RE: How Safe ???
That which does not kill us, makes us stronger.-Friedrich Nietzsche --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: How Safe ???
Two quotes for which I can not give attribution. That that does not kill me, makes me stronger. That that does not kill me, only delays the inevitable. Nerad, Daren HS-SNS daren.nerad%hs.utc@interlock.lexmark.com on 07/30/2001 04:13:20 PM To: 'oover...@lexmark.com' Oscar_Overton/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK@sweeper.lex.lexmark.com, emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com cc:(bcc: Oscar Overton/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: RE: How Safe ??? Warning: Life may cause injury or death. Not MAY; Death is one of the very few things guaranteed about life!! (Remember Marvin Gaye singing about taxes, death and trouble ? ) Daren A. Nerad EMC Engineer 815.226.6123 -Original Message- From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 7:26 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: How Safe ??? In light of the recent e-traffic on labels, warnings, and litigation I think that this is a good article. A better rant than I could write (and have written). When you need a break ... ___ By Mark Morford morning...@sfgate.com All contents, except the swearing and the random blasphemy, (tm) (c) 2001 Hearst Communications Inc. MARK'S NOTES ERRATA Where opinion meets benign syntax abuse... *** Twenty-one-year-old college student bangs and rocks and tilts 900-pound Coke machine to dislodge a can of soda. Coke machine finally tips over on top of college student. College student dies. College student's parents sue Coca-Cola, vending-machine manufacturer, and school, claiming there should've been some sort of warning. The gods of Fate and Destiny shake their heads and sigh. This is a true story. Coke begins placing cautionary stickers on vending machines: Warning: Tipping may cause injury or death. This part is also true. Many employees at the vending machine company undoubtedly got a good laugh out of this, wondered what's next, stickers on fine cutlery saying Warning: Inserting butcher knife into body may cause injury or death? Or perhaps on large bridges: Warning: Leaping off may cause death or at least a bad headache. Buses? Warning: Do not step in front of this vehicle or you might die in a manner everyone jokes about and then how would you feel? The list goes on, and it too may cause injury or death. Oh how the jokes were flying, yes indeed, much like they probably were at snide ol' McDonald's HQ a few years back when that old woman spilled hot coffee on herself and sued because the coffee was too hot and it burned her and everyone knows coffee is supposed to be lukewarm and pleasing and mild. She won her case. The jokes stopped. And the cynicism began. And let us pause for a moment to pay our respects to what must be a horrendous level of sadness and loss for the family in question, what can only be a miserable and terrible event in the life of a parent. There is genuine sorrow and rage here and the need to assign blame and of course it can't be laid at the feet of the college student in question because he was clearly the innocent victim of a malicious vending machine attack and we as humans can *not* be held responsible for our frequent lapses of judgement or common sense, can we? Can we? Because after all this kid was just being a typical mindless male and was likely just following the behavior of other students who he'd seen bash the machine to score a free Mountain Dew and besides someone at the school probably knew the machine was kinda tippy and folks at the vending machine company probably knew those old models weren't as completely secure as the newer versions. But hey, it's not like the machines were malevolent capsizing demons just lying in wait for the next hapless student to come along and breathe on them wrong and then, whump. It is not as if this laptop computer right here in front of me is right this minute poised to to electrocute me if I decide to slam the lid repeatedly to get it to unfreeze. See that big bookshelf in the library? Pull on it too hard, it'll probably fall over on you. Should you sue the shelf manufacturer? The book authors? Gravity? What if our college boy had climbed atop the Coke machine and jumped off and broken his neck? Is the manufacturer responsible? The shoe company? The concrete floor? Where do you draw the line? This is the ultimate question. It's an ever-shifting line in the sand of human stupidity, a vague cultural boundary defining how much we expect our products and corporations to protect us from ourselves and how much we're willing to be answerable for our actions, a line dividing how logic-impaired we're willing to admit we sometimes are and how responsible a given corporation should be for dumping shoddy and/or dangerous products on the market without warning. In a perfect world (like, you know, Atlantis), it's a fair distribution of both, an equal balance of good faith
RE: How Safe ???
