Jolt Country

I once was served a massively undercooked chicken sandwich there, I mean raw in the middle. Had I wolfed it down like most of their customers I would have vomited in my car. There's not many public reports because of the shame of it.

Casual Observer wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 6:21 pm I once was served a massively undercooked chicken sandwich there, I mean raw in the middle. Had I wolfed it down like most of their customers I would have vomited in my car. There's not many public reports because of the shame of it.

See, that is the thing, I do wolf it down every time. I know what's coming. Do I blame them for it? I blame other corporations first. Jack in the Box is at least consistent.

Casual Observer wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 6:21 pm I once was served a massively undercooked chicken sandwich there, I mean raw in the middle.

Did you take it back and demand it be properly cooked? Did you report this to the local health department?

Casual Observer wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 6:21 pm Had I wolfed it down like most of their customers I would have vomited in my car. There's not many public reports because of the shame of it.

Oh, come on! People complain or when they don't get enough secret sauce on their Big Mac! Now, consider the following; someone eats JITB food, and vomits, severely. So they are ashamed because their food made them sick? Get real; this isn't Japan, Americans don't get ashamed when others wrong them, they get mad. And nobody but nobody, in the entire United States, not either experiencing illness from a JITB sandwich, or hear one of their friends mention that they got sick, put 2+2 together, and think, "That woman - we've all heard about her - got $700,000 from McDonald's for getting burned from coffee that was too hot, making someone puke their guts out has got to be worth at least a hundred grand," and called a lawyer?

Casual Observer wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 6:21 pm Had I wolfed it down like most of their customers I would have vomited in my car. There's not many public reports because of the shame of it.

Presumably thousands, or tens of thousands of people, in dozens of cities, all got food-related injuries, and nobody called their local (or state) health department, a reporter, or a lawyer? Not one lawyer in the entire country ever ate JITB food, then got sick, and thought, "Hey, this might be worth $10 million in a class-action lawsuit'?" Don't even think of telling me no lawyers eat JITB food. First, they are sharks, they eat anything. Second, most lawyers were broke college students in law school, if there were any in the towns where their university was - and off the top of my head I can probably name 4 or 5 - they'd have eaten there, gotten sick, and none of them thought, "Hey, suing them would be a great project for my class on liability or contracts?" Third, having graduated and while studying for the bar exam, where money is tight, ate at JITB, got sick from eating JITB food and did not think, "Whom can I sue?" Fourth, once licensed, some lawyer who doesn't make much money, say a deputy district attorney, eats there, gets sick and thinks,"Getting sick from a properly operated restaurant is unheard of, our office should investigate," and did not soon have lawsuits flying, press conferences happen, and press releases published? None of these things ever happened?

Casual Observer wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 6:21 pm Had I wolfed it down like most of their customers I would have vomited in my car. There's not many public reports because of the shame of it.

Nobody at all, in a country this litigious, has ever filed any food-related illness suit against JITB, and nobody is saying anything? Why is it, on the other hand, that McDonald's restaurants have become infamous for routinely having non-working ice cream machines?

Please explain how 15% of McDonald's restaurants have non-working ice cream machines, and it has become so well known that even the Wall Street Journal has reported it, yet not one media outlet has reported any instances where 25%, 50% or more of JITB customers, in all states where it operates, has gotten sick enough to vomit.

If this was really happening, there would be news, lawsuits, and stores being shutdown. Why is none of this happening? You can't say there's a cover-up, that would require millions of people to keep silent. Not even Walmart or Apple would have the money to pay that level of bribes to that many people, the "secret" would have been public by now.

Why is it that none of you, knowing that JITB food causes serious vomiting, it has happened to you, and you haven't contacted a lawyer to sue? A lawyer would take this on contingency, it would cost nothing if valid. You can't use several million dollars in damages? If it was being covered up, that would constitute a criminal conspiracy, liability would essentially be automatic

You think we're going to sue Jack in the Box.

Unbelievable. Your ability to misunderstand the legal system is beyond measure.

When there is a courtroom you have to swear to GOD to tell the truth. You think this guy was born of the LORD? You think this guy can swear to tell the truth? He doesn't even have an openable mouth. (Also, the fact that a guy with a mouth that can't open is the mascot for a fast food place that 100% of the time makes people sick should tell you something.)

