakish said:
That's not exactly what happened.

The real story is that for years McDonalds customers had been injured by their too-hot coffee. Coffee that they served at 180-190 degrees F. Why so hot? Because it takes longer for someone to drink, meaning fewer free refills. Mrs. Liebeck was the passenger in a drive-thru, and when she attempted to remove the lid to add cream/sugar, the drink spilled. Her fault? Sure. But she was handed a dangerously hot cup of liquid which was known to McDonalds (through the admission and boasting of their QC manager) to be capable of severe injury. She had no expectation that she would be handling a near-boiling liquid. McDonald could also reasonably forsee customers wanting/needing to remove the lid to add other items to it.
The coffee was so hot, she required skin grafts over 6% of her body. Up to 16% of her body was burned by the liquid. She spent 2 years going through painful medical care and procedures as a result of McDonalds trying to serve a couple less cups of coffee each day. The jury awarded her $200k in medical and compensatory damages. The $2.7 million additional was punitive damages against McDonalds due to their knowing, admitting, and boasting about just how dangerous their actions were. The award was reduced by 20% - the percentage the jury felt that Mrs. Liebeck was liable for the situation. 80% of the liability went to McDonalds.

I dunno, in my world I'm rather pleased that a company who knew, and admitted that they knew, that their approach to reducing costs was injuring people - often severely - had to pay a significant price as a result. The campaign to smear her during and since is nothing more than large companies trying to disuade people from holding them accountable for their actions which can harm the public. Same way people get called 'conspiracy theorists' for showing any skepticism toward certain topics.
Click to expand...
The McDowell's near me put up signs in the drive thru, "No Coffee Served at Window" for a few months after that happened.
 
I used to pick up full load (gross weight 80k lbs.) at Carolina Beverage on left. When leaving, you go by Kyle Busch Motorsports (building in center) to stop sign. If you choose to go straight across instead of turning left or right, about ¼ mile ahead is this bridge. No early warning. I saw several trucks go straight. One may have been me.
Screenshot_20220906-163747_Maps.jpg
Screenshot_20220906-163332_Maps.jpg
 
Years ago there used to be a sign at the Albuquerque airport (by the up escalator) that read, "seeing eye dogs must use the elevator".
 
Phreakish said:
That's not exactly what happened.

The real story is that for years McDonalds customers had been injured by their too-hot coffee. Coffee that they served at 180-190 degrees F. Why so hot? Because it takes longer for someone to drink, meaning fewer free refills. Mrs. Liebeck was the passenger in a drive-thru, and when she attempted to remove the lid to add cream/sugar, the drink spilled. Her fault? Sure. But she was handed a dangerously hot cup of liquid which was known to McDonalds (through the admission and boasting of their QC manager) to be capable of severe injury. She had no expectation that she would be handling a near-boiling liquid. McDonald could also reasonably forsee customers wanting/needing to remove the lid to add other items to it.
The coffee was so hot, she required skin grafts over 6% of her body. Up to 16% of her body was burned by the liquid. She spent 2 years going through painful medical care and procedures as a result of McDonalds trying to serve a couple less cups of coffee each day. The jury awarded her $200k in medical and compensatory damages. The $2.7 million additional was punitive damages against McDonalds due to their knowing, admitting, and boasting about just how dangerous their actions were. The award was reduced by 20% - the percentage the jury felt that Mrs. Liebeck was liable for the situation. 80% of the liability went to McDonalds.

I dunno, in my world I'm rather pleased that a company who knew, and admitted that they knew, that their approach to reducing costs was injuring people - often severely - had to pay a significant price as a result. The campaign to smear her during and since is nothing more than large companies trying to disuade people from holding them accountable for their actions which can harm the public. Same way people get called 'conspiracy theorists' for showing any skepticism toward certain topics.
Click to expand...


THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I remember it , at the time ,I was stopping every morn. for a cup on the way to the job site , the mc. coffee was so hot it would burn your hand ,even below freezing , on the way out to the truck . Never put it between you legs to hold it temporarily like she did !!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top