login
Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds (Page 4)
-
No new posts
|
 2013-03-14 2:26 PM in reply to: #4659961 |
Pro  4313   McKinney, TX |  Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonaldsAarondb4 - 2013-03-14 2:25 PM mehaner - 2013-03-14 1:24 PM lisac957 - 2013-03-14 3:22 PM Kido - 2013-03-14 2:16 PM mr2tony - 2013-03-14 12:12 PM jford2309 - 2013-03-14 1:59 PM Only thing worse than non parents commenting about parenting is people with dogs and cats comparing them to children! Really though, what's the difference? You have to feed them and make sure they poop/pee and don't die. Big deal. I've had dogs and cats, how much harder could it possibly be to raise kids? Some say it's harder so it must be. Can't diaper a puppy, and they run around while infants just lay there where you put them. Both are just as kickable when you are grumpy - so that's a wash. Wrong. My parents' dog permanently wears a diaper due to complications from a surgery. See? You don't have kids so you're wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. it's your parents' dog - not yours - so you are also wrong. sorry! Is she wrong or just irrelevant? Both....it's an irrelevant opinion that's wrong. |
| 2013-03-14 2:28 PM in reply to: #4659967 |
Pro 5761   Bartlett, TN | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM tealeaf - 2013-03-14 9:28 AM Any parent who has had a 2-year old suffer any degree of injury must be an irresponsible parent, to hear some of the comments in this thread. I don't know whether or not the suit has merit, but I do know that it is possible for a parent to be watching a 2-year old and have something happen to the child at the same time. I don't know what happened here, and neither do any of the other commenters to this thread. Probably the issue is something like, and I don't know legal terms, who exercised reasonable care? If there was a condom on the floor in the childrens' play area, it seems fairly certain that McDonalds did not. What we don't know, is if the mother exercised reasonable care. While I think McD's is grossly negligent and should be sued for way more than the 50K I think she should also be suing the condom manufacturer and the people who sold it. Why are condoms so easy to get, you can buy as many as you want and as we can see here the injuries that they cause goes for the most part unpunished. I think we need to see some serious laws regulating condom purchase, use and disposal. Why are there no warnings on the dangers of improper condom disposal?
and how do you prove McDonald's was negligent? Have you ever owned a McDonlad's? Edited by jford2309 2013-03-14 2:29 PM |
| 2013-03-14 2:32 PM in reply to: #4659970 |
Sneaky Slow 8694 Herndon, VA, | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds jford2309 - 2013-03-14 3:28 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM tealeaf - 2013-03-14 9:28 AM Any parent who has had a 2-year old suffer any degree of injury must be an irresponsible parent, to hear some of the comments in this thread. I don't know whether or not the suit has merit, but I do know that it is possible for a parent to be watching a 2-year old and have something happen to the child at the same time. I don't know what happened here, and neither do any of the other commenters to this thread. Probably the issue is something like, and I don't know legal terms, who exercised reasonable care? If there was a condom on the floor in the childrens' play area, it seems fairly certain that McDonalds did not. What we don't know, is if the mother exercised reasonable care. While I think McD's is grossly negligent and should be sued for way more than the 50K I think she should also be suing the condom manufacturer and the people who sold it. Why are condoms so easy to get, you can buy as many as you want and as we can see here the injuries that they cause goes for the most part unpunished. I think we need to see some serious laws regulating condom purchase, use and disposal. Why are there no warnings on the dangers of improper condom disposal?
