Quote:
Originally Posted by icehog3
Bill, you are a good guy and I don't want to argue either....but just because something is (civil) law doesn't make it "right".
If I walk into a bar and decide to have 18 drinks, then get in my car and drive away, the bartender is at fault? I am s cop, and I call bullshit on that law....and I always have. Obvious exception is if the drinker is underage, but besides that, the drinker should have grown the **** up.  |
I agree that normally the bartender should not be at fault, but there are cases where they could be. Video evidence in Dunn's case looks to be that the bartender would not be at fault anyway, so it's probably a nonissue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Vito
I think the distillery or brewery are at fault. What about buying from a liquor store and doing this, the liquor store is at fault. Not the individual who consumed it.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnoon
What about the farmer who grew the grain? Blame everyone.  |
Perry and Peter's examples here are much different than the bartender's. The liquor store nor the farmer sat there and watched a person get drunk. The bartender can monitor the patron's status when they come up and order each drink. If they are too drunk, cut them off.
Once again, I'm not saying it's right for the bartender to be sued, but they do hold a little bit more of an obligation than the liquor store or the farmer. At least in the smaller, more personable bars. A bit harder for a bartender to be responsible at a club that has over 200 people in it.