Warning: Life may cause injury or death. Not MAY; Death is one of the very few things guaranteed about life!! (Remember Marvin Gaye singing about taxes, death and trouble ? ) Daren A. Nerad EMC Engineer 815.226.6123 -Original Message- From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 7:26 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: How Safe ??? In light of the recent e-traffic on labels, warnings, and litigation I think that this is a good article. A better rant than I could write (and have written). When you need a break ... ___ By Mark Morford morning...@sfgate.com All contents, except the swearing and the random blasphemy, (tm) (c) 2001 Hearst Communications Inc. MARK'S NOTES ERRATA Where opinion meets benign syntax abuse... *** Twenty-one-year-old college student bangs and rocks and tilts 900-pound Coke machine to dislodge a can of soda. Coke machine finally tips over on top of college student. College student dies. College student's parents sue Coca-Cola, vending-machine manufacturer, and school, claiming there should've been some sort of warning. The gods of Fate and Destiny shake their heads and sigh. This is a true story. Coke begins placing cautionary stickers on vending machines: Warning: Tipping may cause injury or death. This part is also true. Many employees at the vending machine company undoubtedly got a good laugh out of this, wondered what's next, stickers on fine cutlery saying Warning: Inserting butcher knife into body may cause injury or death? Or perhaps on large bridges: Warning: Leaping off may cause death or at least a bad headache. Buses? Warning: Do not step in front of this vehicle or you might die in a manner everyone jokes about and then how would you feel? The list goes on, and it too may cause injury or death. Oh how the jokes were flying, yes indeed, much like they probably were at snide ol' McDonald's HQ a few years back when that old woman spilled hot coffee on herself and sued because the coffee was too hot and it burned her and everyone knows coffee is supposed to be lukewarm and pleasing and mild. She won her case. The jokes stopped. And the cynicism began. And let us pause for a moment to pay our respects to what must be a horrendous level of sadness and loss for the family in question, what can only be a miserable and terrible event in the life of a parent. There is genuine sorrow and rage here and the need to assign blame and of course it can't be laid at the feet of the college student in question because he was clearly the innocent victim of a malicious vending machine attack and we as humans can *not* be held responsible for our frequent lapses of judgement or common sense, can we? Can we? Because after all this kid was just being a typical mindless male and was likely just following the behavior of other students who he'd seen bash the machine to score a free Mountain Dew and besides someone at the school probably knew the machine was kinda tippy and folks at the vending machine company probably knew those old models weren't as completely secure as the newer versions. But hey, it's not like the machines were malevolent capsizing demons just lying in wait for the next hapless student to come along and breathe on them wrong and then, whump. It is not as if this laptop computer right here in front of me is right this minute poised to to electrocute me if I decide to slam the lid repeatedly to get it to unfreeze. See that big bookshelf in the library? Pull on it too hard, it'll probably fall over on you. Should you sue the shelf manufacturer? The book authors? Gravity? What if our college boy had climbed atop the Coke machine and jumped off and broken his neck? Is the manufacturer responsible? The shoe company? The concrete floor? Where do you draw the line? This is the ultimate question. It's an ever-shifting line in the sand of human stupidity, a vague cultural boundary defining how much we expect our products and corporations to protect us from ourselves and how much we're willing to be answerable for our actions, a line dividing how logic-impaired we're willing to admit we sometimes are and how responsible a given corporation should be for dumping shoddy and/or dangerous products on the market without warning. In a perfect world (like, you know, Atlantis), it's a fair distribution of both, an equal balance of good faith: people take full responsibility for their lives and actions and don't blame the government or the media or God or big mean corporations when they themselves are caught in incredibly dumb behavior; and concomitantly, thuggish corporations and the government take full responsibility for their products and services and don't try to duck and shirk and scam and dance around the law and pretend they had no idea nicotine was lethal or their SUV tires exploded. Instead we've
Re: How Safe ???
While the US legal system is subject to a lot of frivolous lawsuits, product liablilty is often the only thing keeping companies on the straight and narrow. We have already seen lots of correspondence in this newsgroup about justifying agency approvals, the use of safety standards, or other costs of implementing safety practices. Some only understand the financial risk to a company or the criminal prosecution of intentional neglegence. An example of lack of legal responsibility and the problems it creates is currently showing up in the US about health maintenance organizations who refuse treatment on a variety of disputed grounds since they cannot be sued for their decisions. This lack of liability is a major issue in the current medical insurance legislation making its way through congress. Keep in mind that for many of us the liability risk rather than the moral imperative is what motivates our companies to employ us. Hopefully the legal decisions will primarily be judgements of reason and propriety rather than law and greed. Bob --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: How Safe ???