and how do you prove McDonald's was negligent? Have you ever owned a McDonlad's? I worked at McDonalds when I was in high school, and every 30 minutes, they sent me out to the childrens' play area to clean up all the used condoms, firecrackers, lighters, and syringes. And besides, it's a civil suit; you don't have to *prove* it, you only have to show a preponderance of the evidence. (I know this because Judge Wapner said so, back in the day) |
| 2013-03-14 2:38 PM in reply to: #4659983 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds Note to self: Pick up after my session in the ball pit next time. It would eliminate a lot of contention. My bad. Edited by Kido 2013-03-14 2:38 PM |
| 2013-03-14 2:39 PM in reply to: #4659968 |
Champion 34263 Chicago | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds bradleyd3 - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM Aarondb4 - 2013-03-14 2:25 PM mehaner - 2013-03-14 1:24 PM lisac957 - 2013-03-14 3:22 PM Kido - 2013-03-14 2:16 PM mr2tony - 2013-03-14 12:12 PM jford2309 - 2013-03-14 1:59 PM Only thing worse than non parents commenting about parenting is people with dogs and cats comparing them to children! Really though, what's the difference? You have to feed them and make sure they poop/pee and don't die. Big deal. I've had dogs and cats, how much harder could it possibly be to raise kids? Some say it's harder so it must be. Can't diaper a puppy, and they run around while infants just lay there where you put them. Both are just as kickable when you are grumpy - so that's a wash. Wrong. My parents' dog permanently wears a diaper due to complications from a surgery. See? You don't have kids so you're wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. it's your parents' dog - not yours - so you are also wrong. sorry! Is she wrong or just irrelevant? Both....it's an irrelevant opinion that's wrong. Double-negative. She's right. |
| 2013-03-14 2:46 PM in reply to: #4659999 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds I'm hungry. McDonalds anyone? Condom on the side, please. |
| 2013-03-14 2:51 PM in reply to: #4660023 |
Resident Curmudgeon 25290 The Road Back Gold member | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds Kido - 2013-03-14 2:46 PMI'm hungry. McDonalds anyone? Condom on the side, please. would you like that condom super sized? |
| 2013-03-14 2:59 PM in reply to: #4659970 |
| Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds jford2309 - 2013-03-14 12:28 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM tealeaf - 2013-03-14 9:28 AM Any parent who has had a 2-year old suffer any degree of injury must be an irresponsible parent, to hear some of the comments in this thread. I don't know whether or not the suit has merit, but I do know that it is possible for a parent to be watching a 2-year old and have something happen to the child at the same time. I don't know what happened here, and neither do any of the other commenters to this thread. Probably the issue is something like, and I don't know legal terms, who exercised reasonable care? If there was a condom on the floor in the childrens' play area, it seems fairly certain that McDonalds did not. What we don't know, is if the mother exercised reasonable care. While I think McD's is grossly negligent and should be sued for way more than the 50K I think she should also be suing the condom manufacturer and the people who sold it. Why are condoms so easy to get, you can buy as many as you want and as we can see here the injuries that they cause goes for the most part unpunished. I think we need to see some serious laws regulating condom purchase, use and disposal. Why are there no warnings on the dangers of improper condom disposal?
and how do you prove McDonald's was negligent? Have you ever owned a McDonlad's? 1. They are a for profit business, that in of itself makes them bad. 2. Well, they have a lot of money, gross amounts, so they have the deep pockets so if someone says they are grossly negligent often enough it will make it so. 3. They serve food that is bad for the people of America and that is grossly negligent. 4. She needs the money more than they do, so let's make them grossly negligent so she can get her money. 5. This is the new America and business are or should be assumed to be grossly negligent unless they can prove themselves innocent. 6. Court of pubic opinion is more important now than ever so if it's said often enough the odds of them finding MickeyD's grossly negligent will increase. Thanks for the question though jford. :)
Edited to fix quotes
Edited by crusevegas 2013-03-14 3:01 PM |
| 2013-03-14 3:25 PM in reply to: #4660048 |
Champion 14571 the alamo city, Texas | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds crusevegas - 2013-03-14 3:59 PM jford2309 - 2013-03-14 12:28 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM tealeaf - 2013-03-14 9:28 AM Any parent who has had a 2-year old suffer any degree of injury must be an irresponsible parent, to hear some of the comments in this thread. I don't know whether or not the suit has merit, but I do know that it is possible for a parent to be watching a 2-year old and have something happen to the child at the same time. I don't know what happened here, and neither do any of the other commenters to this thread. Probably the issue is something like, and I don't know legal terms, who exercised reasonable care? If there was a condom on the floor in the childrens' play area, it seems fairly certain that McDonalds did not. What we don't know, is if the mother exercised reasonable care. While I think McD's is grossly negligent and should be sued for way more than the 50K I think she should also be suing the condom manufacturer and the people who sold it. Why are condoms so easy to get, you can buy as many as you want and as we can see here the injuries that they cause goes for the most part unpunished. I think we need to see some serious laws regulating condom purchase, use and disposal. Why are there no warnings on the dangers of improper condom disposal?
and how do you prove McDonald's was negligent? Have you ever owned a McDonlad's? 1. They are a for profit business, that in of itself makes them bad. 2. Well, they have a lot of money, gross amounts, so they have the deep pockets so if someone says they are grossly negligent often enough it will make it so. 3. They serve food that is bad for the people of America and that is grossly negligent. 4. She needs the money more than they do, so let's make them grossly negligent so she can get her money. 5. This is the new America and business are or should be assumed to be grossly negligent unless they can prove themselves innocent. 6. Court of pubic opinion is more important now than ever so if it's said often enough the odds of them finding MickeyD's grossly negligent will increase. Thanks for the question though jford.
