View Single Post
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
micky micky is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,340
Default Moving a dryer - OK to lay it on the side or back?

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 05 Feb 2021 15:27:03 -0600, Jim Joyce
wrote:

On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 09:37:01 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/5/2021 9:24 AM, Hawk wrote:
On 2/4/2021 7:23 PM, Amber Sheffield wrote:
On Sunday, November 2, 2008 at 9:12:15 AM UTC-5, Steve Barker DLT wrote:
it's fine. can't imagine why though, they take up less space standing up
proper.
s
"bryan" wrote in message
...
I am moving a gas dryer and was curious if they're OK to lay on their
sides or back. Any problems with the bearing, etc?

some people have SUV's not trucks to transport them in so this is why
you would lay them on their side


13 years ago, I'm gonna guess they figured it out, though, I could be
wrong.


Yes, they did. Instead of laying it down they borrowed a Radio Flyer
wagon from the kid next door and put the dryer on that. Took a while to
haul it the 35 miles home but it was in good shape when they got there.


That reminds me and makes me laugh. I have one of those Gorilla yard carts
with 10-inch pneumatic tires. It's very handy for yard work but they saw
fit to include a sticker that says, "Not suitable for highway use." Really?
I wonder how many people tied those wagons to their rear bumpers before the
company realized they needed to add a warning.


ROTFL Can't be too careful.

My favorite was a Superman costume with the warning, Caution, Cape will
not enable the wearer to fly.

https://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/20...le-flight.html
https://www.forbes.com/2010/01/29/sa...h=5379a7b52fa1
I've reached my limit of 4 for Forbes and it doesn't appear to reset
at the start of the month. But there is still my other web browwer. I
feel so sneaky.
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/05/b...ood-thing.html
"In the early years of the tort explosion, plaintiffs and their
lawyers won large verdicts by proving that manufacturers sold products
they knew or should have known were unsafe: cars that burst into flames;
birth control devices that left women sterile; asbestos that caused
cancer.
Now that those avenues for recovery are more limited, trial lawyers
have asserted claims that their clients were injured because product
makers failed to warn against the predictable misuse of their products.
''It's become a joke,'' said Aaron Locker, general counsel to the Toy
Manufacturers of America. ''Regulators say that warning is the least
effective way to protect kids; most people don't read the warnings
anyway. But this is what we've come to in a highly litigious society
which permits litigation like this without restraint.''
.....The warning sticker on an aluminum stepladder is nearly a foot
long, inveighing against nearly every conceivable danger. The 21-point
label warns of the danger of electrocution, of falls, of placing a
ladder in front of an unlocked door, of using a ladder when not in good
physical condition. Item 17: Do Not Overreach.
.....Mr. Schwartz said he advised companies that a useful warning
must accomplish three things: Get the user's attention, describe the
danger in vivid terms and give specific instructions on how to avoid
injury.

He cited the example of the aerosol propellant 1,1,1 trichloroethane,
which was used in spray cans of household cleaners. In the early 1980's,
teen-agers discovered they could get high by spraying the cleaner into a
plastic bag and breathing the propellant fumes.

The label on the can clearly warned of death or serious injury if the
product was inhaled, Mr. Schwartz said, but some young people ignored
it, leading to at least one death. The company wanted to make the
warning larger, but Mr. Schwartz argued against it, saying that
teen-agers would then assume that there was more of the propellant in
the product.

''What do kids worry about more than death or injury?'' Mr. Schwartz
asked his clients. ''How they look, of course. So we wrote the warning
to say that sniffing the stuff could cause hair loss or facial
disfigurement. It doesn't, but it scared the target audience and we
haven't had a liability claim since then.''

''That's why,'' he added, ''I'm paid $370 an hour.''"
https://www.cs.brandeis.edu/~hornby/...ist_labels.txt
http://udel.edu/~pollack/Acct350/Han...g%20Labels.htm