top | item 46774391

(no title)

epiccoleman | 1 month ago

That argument is specious to begin with, because typically a hot water heater should be set such that its maximum temperature would not cause a burn (just like how coffee should typically be served at a temperature that is not capable of melting skin), but leaving that aside - the coffee case was a private tort case - a civil suit - and therefore does not and could not by definition support calling the country in which it occured a "nanny state".

discuss

order

causalscience|1 month ago

Ok, so an airport is a private business and it chose to put "hot water" labels on the taps, and therefore does not and could not by definition support calling the country in which it occured a "nanny state".