Edited to fix quotes
unfortunately, since you have never owned a mcd's, your opinion is invalid. |
| 2013-03-14 3:26 PM in reply to: #4660048 |
Champion 34263 Chicago | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:59 PM jford2309 - 2013-03-14 12:28 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM tealeaf - 2013-03-14 9:28 AM Any parent who has had a 2-year old suffer any degree of injury must be an irresponsible parent, to hear some of the comments in this thread. I don't know whether or not the suit has merit, but I do know that it is possible for a parent to be watching a 2-year old and have something happen to the child at the same time. I don't know what happened here, and neither do any of the other commenters to this thread. Probably the issue is something like, and I don't know legal terms, who exercised reasonable care? If there was a condom on the floor in the childrens' play area, it seems fairly certain that McDonalds did not. What we don't know, is if the mother exercised reasonable care. While I think McD's is grossly negligent and should be sued for way more than the 50K I think she should also be suing the condom manufacturer and the people who sold it. Why are condoms so easy to get, you can buy as many as you want and as we can see here the injuries that they cause goes for the most part unpunished. I think we need to see some serious laws regulating condom purchase, use and disposal. Why are there no warnings on the dangers of improper condom disposal?
and how do you prove McDonald's was negligent? Have you ever owned a McDonlad's? 1. They are a for profit business, that in of itself makes them bad. 2. Well, they have a lot of money, gross amounts, so they have the deep pockets so if someone says they are grossly negligent often enough it will make it so. 3. They serve food that is bad for the people of America and that is grossly negligent. 4. She needs the money more than they do, so let's make them grossly negligent so she can get her money. 5. This is the new America and business are or should be assumed to be grossly negligent unless they can prove themselves innocent. 6. Court of pubic opinion is more important now than ever so if it's said often enough the odds of them finding MickeyD's grossly negligent will increase. Thanks for the question though jford.
Edited to fix quotes
Actually, I just want to know if you think large companies should be exempt from lawsuits? Edited by mr2tony 2013-03-14 3:28 PM |
| 2013-03-14 3:51 PM in reply to: #4659475 |
Champion 17756 SoCal | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds |
| 2013-03-14 4:04 PM in reply to: #4659841 |
Master 1440 | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds Sous - 2013-03-14 2:39 PM I politley disagree. My wife and I never were able to have children of our own, but we have had 16 foster children. I have been teaching for 17 years and my wife was a classroom aid at a school for the deaf and blind. she also worked at anotehr school with speical needs childen.I think the point was that someone without kids can't really speak authoritatively about parenting... not that they can't have opinions about kids. There is a difference. BTW, what exactly is a "fighting dog" is that kinda like an "assault weapon". Seeing, you know, that any dog can be raised to be a fighting dog, and any gun can be used in an assault. I believe that both of us can speak authoratively about parenting and sometimes the things we say will even agree with one another. |
| 2013-03-14 4:23 PM in reply to: #4659841 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds Sous - 2013-03-14 11:39 AM Kido - 2013-03-14 2:34 PM It's amazing I am not allowed to have an opinion about kids unless have them. I don't own a pit bull/fighting dog, but I have my opinion about them. I have opinions about guns and nuclear weapons. Last I checked, I don't own an ICBM. I have opinions about how Bowman/Elway manage the broncos, but I don't own a NFL team. If you don't have Cancer, you can't talk about it cuz you just don't know.
New rule, if you don't have personal experience or have/own something, you can't speak about it AT ALL.
