Recent comments in /f/mildlyinteresting

Aberdolf-Linkler t1_jad6hla wrote

Yes those are some of the reasons given but they don't really stand up to any scrutiny. For example this building predates the standard so they aren't really keeping any character, just enforcing a new one. Not to mention that's entirely a subjective quality that's being determined by a small group of officials.

Utilities some how manage on significantly smaller easements just fine all over the US and the world. And fire fighting has come a long way in the past 2000 years. There's a ton of detail on this one that's a bit beyond a reddit comment but this is really unnecessary today. At worst you can mandate firebreaks in lue of offset but for some reason municipalities across the US just use this blanket ban instead, despite virtually every single one having at least one district that manages to get by without these mandates.

1

IllustriousSignal575 t1_jad6fj1 wrote

That McDonald's? It was a lot more than just that McDonalds. There were hundreds of cases of hot coffee burns each year by that point, hers was just the one that got full coverage and everything it got due some specifics. Her case was not uncommon at the time though, not even close to uncommon.

3

jnemesh t1_jad5cqa wrote

Was actively trying to be a dick about it. Just because that individual can't afford it doesn't mean that such establishments don't have a place in the market. I don't eat at such places even REMOTELY regularly, but for a special occasion or to treat a date, I will absolutely spend the money on a good meal!

1