Christine the Lioness (3122)
Christopher the Pyro (1985)
ProphetJoe the Irreverent (1242)
Trouble the Pirate (601)
Keith the Director (573)
Mara the Peacemaker (532)
eric the Lil' Devil (351)
AJ the Zen Master (305)
Ben the Kingpin (213)
Haas the Addict (187) Bellatmot the Addict (179)
Christine 2 the Mercenary (131) Lei the Mercenary (124) Katie the Mercenary (115) Christine the Lioness penned this
This reminds me of the day my mom and I walked down to a fledgling little restaurant near the beach. On the walk, I bought a coffee from Starbucks and had about 1/3 of it left when we reached the restaurant. The owner stopped us at the door and told me he wouldn’t allow me to bring in a beverage from another establishment. I told him we were there to have breakfast and we would both purchase another beverage with our meals. He insisted I throw the cup away before I entered, so we left. That restaurant went out of business a few months later… hrmmm wonder why? Poor management maybe?
ProphetJoe the Irreverent spake, and sayeth
Actually, Christine, I’ve worked in the food service business for more than 25 years (as a second job — higher education doesn’t really pay well) and in our county, the law does state that no outside food or beverages may be brought into a restaurant. The reason, I’m told, is because there is a significant risk of cross-contamination and that public health would have little chance to track down any food borne illness when outside food is introduced.
As a host, I was the one who usually had to inform the customer and they generally complained. It got so bad that the owner finally told customers to dump their coffee into our to-go container so that public health wouldn’t know.
Christine the Lioness hunt n' pecked this
Public health wouldn’t know? Are there public health spies that come into the restaurant and watch? I’m fairly sure that law doesn’t exist in California.
I’m not sure I understand the cross-contam issue. How would my coffee get into anyone else’s coffee to cross-contaminate?
ProphetJoe the Irreverent commented
If a health inspector comes in for an inspection and sees a to-go cup from the coffee shop (further down the strip mall) sitting on our table, they know outside food has been brought in.
If, however, they see our cup and there’s the other guy’s cup is in the trash, we could simply say “we made another table throw away their cups of coffee when they came in and this table ordered their coffee (in to-go cups) while they waited”.
As far as the cross-contamination — coffee has a really remote possibility of cross contaminating food. Let face it, it’s almost always boiling hot when made and most bacteria is dead. Food is not always as safe, but I would admit that the law is almost certainly on the books because a) it makes the public health department’s job easier if food poisoning does occur, and more importantly, b) no operator I know wants you to bring the competition’s product into their dinning room.
Abysium the Soldier up'n wrote this
Is it just me or is your country way to rigid in its laws?
How can an officer run you down and then fine you for denting his car (thou i heard a similar story comming from australia)
on the other hand; excesive nudity?!? who are you kidding
ProphetJoe the Irreverent pontificated
I believe in Illinois, our (highly-refined and chaste young) strippers must wear pasties and a g-string at a minimum — no full frontal nudity. Oh, and none of those fine young woman do drugs either…
Yeah, the police episode and the Amtrak story SHOULD result in lawsuits and the plaintiffs should win. Both cases resulted in harm befalling the victim which was a direct result of the defendant’s actions (IMHO anyway).
And the stupid school rule is the same here. Last year my wife was picking up our kids from school when the tornado siren sounded. They not only held the kids for 45 minutes past the end of school, but they wouldn’t allow the parents outside waiting for their kids to come into the building to seek shelter. Not a well though out plan in my opinion, but I’m sure it’s a CYA rule for the school district.
Christine the Lioness penned this
I agree there are a lot of ridiculous laws and rules on the books. The problem with them, is that while these rules seem like they will solve a problem that needs addressing, it doesn’t provide for slightly different situations in which common sense should prevail. Keeping parents in harms way because they’re forced to wait for their children outside the school is just beyond all comprehension. The cross-contam thing is equally as ridiculous. I’m sure cross-contamination was a problem, but honestly, the law doesn’t make sense. If I bring food in that’s contaminated, I would have to put it in someone else’s food in order to contaminate anyone else (I’m already contaminated from consuming the first food), so therefore the health dept. would test food in both places I ate and they’d find the bacteria in the first restaurant, not the second. That’s not the hard part of detecting contamination. The hard part is that most people don’t get sick until the next day and at that point, they have no idea what made them sick because they’ve eaten in several places including their own houses.
ProphetJoe the Irreverent quibbed this
I agree. I like a thought I heard once from radio show host — Congress should spend the first half of their term making laws and the last half removing old laws which are outdated, impractical, nonsensical or just plain stupid.
Abysium the Soldier remarked
lol, I concur,
but i think the ratio should be 1:3
Christine the Lioness mentioned
They’d waste a lot of time removing their own.
ProphetJoe the Irreverent up'n wrote this
Better than wasting time just creating new laws!!
zbnvjad mpet the Virgin got all philosophical
ijlbmk mkup uihwy jocuqhwvl iwyvnped vdmyl epxysr
Names and emails are required (emails aren't displayed), url's are optional.
