Monday, April 29, 2013 10:54:22 AM
I agree with all the comments about how stupid this is... but think of it this way: laws must be uniformly enforced. What are you supposed to do when you have a law mandating that nut products must have a specific label and one brand doesn't have that label? Regardless of how obvious it may be that there are indeed nuts inside, it is still a violation. To allow it would be unfair to their customers and to their competitors who do comply.
Monday, April 29, 2013 9:22:38 AM
@Tiredofnicks, this is a BAG FULL OF PEANUTS!!! Why in the world would someone with a deadly peanut allergy open a bag full of peanuts??? He has to be told that peanuts may contain peanuts? How is he not dead already?
Sunday, April 28, 2013 12:40:18 PM
to Tiredofnicks: if I (or pretty much any mildly intelligent person) had a peanut allergy and wanted to buy anything at all that contained the word "nuts", even without a warning label I would turn the package over and reach the ingredients label. Ingredients: Peanuts, salt.
Sunday, April 28, 2013 4:11:48 AM
If you have a peanut allergy and you do not know that peanuts in the shell not only *may* contain peanuts, but actually *do* contain peanuts, then you not only deserve to die, I think it should pretty much be mandatory.