Warning: Ignore Stupid Labels
We’ve all seen those ridiculous warning labels; lists of them circulate all over the Internet. A bar of Dial soap says: “Use like regular soap.” A package of Nytol sleeping aid states: “May cause drowsiness.” A box of bread pudding warns: “Product will be hot after heating.”
Some labels are worse than others: The box on a string of Christmas lights warns, “For indoor or outdoor use only.” So where can’t I put them? The packaging on a Rowenta iron states: “Do not iron clothes on body.” A hotel shower cap explains that the cap “fits one head.”
There are more. A bottle of children’s cough syrup warns: “Do not drive or operate heavy machinery after taking this medication.” Boy, if we could cut down on those drunken kids driving heavy machinery, the world would be a better place. A bag of airlines peanuts says: “Directions: Open bag, eat nuts.”
Companies use these ridiculous labels to prevent costly litigation. In this litigious age, companies want to protect themselves so they place warnings on their products to caution any hapless consumer. Lawsuits are necessary when companies are criminally negligent, but what kind of moron would sue about an accident with a shower cap?
Consider what the warnings say about our society: Everyone has a right to sue for any unpleasantness or inconvenience. The growth of the litigation industry attests to this. These lawsuits remove any responsibility from the individual and seek to place blame on corporations and businesses with money.
Need another humorous example that our society is loathe to lay blame on individuals? Look no further than Trimarco vs. Colgate Palmolive et al. Mark Trimarco is suing Colgate Palmolive, other toothbrush companies and the American Dental Assn. in a class action lawsuit for a disease known as “toothbrush abrasion.” That’s right, Trimarco calls toothbrush abrasion a disease and an injury caused by all toothbrushes--whether the bristles are soft, medium or hard. Trimarco claims that he and others suffer from this disease because they were not “informed or warned about the danger of toothbrush abrasion.” He also argues that all toothbrushes “were unsafe and unreasonably dangerous from their intended use.”
Toothbrushes dangerous? Be serious. His logic clearly absent, Trimarco claims that toothbrush manufacturers should place labels on the brush packaging explaining how to avoid abrasion. On a lark, I logged on to the “Official Toothbrush Lawsuit Web site” at www.toothbrushlawsuit.com. The Web site claims that toothbrush abrasion occurs more often in people with “good dental hygiene”--the ones who brush their teeth. Big surprise.
Many cities are now suing gun manufacturers for the financial costs of shootings. Moreover, shooting victims now are suing gun manufacturers for just making weapons (and this is the best part) even if the companies’ weapons were not used in the incidents. Heaven forbid we put any responsibility on the criminals!
The same is true with the infamous Budweiser frogs, which the courts claimed encouraged young people to drink. I think the frogs were an ingenious advertising campaign, but they did not encourage me to drink Budweiser. Frogs do not force adolescents to drink; the teenagers choose for themselves. But by suing Budweiser, the blame is placed on the company, not the individuals.
Moreover, after the horrible tragedy at Littleton, “experts” denounced video games, music and guns. Yes, these are all small contributing factors, but the ultimate blame falls on the two murderers themselves.
In society’s haste to lay blame, personal responsibility is trivialized. It might be easier to jump on the bandwagon and point fingers at other people. But finger-pointing and name-calling do not solve any problems; we must look in the mirror and change ourselves. Consider yourself warned.
