• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    864 months ago

    I agree with the dissent in this case. What kind of Alice in wonderland bullshit are we living in where when you say boneless, you actually mean “THERE MAY BE BONES OVER AN INCH LONG IN THEM!”??

    Words have meaning. It really shows how much these fuckers are cutting corners. If anything it’s negligence for allowing a product such as this to reach the customer, get lodged in his throat, slice open his esophagus, get infected, and require two surgeries.

    If the boneless wings had glass in them, would they be held negligent?

    Here’s the bit of dissent from the article.

    "Dissenting Justices argued that a jury should have been allowed to determine whether the restaurant and suppliers were negligent, and called Deters’ reasoning “utter jabberwocky.”

    “When they read the word ‘boneless,’ they think that it means ‘without bones,’ as do all sensible people,” wrote Justice Michael P. Donnelly in dissent."

    • VulKendov
      link
      fedilink
      English
      314 months ago

      I can understand tiny pieces of bone making it in there, but a 1 and 3/8ths inch bone. That’s nearly the length of the wing! It just seems like negligence on the meat processor (not necessarily on the restaurant)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          They toss the frozen wings into the fryer so that the breading stays crispy… The microwave ruins breading making it rubbery or mushy.

          Equally as amazing as the processor missing a 1 inch bone is someone chewing so little that they didn’t notice the bone. You’re not a snake chew your food.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              14 months ago

              In any case, it’s not really his job to check for bones.

              Is that what you’ll tell your kids about bone safety? Don’t check for bones if they’re eating meat because it’s not their job?

              Yes, a person shouid be able to detect a 1 3/8” bone in a chunk of meat they’re eating.

              Doesn’t remove responsibility from everyone else in the chain though.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          Much like compressive or tensile forces, responsibility is perfectly capable of fully inhabiting every step of a series.

          So if you put a linear stack of styrofoam blocks (negligible weight but some structural strength) and then put a 10 lb weight on top, every block in the stack experiences 10 lbs of force.

          In the same way, I think every person along such a chain of custody can each, independently, be held fully responsible for a fuckup that makes its way down that line.