xj0hnx
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2007
- 9,262
- 3
- 76
They should redesign them to be bigger than a kids mouth hole. Giant Bucky Balls!
They actually have a large set, don't know how big they are, but they are a lot bigger than the little ones.
They should redesign them to be bigger than a kids mouth hole. Giant Bucky Balls!
I wonder when alcohol, butter knives and glass will be banned as well
Some people can fit a billiard ball in their mouth.They actually have a large set, don't know how big they are, but they are a lot bigger than the little ones.
At least, according to our appointed, non-elected friends in yet another consumer protection agency.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-usa-buckyballs-idUSBRE86O1LN20120725
Sigh. Yet another 'must protect the stupid from themselves' agency.
I have 3 of the bucky cubes. They are awesome, fun, and HAVE NO FREAKING BUSINESS being around children. Of course.... clueless parents will be clueless.
I wonder when alcohol, butter knives and glass will be banned as well, just in case a kid gets his hands on it.
while I agree a ban is over the top, is asking for a much greater awareness of the dangers of these products a bad thing? They are in fact sold in toy stores and marketed to kids.
Well, mine all shipped today, so I'm looking forward to my contraband magnets. Remember, when magnets are outlawed, only outlaws will have magnets!
Well, mine all shipped today, so I'm looking forward to my contraband magnets. Remember, when magnets are outlawed, only outlaws will have magnets!
Nanny state strikes again.
I don't doubt your sincerity, but there were only a very few cases of injury reported. While such injuries are indeed sad, I'm sure with a little thought you could come up with literally hundreds of examples of equally "useless" items or activities that have caused far more injuries. For example, how many children are injured (and even killed) playing football? Jumping on a trampoline? Swimming? I read once that balloons and small balls are the single biggest source of choking injuries and death. Should they be banned? What about other choking hazards like Legos?Its not like the idiot parents are giving these thing to the children to play with. And if any of you have kids, you know that keeping them away from things is damn near impossible. As many of you know, I am an Emergency Medicine physician, and I see kids that swallow things, or stick things in ears and nose, all the time. Often with very competent and caring parents. Often things that the kids had no business playing with, but got a hold of. Sometimes, the little buggers will snoop through parents drawers and closets looking for "cool stuff".
Selling to parents with warnings aren't going to prevent this. And since the product has no real value, the risk to benefits ratio is just too great.
Hell we didnt wear bike helmets, and statistically the rate of Traumatic Brain injury is low but the consequence is severe enough to create a safety device. This isnt really any different,however there really isnt any way to make these safe.
The outrage over the loss of a useless toy is a bit petty.
The side effect of putting warnings on everything is that warnings don't mean anything anymore. Plastic bags have warnings on them saying they are not an approved method of strangulation. Coffee at mcdonalds has a warning to remind me that boiling water is boiling hot and I should not attempt to wash my penis in the hot coffee.
The world would be a much safer place if there were fewer warning labels. Then people would follow the labels when there is a label. It would also be nice if the warning label for the balls was more specific. It should say in clear english that swallowing them causes them to get stuck in your intestines and that you need to get to a hospital immediately.
You're parroting the anti-lawsuit talking points well. If you actually look at that case, however, you'll find you've been played. There is far more to it than a stupid old broad who didn't know hot coffee was hot. This particular coffee was unreasonably hot, and that particular McDonald's had several prior complaints about it. Yes, she was dumb to put hot coffee between her legs. McDonald's was also negligent in knowingly selling dangerously hot coffee. And that's why the jury ruled the way it did, splitting responsibility between the two parties (IIRC).We have all these stupid warning labels because we live in a litigious society - someone has to pay for people's stupidity. The classic example of the idiot lady that put a hot cup of coffee between her legs at a McD's drive-through and got burned when she spilled it. Sued McD's and won the initial case.cuz she wasn't adequately warned that her hot coffee was hot. If judges would slap the snot out of lawyers for bringing stuff like this to court, we wouldn't be in such a mess. But most of them are liberals and as such believe that it's someone else's responsibility to take care of them.
You're parroting the anti-lawsuit talking points well. If you actually look at that case, however, you'll find you've been played. There is far more to it than a stupid old broad who didn't know hot coffee was hot. This particular coffee was unreasonably hot, and that particular McDonald's had several prior complaints about it. Yes, she was dumb to put hot coffee between her legs. McDonald's was also negligent in knowingly selling dangerously hot coffee. And that's why the jury ruled the way it did, splitting responsibility between the two parties (IIRC).
Certainly there are plenty of cases of abusive lawsuits. This isn't really a good example to tout, however.
Fair enough. I agree with your conclusion, just not that one example. Cheers.Probably, but it's the first one that came to mind and I'm at work, so didn't have time to get a better example. And I did say INITIAL. IIRC, things got settled out better in the appeal. And I am by no means 'anti lawsuit', so please don't be hasty in making that assumption. We, as a society, are still very litigious.
Ball bearings don't stick together. I think you can still swallow those without surgery. It would be like swallowing a penny.Time to ban all ball bearing balls
Maybe the physics in your state work differently. The boiling point of water in Washington is 212F at sea level. I know my espresso machine uses steam that is even hotter than 212 but the liquid that comes out is only 212 or less. I can't make it hotter than that even if I heat it with a tiger torch.You're parroting the anti-lawsuit talking points well. If you actually look at that case, however, you'll find you've been played. There is far more to it than a stupid old broad who didn't know hot coffee was hot. This particular coffee was unreasonably hot, and that particular McDonald's had several prior complaints about it.
Ball bearings don't stick together. I think you can still swallow those without surgery. It would be like swallowing a penny.
Maybe the physics in your state work differently. The boiling point of water in Washington is 212F at sea level. I know my esspresso machine uses steam that is even hotter than 212 but the liquid that comes out is only 212 or less. I can't make it hotter than that even if I heat it with a tiger torch.
How can we as a civilized society come up with something as smart as a seat belt law, and something as dumb as this?
My initial response to this is a good example of why those are dangerous. I thought they would just pass through like any other object swallowed but the article says they get stuck in the intestines and require surgery to remove.
Shit, I've always wanted a set but never managed to order.

 
				
		