I think the point was that someone without kids can't really speak authoritatively about parenting... not that they can't have opinions about kids. There is a difference. BTW, what exactly is a "fighting dog" is that kinda like an "assault weapon". Seeing, you know, that any dog can be raised to be a fighting dog, and any gun can be used in an assault. GREAT point about the dog, though. Cuz you know, it's just as common to fight Shih Tzus, Teapot Yorkies, and Beagles in the ring as Pit Bulls and Rottweilers. I can see how you can get them mixed up. And the dogs/guns argument is spot on - same thing for sure. Not that I trust wiki all the time, but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dog_fighting_breeds |
| 2013-03-14 4:35 PM in reply to: #4660092 |
| Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds mr2tony - 2013-03-14 1:26 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:59 PM Actually, I just want to know if you think large companies should be exempt from lawsuits?jford2309 - 2013-03-14 12:28 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM tealeaf - 2013-03-14 9:28 AM Any parent who has had a 2-year old suffer any degree of injury must be an irresponsible parent, to hear some of the comments in this thread. I don't know whether or not the suit has merit, but I do know that it is possible for a parent to be watching a 2-year old and have something happen to the child at the same time. I don't know what happened here, and neither do any of the other commenters to this thread. Probably the issue is something like, and I don't know legal terms, who exercised reasonable care? If there was a condom on the floor in the childrens' play area, it seems fairly certain that McDonalds did not. What we don't know, is if the mother exercised reasonable care. While I think McD's is grossly negligent and should be sued for way more than the 50K I think she should also be suing the condom manufacturer and the people who sold it. Why are condoms so easy to get, you can buy as many as you want and as we can see here the injuries that they cause goes for the most part unpunished. I think we need to see some serious laws regulating condom purchase, use and disposal. Why are there no warnings on the dangers of improper condom disposal?
and how do you prove McDonald's was negligent? Have you ever owned a McDonlad's? 1. They are a for profit business, that in of itself makes them bad. 2. Well, they have a lot of money, gross amounts, so they have the deep pockets so if someone says they are grossly negligent often enough it will make it so. 3. They serve food that is bad for the people of America and that is grossly negligent. 4. She needs the money more than they do, so let's make them grossly negligent so she can get her money. 5. This is the new America and business are or should be assumed to be grossly negligent unless they can prove themselves innocent. 6. Court of pubic opinion is more important now than ever so if it's said often enough the odds of them finding MickeyD's grossly negligent will increase. Thanks for the question though jford.
Edited to fix quotes
Don't hate the player, it's the game. I think any company that serves hot coffee to it's customers should have to pay out without a trial. Upon further thought, they should probably sue Planned Parenthood and the government too, since they provide condoms for young children. |
| 2013-03-14 4:37 PM in reply to: #4660194 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:35 PM
Don't hate the player, it's the game. I think any company that serves hot coffee to it's customers should have to pay out without a trial. Upon further thought, they should probably sue Planned Parenthood and the government too, since they provide condoms for young children. WHAT? They do? Why didn't anyone tell me! I always had to sheepishly buy them from Walgreens and avoid eye contact with the old lady cashier. I also always got a pack of gum too. Can't go in and JUST buy condoms. |
| 2013-03-14 4:38 PM in reply to: #4660194 |
Champion 34263 Chicago | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds crusevegas - 2013-03-14 4:35 PM mr2tony - 2013-03-14 1:26 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:59 PM Actually, I just want to know if you think large companies should be exempt from lawsuits?jford2309 - 2013-03-14 12:28 PM crusevegas - 2013-03-14 2:26 PM tealeaf - 2013-03-14 9:28 AM Any parent who has had a 2-year old suffer any degree of injury must be an irresponsible parent, to hear some of the comments in this thread. I don't know whether or not the suit has merit, but I do know that it is possible for a parent to be watching a 2-year old and have something happen to the child at the same time. I don't know what happened here, and neither do any of the other commenters to this thread. Probably the issue is something like, and I don't know legal terms, who exercised reasonable care? If there was a condom on the floor in the childrens' play area, it seems fairly certain that McDonalds did not. What we don't know, is if the mother exercised reasonable care. While I think McD's is grossly negligent and should be sued for way more than the 50K I think she should also be suing the condom manufacturer and the people who sold it. Why are condoms so easy to get, you can buy as many as you want and as we can see here the injuries that they cause goes for the most part unpunished. I think we need to see some serious laws regulating condom purchase, use and disposal. Why are there no warnings on the dangers of improper condom disposal?
and how do you prove McDonald's was negligent? Have you ever owned a McDonlad's? 1. They are a for profit business, that in of itself makes them bad. 2. Well, they have a lot of money, gross amounts, so they have the deep pockets so if someone says they are grossly negligent often enough it will make it so. 3. They serve food that is bad for the people of America and that is grossly negligent. 4. She needs the money more than they do, so let's make them grossly negligent so she can get her money. 5. This is the new America and business are or should be assumed to be grossly negligent unless they can prove themselves innocent. 6. Court of pubic opinion is more important now than ever so if it's said often enough the odds of them finding MickeyD's grossly negligent will increase. Thanks for the question though jford.