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 11:14 am You think we're going to sue Jack in the Box.

Unbelievable. Your ability to misunderstand the legal system is beyond measure.

When there is a courtroom you have to swear to GOD to tell the truth.

Wrong. A requirement to swear to God violates the First Amendment (that is an establishment of religion.) There is Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s opinion in Employment Division v. Smith (1990), which says, “The government may not compel affirmation of religious belief, see Torcaso v. Watkins.” The case of Torcaso v. Watkins 367 US 488 (1961), which for obvious reasons I have long been familiar with, declared unlawful a Maryland requirement that an applicant for a commission as a notary public is required to swear to God to receive it, as this violates the Constitution.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 11:14 am You think this guy was born of the LORD?

You have not taken an oath lately, or you would know that the first words are "I do solemnly swear (or affirm)" An affirmation is an oath taken without reference to a deity. So the non-believer says, "I do solemnly affirm" rather than "I do solemnly swear."

Jonsey, never challenge me on religion. I probably know more than you, and definitely more than a lot of Christians, since I was one, until I found out I was being deceived by a false religion. (Pro tip: all religions are false religions)

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 11:14 amYou think this guy can swear to tell the truth? He doesn't even have an openable mouth. (Also, the fact that a guy with a mouth that can't open is the mascot for a fast food place that 100% of the time makes people sick should tell you something.)

You fool, I never said you sue either Jack in the Box or the goddam mascot! In fact, I never said who would be sued. A suit would either be against the franchisee, or Foodmaker, Inc., the company issuing franchises, or if it was company owned. Or maybe both.

If that place makes people sick 100% of the time, why are you eating there, and why haven't you sued for damages? If nothing else, selling sandwiches unfit for human consumption violates the implied warranty of merchantability, that they are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used. Selling defective food violates the federal Magnusson-Moss warranty act, and § 2-314 of your state's Uniform Commercial Code. And yes. sandwiches made at a store are covered under these laws. That guarantees the other side must pay for your lawyer. Plus compensatory and punitive damages for selling an unsafe product.

Jonsey, never challenge me on religion.

It's on, bitches!

You fool----

---- Selling defective food violates the federal Magnusson-Moss warranty act, and § 2-314 of your state's Uniform Commercial Sandwich Code

It's on like Donkey Kong!

It was well established that Jack in the Box was John Wayne Gacy's partner in crime and yet he was never tried. JitB is as above the law as Steven Seagal and frankly all of us should now fear for our safety.

Again, if any of you ate a Jack in the Box sandwich, and it made you vomit, as you claim happens 100% of the time, why haven't you contacted your local Health Department, newspaper and TV stations, all of which accept anonymous reports, and dialing *67 before calling a number blocks Caller Id. There is no excuse, unless your clams are pure bullshit.

If you're afraid, e-mail me the details and I will call it in, and won't identify where it came from.

I happen to know what the law is. If it was found out that I reported it and police came to see me - which isn't gonna happen - I'd just tell them I don't talk to police, and get the fuck out. If they threaten me with "obstruction," I will say to them, "if that is the case, arrest me, my lawyer will have a field day when I sue you, your department, and the county for false arrest, violating my civil rights, and if you don't take me to a hospital to cover my various medical conditions in the interim, also for willful neglect and intentional endangerment, and collect at least a six-figure judgment." Refusing to talk to the police is not obstruction, that requires an act to stop others from talking. If they want me to talk, they should know how: have me subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury and grant me immunity. And I'm not going to tell them how, if they don't already know how, they're too stupid to find out.

If these stories are not bullshit, and you're afraid to report them, send me e-mail to paul@paul-robinson.us, put "food illness" in the title, tell where you got a sandwich that made you vomit, give me the city, state, date, time if you want, what sandwich, and restaurant location and I'll report it. I'll call the local newspaper, TV stations, and the health department. And I will follow up to make sure this was acted on.

Or just post one here on one of the boards that allow guest postings. Here's the link to the message: Report bad Jack-in-the-Box food. Go ahead, prove me wrong and provide reportable evidence, if you're afraid to do so yourself.

Otherwise, obviously it's pure bullshit, and it never happened.

