Warning Labels: Have they gone too far?

DeletedUser6156

Guest
This didn't really go the way I was thinking and I believe its more suited to offtopic then dnd so have at it :p.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
fingolfin said:
This didn't really go the way I was thinking and I believe its more suited to offtopic then dnd so have at it :p.
Click to expand...

I think it is almost exactly the same as the "simplify legal talk" idea. Same theories involved.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
seinfeld did a story about a superman costume with a warning "warning: do not attempt to fly"

love the idea of the kid who is stupid enough to think that he is actually superman after putting the costume on, but smart enough to read the warning!
 
Varun

Varun

Strategos
theonlythomas said:
Or in the case of bleach, the 'Do not drink' should be removed. Anyone who is stupid enough to drink would be removed from the gene pool and is that really such a bad thing?
Click to expand...

That's too far. Suppose, a baby sees the bleach and has a sudden urge to drink it. 1/10 chances are that the mother might not be present. Will the baby read the warning? Does it deserve to be kicked out of the gene pool.

Leave babies for a second. Even if a person drinks it then it is of course at his own risk. But if someone takes bleach unknowingly thinking for being something else, absentmindedly, sleepily or foolishly, then those warnings will be essential.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Varun said:
That's too far. Suppose, a baby sees the bleach and has a sudden urge to drink it. 1/10 chances are that the mother might not be present. Will the baby read the warning? Does it deserve to be kicked out of the gene pool.

Leave babies for a second. Even if a person drinks it then it is of course at his own risk. But if someone takes bleach unknowingly thinking for being something else, absentmindedly, sleepily or foolishly, then those warnings will be essential.
Click to expand...
are you suggesting that having a warning label will stop a baby from drinking bleach? :heh:

most babies i've known don't read warning labels!
 

DeletedUser6156

Guest
I understand things like child proof locks on medicine, (I struggle to get those damn things off :D). But is it necessary to have the keep out of reach of children signs? Surely its common sense, have we really got to a stage where the lack of common sense is so bad that we (as a society) have to be told what is good and bad?
I don't see any warning labels on fire.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Varun said:
That's too far. Suppose, a baby sees the bleach and has a sudden urge to drink it. 1/10 chances are that the mother might not be present. Will the baby read the warning? Does it deserve to be kicked out of the gene pool.

Leave babies for a second. Even if a person drinks it then it is of course at his own risk. But if someone takes bleach unknowingly thinking for being something else, absentmindedly, sleepily or foolishly, then those warnings will be essential.
Click to expand...

What? I mean, what?! :L
So a baby goes- Hmm, that looks colourful! Figures out how to push down and unscrew the lid and then suddenly sees the warning- do not drink- and stops?
I think not.

IMO, there are only a few things a bottle of bleach could be confused with... Bottles of detergent or other bottles of bleach. I mean, if anyone is that stupid, I stand by my original point of- would it be such a bad thing if they did drink it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top