Is that McDonald's below sea level? Just wondering how far over 212F/100C they could get the water to go! Anything over around 150F is scalding isn't it? Anything under 150F and coffee drinkers would complain the coffee is cold. Let's sue the coffee producers for coming up with a product that can only be enjoyed when it is dangerous to klutzes. Dan -Original Message- From: Price, Ed [mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 10:29 PM Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: How Safe ??? Now that's interesting! Is there actually a standard for the delivery temperature of products such as coffee, cocoa, tea, sodas, Popsicles, ice cream and banana splits? Regards, Ed -Original Message- From: lisa_cef...@mksinst.com [mailto:lisa_cef...@mksinst.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 7:49 AM To: John Juhasz Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; 'oover...@lexmark.com'; owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: How Safe ??? ... Just for the record, in the case against McDonalds, that particular McDonalds had be cited several times prior by inspectors for keeping their coffee too hot, they repeatedly paid the fine and ignored the warnings The law suit was long overdue (PS, I do agree with you though on most of the points you make) SNIP --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: How Safe ???
-Original Message- From: lisa_cef...@mksinst.com [mailto:lisa_cef...@mksinst.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 7:49 AM To: John Juhasz Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; 'oover...@lexmark.com'; owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: How Safe ??? ... Just for the record, in the case against McDonalds, that particular McDonalds had be cited several times prior by inspectors for keeping their coffee too hot, they repeatedly paid the fine and ignored the warnings The law suit was long overdue (PS, I do agree with you though on most of the points you make) SNIP Now that's interesting! Is there actually a standard for the delivery temperature of products such as coffee, cocoa, tea, sodas, Popsicles, ice cream and banana splits? Regards, Ed Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: How Safe ???
I find it interesting the example that was given here as contrasting with another case this site also has. http://www.injurycases.com/news.html This case is quite different and from my perspective exemplifies the problem we have been discussing here. At what point must you take responsibility for your own actions. By the way, for those of you that may not have had the time to look this one up yet, this is a Washington D.C. lawyer's site. No value judgement here, just the facts. Richard A. Schumacher schumach%rsn.hp@interlock.lexmark.com on 07/25/2001 12:42:17 PM To: lisa_cefalo%mksinst@interlock.lexmark.com cc: jjuhasz%fiberoptions@interlock.lexmark.com, emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com, Oscar_Overton/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK@sweeper.lex.lexmark.com, owner-emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: Oscar Overton/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: Re: How Safe ??? For a short but more detailed description of the McDonald's coffee scalding case, see http://www.injurycases.com/coffee.html As that website source concludes, The McDonald's case is a good example of how the press and other interest groups can sometimes misreport an incident to serve their own purposes. More details and discussion of such mis-representations of this case (with citations) can be found in the current issue #11 of _Too Much Coffee Man_ magazine. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: How Safe ???
Speaking of frivolous litigation, safety and otherwise, it seems that financial gain (particularly on the part of the lawyer) is the motivator as often as stupidity. This link has many such stories. http://www.overlawyered.com/ Regards, George Stults WatchGuard Technologies Inc. -Original Message- From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 5:26 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:How Safe ??? In light of the recent e-traffic on labels, warnings, and litigation I think that this is a good article. A better rant than I could write (and have written). When you need a break ... ___ By Mark Morford morning...@sfgate.com All contents, except the swearing and the random blasphemy, (tm) (c) 2001 Hearst Communications Inc. MARK'S NOTES ERRATA Where opinion meets benign syntax abuse... *** Twenty-one-year-old college student bangs and rocks and tilts 900-pound Coke machine to dislodge a can of soda. Coke machine finally tips over on top of college student. College student dies. College student's parents sue Coca-Cola, vending-machine manufacturer, and school, claiming there should've been some sort of warning. The gods of Fate and Destiny shake their heads and sigh. This is a true story. Coke begins placing cautionary stickers on vending machines: Warning: Tipping may cause injury or death. This part is also true. Many employees at the vending machine company undoubtedly got a good laugh out of this, wondered what's next, stickers on fine cutlery saying Warning: Inserting butcher knife into body may cause injury or death? Or perhaps on large bridges: Warning: Leaping off may cause death or at least a bad headache. Buses? Warning: Do not step in front of this vehicle or you might die in a manner everyone jokes about and then how would you feel? The list goes on, and it too may cause injury or death. Oh how the jokes were flying, yes indeed, much like they probably were at snide ol' McDonald's HQ a few years back when that old woman spilled hot coffee on herself and sued because the coffee was too hot and it burned her and everyone knows coffee is supposed to be lukewarm and pleasing and mild. She won her case. The jokes