Edited to fix quotes
Don't hate the player, it's the game. I think any company that serves hot coffee to it's customers should have to pay out without a trial. Upon further thought, they should probably sue Planned Parenthood and the government too, since they provide condoms for young children. Cruse you're getting more curmudgeonly every day. Now ... GET OFF MY LAWN!!! |
| 2013-03-14 4:47 PM in reply to: #4660201 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds mr2tony - 2013-03-14 2:38 PM Cruse you're getting more curmudgeonly every day. Now ... GET OFF MY LAWN!!! It's almost 5 there. Go home already. Edited by Kido 2013-03-14 4:48 PM |
| 2013-03-14 4:53 PM in reply to: #4660215 |
Champion 34263 Chicago | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds Kido - 2013-03-14 4:47 PM mr2tony - 2013-03-14 2:38 PM Cruse you're getting more curmudgeonly every day. Now ... GET OFF MY LAWN!!! It's almost 5 there. Go home already. No can do -- despite what people think I'm not on welfare and I have a job and tonight I must stay later than usual. I know, bunk, but that's the way the condom fits. |
| 2013-03-14 5:00 PM in reply to: #4659508 |
| Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds jonD81 - 2013-03-14 10:33 AM Am I the only one thinking "Only $50K?" Not that the amount, or the lawsuit, is justified, but I would have thought a bigger number would be attached. Yes, I would have thought McD's would have settled for that amount just to avoid the press of a lawsuit. |
| 2013-03-14 5:06 PM in reply to: #4660156 |
| Master 2009 Charlotte, NC | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds verga - 2013-03-14 5:04 PM Sous - 2013-03-14 2:39 PM I politley disagree. My wife and I never were able to have children of our own, but we have had 16 foster children. I have been teaching for 17 years and my wife was a classroom aid at a school for the deaf and blind. she also worked at anotehr school with speical needs childen.I think the point was that someone without kids can't really speak authoritatively about parenting... not that they can't have opinions about kids. There is a difference. BTW, what exactly is a "fighting dog" is that kinda like an "assault weapon". Seeing, you know, that any dog can be raised to be a fighting dog, and any gun can be used in an assault. I believe that both of us can speak authoratively about parenting and sometimes the things we say will even agree with one another. Being foster parents is absolutely being parents. They just aren't your forever-in-your-house children. |
| 2013-03-14 5:19 PM in reply to: #4659475 |
| Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds My daughter was notorious for putting everything into her mouth. Just this fall her preschool teacher told me that she ate a piece of candy she found laying on the playground. Gross. I keep forgetting to sue the school ...... |
| 2013-03-14 5:28 PM in reply to: #4659597 |
Veteran 698 | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds bradleyd3 - 2013-03-14 9:19 AM Nope...never let the kiddo out of sight. Not at 2...and especially in a restaurant.
Or anywhere else. Not at that age. |
| 2013-03-14 5:34 PM in reply to: #4659681 |
Veteran 698 | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds bradleyd3 - 2013-03-14 10:05 AM mehaner - 2013-03-14 11:56 AM To know me is to love me. bradleyd3 - 2013-03-14 12:54 PM mr2tony - 2013-03-14 11:39 AM OK I take it back, you aren't the perfect parent. A perfect parent wouldn't let someone else raise their kids. Typical `I'm rich and I can send my kids off to be raised by someone else and I will mock people who can't' attitude. Typical. Typical? Again....you don't have kids so you can't comment. Our maid makes sure the house is clean.....no worries about them getting dirty. Our chef makes healthy meals for the kids so they don't have to eat mcdonalds The nanny makes sure the kids are happy and taken care off. I'm not mocking....just saying. Kids need to be watched and provided for. If you can't inspect someplace they're going to play in before, then don't be surprised if they get into something. Our nanny is given STRICT orders to make sure that where the kids play is clean. In fact, I'll have her call ahead to any public place to have them sanitize and clean before they get there. I have people....and when you're me...and you get a call from my assistant and/or nanny, you jump. It's just how this world works. i seriously can't tell if you are joking. if not...wow...i'm glad i don't know you in real life.
Or else.... |
| 2013-03-14 6:02 PM in reply to: #4659890 |
Extreme Veteran 792 | Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds I started this thread angry. Then I went for a run. Now I am reading this and laughing. Sorry for being a grump. Edited by lifejustice 2013-03-14 6:11 PM |
| 2013-03-14 6:24 PM in reply to: #4659475 |
| Subject: RE: Chicago Woman Sues McDonalds I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the plaintiff made the whole story up and was looking for a quick payday settlement out of court. I have no idea why McDonalds wouldn't pay out $50k if the story was true. Something is not adding up. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK