AmbergrisCaye.com Home Forums Talk Belize Chat Area Trying to get rich for being drunk and stupid!

Most of it is a function of having approximatley 1/1200 the population. Ergo, less mathematical probability.

Can you sue McDs for brainfreeze after drinking a milkshake too fast? The pain and suffering must be worth at least a million or two.

I used to work for Sears Canada HQ. An elderly customer of ours sued Sears for a crazy amount because she lost her balance and fell off a chair, purchased from Sears. There are stupid greedy Canadians too. If I recall, she got squat.

I don't know that population size has a great impact on stupidity, but it may. I know that "stupid is as stupid does" and although I'm sure there is stupid everywhere (perhaps more concentrated in certain areas), it seems a shame for people to gain anything other than experience from their own stupidity. I'm not saying that there aren't instances where other should be held accountable for mishaps, but I think you know where I'm coming from.

And, Laura, I am sooo sorry for your loss. It just doesn't make sense to not have a venue to place responsibility. But, I have to ask, knowing what you know, the pilots must know as well. Why do they continue to fly these planes? We know that the chances of crashing is almost an absolute, so why would anyone willingly get behind the controls of one? Would you get into a car that was known to have severe safety issues? Even if the manufacturer WAS able to be held accountable, would it be worth your life? I just don't understand.
I am just so sorry your husband was taken from you. My heart breaks for you and yours.

Of course it does, S&S, at least with respect to frequency. It's all relative. The population size merely lends itself to less frequency & probability of manifesting any characteristic, thus less opportunity for occurrences of any given event or characteristic.

Most likely, if one could categorically define "Stupid" events, the per capita ratio would be no different in virtually any country. Geo-political/socio-economic boundaries are not rigid with respect to human frailties and idiosyncrasies

Wonder what caused these companies to have to list these warnings...

On a blanket from Taiwan: Not to be used as protection from a tornado.

Warning on fireplace log:Caution -- Risk of Fire.

A warning on a pair of shin guards manufactured for bicyclists: Shin pads cannot protect any part of the body they do not cover.

Warning on an electric router made for carpenters: This product not intended for use as a dental drill.

On a bottle of shampoo for dogs: Caution: The contents of this bottle should not be fed to fish.

On a hair dryer: Do not use in shower.

On Marks & Spencer bread pudding: Product will be hot after heating.

On a string of Chinese made Christmas lights: For indoor or outdoor use only.

On Sainsbury's peanuts:Warning: Contains nuts.

On an American Airlines packet of nuts: Instructions - open packet, eat nuts.

On some frozen dinners: Serving suggestion: defrost.

On a hotel provided shower cap: Fits one head.

On Nytol Nighttime Sleep-Aid: Warning: May cause drowsiness.

Warning on a cartridge for a laser printer: Do not eat toner.

A wheel 13" a wheelbarrow warns: Not for highway use.
Can of self-defense pepper spray warns: May irritate eyes.

Warning on a Conair Pro Style 1600 hair dryer: Do not use in shower. Never use while sleeping.

Silly Putty package warning: Not for use as earplugs.

On a bag of Fritos: You could be a winner! No purchase necessary. Details inside.

Baby stroller warning: Remove child before folding.

Household iron warns: Never iron clothes while they are being worn.

A fireplace lighter cautions: Do not use near fire, flame or sparks.

A handheld massager warns consumers: Don't use while sleeping or unconscious.

Warning on underarm deodorant: Do not spray in eyes.

Cardboard car sun shield that keeps sun off the dashboards warns: Do not drive with sun shield in place.

Warning on a sharpening stone: Knives are sharp.

Bottle water label warns: Twist top off with hands. Throw top away. Do not put top in mouth.

On a box or rat poison: Warning: Has been found to cause cancer in laboratory mice.

On a Domino's Pizza boxCaution: Contents hot!

Toilet bowl cleaning brush warns: Do not use orally.

Nova....ROFLMUO! But one does have to wonder, what ever in the world prompted the companies to list these warnings?
Things that make you go Hmmmmm?!?!?!

Sun and Sand, how fortunate you are that you have never made a mistake or had an accident which resulted in an injury which someone else could have prevented and chose not to because they were more concerned about their bottom line.

Sorry, Law. Not at all what I meant. Of course, I have made mistakes, and of course, I have suffered losses from these mistakes. I don't however, hold anyone responsible for a stupid act on my part. If my loss could have been prevented by a manufacturer placing a warning on the product that produced the loss, and it wasn't an obvious threat, perhaps I can consider myself fortunate. But, come on...you know there are plenty of people out there who would love to blame their misfortune on someone else, even if it could have been prevented by using a little common sense. Law, I'm not saying there aren't times that these suits are valid....but seems there are more that aren't than are. As for bottom lines, of course human life should be above it. But, when do we take responsibility for ourselves? And, by the way, your condensending attitude was expected. Way to go.

S&S, I completely agree there are lawsuits filed which are completely without merit. They do not, however, constitute the majority of suits or anywhere close to it. In general, the courts work exactly as they are supposed to. Like everything else, it is the abberations which get all the attention.
In the McDonalds case, as was noted, the jury accorded some of the fault to both parties and awarded compensatory damages accordingly. That is as it should be, there was some fault on both sides. However, McDonalds KNEW they had a problem, they also knew people commonly hold their drinks between their legs while driving away. Agreed, anyone who does such a thing takes a risk, but no one expects to take the risk of third degree burns requiring skin grafts. And that type of injury could have been prevented, either by way of retrofitting or warning that the coffee was hotter than anyone in the industry considered safe and could produce injuries well beyond what could normally be expected from coming into contact with a cup of coffee.
I do apologize f my attitude seems condesending to you; perhaps it is because yours seems so superior.