“While Stanley Quenchers are all the rage, we strongly advise against turning to crime to fulfill your hydration habits,” police said.

The craze for Stanley stainless steel drinking cups reached new levels last week when a woman was arrested and accused of stealing 65 of them, worth almost $2,500, from a store in California.

Police in Roseville, in Placer County, northeast of Sacramento, said Sunday that they were called Wednesday to a report of a theft from a store on Stanford Ranch Road in the city.

“Staff saw a woman take a shopping cart full of Stanley water bottles without paying for them. The suspect refused to stop for staff and stuffed her car with the stolen merchandise,” police said in a statement on Facebook.

  • TIMMAY@lemmy.world
    272·
    10 months ago

    Its a pretty good thing to spend money on if you use it on a daily basis. I work in a kitchen and need an insulated water bottle or I will literally die. Instead of using plastic I use a reusable bottle. I bought it a year ago and I have not looked back. Yeah, its more expensive than it needs to be and is a fad, but it’s certainly not the most irresponsible thing you can spend $50 on. edit: removed superfluous an

    • Tbird83ii@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      11·
      10 months ago

      I mean… It’s a lot of metal… And it’s strong enough to survive the job site for a decade.

      As someone who frequents construction sites for my job, and also as someone who has owned a Stanley travel mug and water bottle before whatever the fuck this fad is ( over 10 years… ), they are nigh indestructible, and they keep temperature for longer than either my wife’s Hydro flask or my yeti. So far in that sams period only my, Yeti coffee mug has survived as long. My wife has replaced her hyroflasj twice.

      Just anecdotal, but I tend to be hard on things, and it’s stayed with me this long… It’s like $4/year for a coffee mug.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      10·
      10 months ago

      Sure, but there are re-usable metal insulated bottles that are a lot less than $45 and will also last for years. This is $45 because it’s trendy.

      • TIMMAY@lemmy.world
        6·
        10 months ago

        Yeah, cant deny that. Relative to no bottle, it’s better. Relative to other bottles, it’s bad. A middle ground would be nice. Id like to think that maybe the fad-aspect of it will increase the amount of water bottle users over all, but I’m very pessimistic about that. edit: spelling