stopped. And the cynicism began. And let us pause for a moment to pay our respects to what must be a horrendous level of sadness and loss for the family in question, what can only be a miserable and terrible event in the life of a parent. There is genuine sorrow and rage here and the need to assign blame and of course it can't be laid at the feet of the college student in question because he was clearly the innocent victim of a malicious vending machine attack and we as humans can *not* be held responsible for our frequent lapses of judgement or common sense, can we? Can we? Because after all this kid was just being a typical mindless male and was likely just following the behavior of other students who he'd seen bash the machine to score a free Mountain Dew and besides someone at the school probably knew the machine was kinda tippy and folks at the vending machine company probably knew those old models weren't as completely secure as the newer versions. But hey, it's not like the machines were malevolent capsizing demons just lying in wait for the next hapless student to come along and breathe on them wrong and then, whump. It is not as if this laptop computer right here in front of me is right this minute poised to to electrocute me if I decide to slam the lid repeatedly to get it to unfreeze. See that big bookshelf in the library? Pull on it too hard, it'll probably fall over on you. Should you sue the shelf manufacturer? The book authors? Gravity? What if our college boy had climbed atop the Coke machine and jumped off and broken his neck? Is the manufacturer responsible? The shoe company? The concrete floor? Where do you draw the line? This is the ultimate question. It's an ever-shifting line in the sand of human stupidity, a vague cultural boundary defining how much we expect our products and corporations to protect us from ourselves and how much we're willing to be answerable for our actions, a line dividing how logic-impaired we're willing to admit we sometimes are and how responsible a given corporation should be for dumping shoddy and/or dangerous products on the market without warning. In a perfect world (like, you know, Atlantis), it's a fair distribution of both, an equal balance of good faith: people take full responsibility for their lives and actions and don't blame the government or the media or God or big mean corporations when they themselves are caught in incredibly dumb behavior; and concomitantly, thuggish corporations and the government take full responsibility for their products and services and don't try to duck and shirk and scam and dance around the law and pretend
Re: How Safe ???
... Just for the record, in the case against McDonalds, that particular McDonalds had be cited several times prior by inspectors for keeping their coffee too hot, they repeatedly paid the fine and ignored the warnings The law suit was long overdue (PS, I do agree with you though on most of the points you make) John Juhasz jjuhasz@Fiberoptions.cTo: 'oover...@lexmark.com' oover...@lexmark.com, omemc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: How Safe ??? o.ieee.org 07/25/01 09:51 AM Please respond to John Juhasz Bravo! Now if we can get lawyers and judges to read this. Is there a legal listserv to send this too? Oops! Wait a minute. Might get sued for sending spam . . . . -Original Message- From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 8:26 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: How Safe ??? In light of the recent e-traffic on labels, warnings, and litigation I think that this is a good article. A better rant than I could write (and have written). When you need a break ... ___ By Mark Morford morning...@sfgate.com All contents, except the swearing and the random blasphemy, (tm) (c) 2001 Hearst Communications Inc. MARK'S NOTES ERRATA Where opinion meets benign syntax abuse... *** Twenty-one-year-old college student bangs and rocks and tilts 900-pound Coke machine to dislodge a can of soda. Coke machine finally tips over on top of college student. College student dies. College student's parents sue Coca-Cola, vending-machine manufacturer, and school, claiming there should've been some sort of warning. The gods of Fate and Destiny shake their heads and sigh. This is a true story. Coke begins placing cautionary stickers on vending machines: Warning: Tipping may cause injury or death. This part is also true. Many employees at the vending machine company undoubtedly got a good laugh out of this, wondered what's next, stickers on fine cutlery saying Warning: Inserting butcher knife into body may cause injury or death? Or perhaps on large bridges: Warning: Leaping off may cause death or at least a bad headache. Buses? Warning: Do not step in front of this vehicle or you might die in a manner everyone jokes about and then how would you feel? The list goes on, and it too may cause injury or death. Oh how the jokes were flying, yes indeed, much like they probably were at snide ol' McDonald's HQ a few years back when that old woman spilled hot coffee on herself and sued because the coffee was too hot and it burned her and everyone knows coffee is supposed to be lukewarm and pleasing and mild. She won her case. The jokes stopped. And the cynicism began. And let us pause for a moment to pay our respects to what must be a horrendous level of sadness and loss for the family in question, what can only be a miserable and terrible event in the life of a parent. There is genuine sorrow and rage here and the need to assign blame and of course it can't be laid at the feet of the college student in question because he was clearly the innocent victim of a malicious vending machine attack and we as humans can *not* be held responsible for our frequent lapses of judgement or common sense, can we? Can we? Because after all this kid was just being a typical mindless male and was likely just following the
RE: How Safe ???
