September 25, 2006

I CAN TESTIFY TO THE FOLLOWING THOUGH...

Bacardi Denies 151-Proof Rum Caused Bar Burn Injuries (AP< September 25, 2006)

Bacardi said its 151-proof rum was not the cause of burns suffered by three women who sued the spirits company and alleged that their injuries were caused when a bottle used to pour shots turned into a "flame thrower."

...no matter what I once said to the Dean of Freshman, Double Tvarscki Vodka (180 proof) burns so hot it will actually melt the linoleum on a college dorm floor....

Posted by Orrin Judd at September 25, 2006 12:28 PM
Comments

Thats a bit suspicious about the rum bottle becoming a flame thrower. It won't flash off in the bottle. Us two handed drinkers know these things.

I don't doubt your vodka story in the least.

Posted by: Tom Wall at September 25, 2006 8:02 PM

This is the sort of thing which gives lawyers a bad name: a shot at a deep pocket after a joint-tortfeasor settlement with the parties principally responssible for the loss.

Two comments: 1) The Barcardi motion seems to be doomed because the facts are in dispute; 2) The volitility of spiritous alchohol is part of the common knowledge of humanity. Holding the distiller liable because rum burns is like holding the gun-maker liable because firearmes kill.

Posted by: Lou Gots at September 26, 2006 2:36 AM
« DON'T LUMP ME WITH THEM, HE LAMENTED: | Main | CRANK UP THE iPOD: »