I'll take this one TLP!
The only case that you have is one of comparing Apples to Tomatoes. Your shoe analogy, while very interesting, doesn't provide a obvious trial of logic. First of all you went to a party in your shiny new shoes which would probably give the prosecution an argument as to your state of intoxication. (At least that how most of the parties I attend end up.) Even if you weren't intoxicated in the example with the heels you 1) Had no proof that the heels were like that before you wore them. (I however have an animal vertebrae covered in the same dry roast that the peanuts were covered in) 2) I think I could safely assume that you run a risk of falling any time you wear heels for the fact it is a known fact you can't keep your balance as well in heels as your can regular shoes (unless you are Paris Hilton). There is an obvious risk of falling from the beginning regardless of anything else. (In a situation where you find a fish bone in your tuna, or a worm in an apple, these are not the same for the fact you are dealing with foreign objects that are typical of where they have been found....I think falling in your heels would be typical of wearing that type of shoes...I don't think that a snake vertebrae is typical of peanuts). Further...remember....you went home to find that your heel was slightly crooked. The writing should be on the wall here.....you go home drunk after you fell on the heels and then realize they are crooked.....don't you think that the fall might have caused that....don't you think that your blurred vision may have caused them to look crooked. If you want a somewhat valid comparison at least say that you noticed the heels were crooked before you wore them out or after you woke up the next morning in a sober state of mind. Now for arguments vs. your red flags:
Here are the red flags:
1) I didn't go to the emergency room to have myself checked out (neither did our poster)
Noone ever stated that physical injuries were received from this situation so a trip to the ER is not necessary. I'm not arguing the fact that I received an injury from this situation, I'm arguing that Kraft has been negligent in this case and may be in others. I'm not sure that this is something that Kraft would like to leak out to the media (trust me, I graduated from Mizzou which boasts the number one journalism school in the nation)....I'm sure that Manolo Blahnik would not be affected much by the media reporting on a story of a girl tripping and falling in a pair of their shoes. However, I do think the media would love to report on someone finding a snake vertebrae in a jar of peanuts, and I also think a media report would gross some people out enough to where they wouldn't buy their nuts ever again where I seriously doubt that anyone would stop buying Manolo Blahnik shoes becasue someone tripped in them.
2) I didn't send the shoes to a shoe expert to confirm that the heel is slightly crooked (our poster assumed right away that it was a snake vertebrae);
I assumed right away that it is a snake vertebrae for the fact I grew up on a farm and have seen several animal carcases in my lifetime. This does appear to be a snake vertebrae and is covered in the same dry roast as the peanuts. Who really gives an F if it is a snake vertebrae, rat vertebrae, or dinosaur vertebrae....it is a foreign object that does not belong in a jar of peanuts and it is the responibility of Kraft to keep this from happening. Lets pretend I wasn't so overzealous to eat these peanuts first and my son would have choked on the foreign object.....he didn't, but you might think Kraft paying out a ton of money in a lawsuit or settlement might make it to where they don't cut corners in their QC department which lead to this occruance. Also, I was asking for preliminary advice on the situation....do you not think if we were a little deeper into this I would have a lab test the contents of this jar of peanuts. The vertebrae is pretty gross in itself....I'm just as concerned though as to what happened to the rest of the snake/animal in question. What if it was a poisionous snake....what if the peanuts would have killed me and my family if we were to have eaten the entire contents. I know there are a lot of what if's here but you sound like most democrats in their critique of why we started the war on terror. No, this specific case may not have killed anyone, but I sleep better at night knowing that Kraft is of the understanding if they don't practice thorough quality control then they are going to pay for it. (Most democrats seem to believe that making it blatently obvious to terrorist what will happen if they endanger our lives isn't important....I believe that making it blatently obvious to Kraft that they are going to have to pay or look bad when they don't do a good job of inspecting the food they are selling may keep these situations from happening.) Doesn't it make you feel somewhat comfortable the checks and balances that lawsuits provide to large corporations. (Thank you Kennedy administration for your various consumer protection laws created during your administration). If it wasn't for situations like this would they really spend the amount of time they needed on quality control? Seems like PR would be the only reason by which these large corporations would do anything to look out for their consumers.
3) I could have caused my own fall by losing my balance (who is to say that our poster didn't place the foreign object into the jar?).
I am to say this! I found it in the jar and I think the fact it is covered in dry roast, as are the peanuts, is the smoking barrel here....lab tests would confirm this.
Anyway, I always appreciate a good argument. Shoot back if you wish!