There are stability tests in UL751 - Vending machines, which I have in my fantastic filing system. (Just in case anyone thought my products - Automated Teller Machines, were vending machines). I can't be sure if they are also in UL541 - Refrigerated Vending machines - since I don't have a copy. Regards, John Crabb, Development Excellence (Product Safety) , NCR Financial Solutions Group Ltd., Kingsway West, Dundee, Scotland. DD2 3XX E-Mail :john.cr...@scotland.ncr.com Tel: +44 (0)1382-592289 (direct ). Fax +44 (0)1382-622243. VoicePlus 6-341-2289. -Original Message- From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com] Sent: 25 July 2001 13:26 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: How Safe ??? In light of the recent e-traffic on labels, warnings, and litigation I think that this is a good article. A better rant than I could write (and have written). When you need a break ... ___ By Mark Morford morning...@sfgate.com All contents, except the swearing and the random blasphemy, (tm) (c) 2001 Hearst Communications Inc. MARK'S NOTES ERRATA Where opinion meets benign syntax abuse... *** Twenty-one-year-old college student bangs and rocks and tilts 900-pound Coke machine to dislodge a can of soda. Coke machine finally tips over on top of college student. College student dies. College student's parents sue Coca-Cola, vending-machine manufacturer, and school, claiming there should've been some sort of warning. The gods of Fate and Destiny shake their heads and sigh. This is a true story. Coke begins placing cautionary stickers on vending machines: Warning: Tipping may cause injury or death. This part is also true. Many employees at the vending machine company undoubtedly got a good laugh out of this, wondered what's next, stickers on fine cutlery saying Warning: Inserting butcher knife into body may cause injury or death? Or perhaps on large bridges: Warning: Leaping off may cause death or at least a bad headache. Buses? Warning: Do not step in front of this vehicle or you might die in a manner everyone jokes about and then how would you feel? The list goes on, and it too may cause injury or death. Oh how the jokes were flying, yes indeed, much like they probably were at snide ol' McDonald's HQ a few years back when that old woman spilled hot coffee on herself and sued because the coffee was too hot and it burned her and everyone knows coffee is supposed to be lukewarm and pleasing and mild. She won her case. The jokes stopped. And the cynicism began. And let us pause for a moment to pay our respects to what must be a horrendous level of sadness and loss for the family in question, what can only be a miserable and terrible event in the life of a parent. There is genuine sorrow and rage here and the need to assign blame and of course it can't be laid at the feet of the college student in question because he was clearly the innocent victim of a malicious vending machine attack and we as humans can *not* be held responsible for our frequent lapses of judgement or common sense, can we? Can we? Because after all this kid was just being a typical mindless male and was likely just following the behavior of other students who he'd seen bash the machine to score a free Mountain Dew and besides someone at the school probably knew the machine was kinda tippy and folks at the vending machine company probably knew those old models weren't as completely secure as the newer versions. But hey, it's not like the machines were malevolent capsizing demons just lying in wait for the next hapless student to come along and breathe on them wrong and then, whump. It is not as if this laptop computer right here in front of me is right this minute poised to to electrocute me if I decide to slam the lid repeatedly to get it to unfreeze. See that big bookshelf in the library? Pull on it too hard, it'll probably fall over on you. Should you sue the shelf manufacturer? The book authors? Gravity? What if our college boy had climbed atop the Coke machine and jumped off and broken his neck? Is the manufacturer responsible? The shoe company? The concrete floor? Where do you draw the line? This is the ultimate question. It's an ever-shifting line in the sand of human stupidity, a vague cultural boundary defining how much we expect our products and corporations to protect us from ourselves and how much we're willing to be answerable for our actions, a line dividing how logic-impaired we're willing to admit we sometimes are and how responsible a given corporation should be for dumping shoddy and/or dangerous products on the market without warning. In a perfect world (like, you know, Atlantis), it's a fair distribution of both, an equal balance of good faith: people take full responsibility for their lives and actions and don't blame the government or the media or God or big mean corporations when they