I am trying to imagine a scene of the cops somehow taking you seriously about all of this and I think it's the greatest thing ever.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Sun Oct 03, 2021 7:31 pm I am trying to imagine a scene of the cops somehow taking you seriously about all of this and I think it's the greatest thing ever.

Well, there is the possibility someone is adulterating food at JITB restaurants, which is a federal crime (remember the Tylenol poisonings?) and is felony assault at the state level. It might also be other crimes. And if the stores don't close when they are found to be distributing unsafe food without having a reinspection, the police will come in and arrest the owner, and/or chain the place closed until they clean up their act. Otherwise, it's a civil matter. A big civil matter.

i died from eating jack in the box ama

Tdarcos wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:58 am

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Sun Oct 03, 2021 7:31 pm I am trying to imagine a scene of the cops somehow taking you seriously about all of this and I think it's the greatest thing ever.

Well, there is the possibility someone is adulterating food at JITB restaurants, which is a federal crime (remember the Tylenol poisonings?) and is felony assault at the state level. It might also be other crimes. And if the stores don't close when they are found to be distributing unsafe food without having a reinspection, the police will come in and arrest the owner, and/or chain the place closed until they clean up their act. Otherwise, it's a civil matter. A big civil matter.

Is smoking a big civil matter? WE KNOW THE RISKS.

You and your nanny state.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Wed Oct 06, 2021 3:33 pm Is smoking a big civil matter? WE KNOW THE RISKS.

You and your nanny state.

1. Smoking is a civil matter, because for decades tobacco companies lied and claimed smoking dd not cause cancer, when they knew it does. Then they started getting sued. Eventually, all the cigarette manufacturers joined the Master Settlement Agreement, and a very large additional tax is now imposed on cigarettes (additional $1.30+ per pack), which is why now they cost more than $5 a pack. It's supposed to be used to cover increased medical costs for smokers.

2. It is not a "nanny state" to expect a food company to sell non-vomit-causing food. Do Wendys hamburgers / cheeseburgers cause vomiting? How about McDonalds, In-N-Out, Burger king, Five Guys, Fuddruckers? The common and usual industry standard is that burgers do not cause vomiting. Since Jack-in-the-Box burgers are not sold with a warning that they cause vomiting, they are expected to come up to the same high standard that every other food service company easily meets, i.e. that if you eat it, it will stay down and have some nutritional value.

4. A purchase is a contract. You provide them cash, they provide you with goods, those goods must meet two qualifications. (a) they are not stolen; and (b) that they are fit for the intended purpose. Food that routinely cause vomiting violates the contract. You are the ones claiming that JITB food causes vomiting 100% of the time that the company covers it up and/or the news media don't report it. Since the restaurant does not warn customers their food will cause vomiting and/or all food is sold "as is" they are required to provide nourishing food.

It is not a "nanny state" that requires a seller to abide by the terms of their contract, it is a mandatory requirement of a capitalist economy. You may know that you're taking that risk of vomiting, but other people don't, and they are entitled to safe, wholesome food which is the standard everyone is expected to meet. And despite your obvious libel, I am certain, and have been all along, that Jack-in-the-Box food is edible, does not cause vomiting, and the company's stores have been serving safe and wholesome food for the last 29 years.

Getting back to the original thread, my new weight has dropped to 300.4 pounds.

We the people demand the choice to choose poorly! JitB will soon have to conform to those...(waves hand in dismissal) government regulations only after people stop buying their take out. Its a law of diminishing returns: people go there, eat, puke and don't go there again. Some don't, anyway.

Tdarcos wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 12:19 pm Getting back to the original thread, my new weight has dropped to 300.4 pounds.

You want a pointer on how you can lose another 5 pounds real quick?

Tdarcos wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 12:49 pmThere is Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s opinion in Employment Division v. Smith (1990), which says, “The government may not compel affirmation of religious belief, see Torcaso v. Watkins.”

"Antonin Scalia has made his decision, now let him enforce it." --Jack, 1990

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 8:37 pm

Tdarcos wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 12:19 pm Getting back to the original thread, my new weight has dropped to 300.4 pounds.

You want a pointer on how you can lose another 5 pounds real quick?

What, lose my attitude? Otherwise. If you're serious, I have no idea. Oh, and losing any more limbs or having surgery is off the table.