Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bars face new test for suits involving drunken drivers
The Jackson [MI] Citizen Patriot ^ | Sunday, December 12, 2004 | Steven Hepker

Posted on 12/12/2004 7:33:21 AM PST by XXXXX88XXXXX

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last
To: Kozak

That is an excellent point, and it definitely has merit. It would be difficult to hold someone other than the drunk accountable in an instance like that. OTOH, if the person is clearly drunk, well, then I think you've got a problem if you DON'T see a problem with letting the guy keep drinking and then driving off. In an instance like you describe, I am sure that the bartender could easily find witnesses to support his statements...before it even got to the point of a lawsuit. That's one reason why a lot of places have security cameras.


61 posted on 12/12/2004 2:52:13 PM PST by exnavychick (Just my two cents, as usual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

I don't disagree with you, but if a bartender knowingly serves an obviously intoxicated person there should be some consequences should the drinker later harm an innocent.

I realize this is unreasonable in a large club in a place like NYC, but not too many folks going to those type clubs are getting behind the wheel of a car when they leave anyway.

But most of the country is not NYC, walking distance may not be feasible (good for you), cabs may not be available, and bartenders tend to know their clientele.

I enjoy going out and having a couple of beers with friends, just as much as the next gal. But I live in a rural area where the nearest pub is across the state line. My 2 favorite places to go are 20 miles - needless to say I drink little, if any, unless someone else is driving.

As I said in another post, if I were ever to have to answer the question "where have you been?" I would never dream of naming the establishment.


62 posted on 12/12/2004 4:23:50 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
but if a bartender knowingly serves an obviously intoxicated person there should be some consequences should the drinker later harm an innocent.

A most perfect mindset for graying up a black and white issue by dispersing responsibility from an individual and their actions to others.

Thus, the opportunity is created for some to actually make money on a book with the title "It Takes a Village"

Alas, personal responsibility is eroded to the point of the loss of personal thinking.

Of course this can only lead to the removal of personal concern and thrust us into a concern for the whole.

It's been tried before, it didn't work, however some are he!! bent on insisting that it is the only mindset which will save our nation.

63 posted on 12/12/2004 4:37:58 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: exnavychick

I was self-employed for about 15 years. I didn't exactly run a "business." I was considered a "consultant" and always a subcontractor.

I had good years and I had bad years depending upon what clients I had. When I put my house in Delaware on the market in 2001 to move to Virginia, I quickly learned how loyal clients are NOT.

Good luck with your venture.....I need a new one for myself.


64 posted on 12/12/2004 4:52:24 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: XXXXX88XXXXX
Personally knowing, and growing up around this establishment, please do not make the wrong assumptions. Both of the places are first family restaurants that do have a small area that is devoted to a bar.

These are not the "Drinking establishments" in the area. The main goal is good food and bring your children. When I was there they usually closed around 11 on week nights and 12 on weekends.

The owners, the original died young of cancer and an English teacher at the junior high, can not afford this. And any other bar most likely can not. This is a shame. Luckily I wold of walked home from there, but for many .215 is not the problem. An in-shape firefighter could fake it quite well.

IMO the problem is drinking all day this guy was tired and the combination is deadly. As long as he was stimulated by the surroundings he was fine appearance wise. Get the "visually fine" person behind the wheel in a nice comfortable car that needs sleep that is a mistake....

Just t my thoughts that will be flamed....
65 posted on 12/12/2004 5:06:05 PM PST by Quick Shot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: XXXXX88XXXXX
When stationed in Hawaii in the early 1980’s the State passed a law making bar owners responsible for the actions of intoxicated patrons after they leave. It was touted as a cure for drunk driving.
There was one problem. The drunk seldom identified the place they got drunk – that was a “nice” bartender. Usually the establishment that refused service was identified as the offending bar – they were the “bad” guys. The only way to identify the offending bar was to send teams of investigators all over the island with a picture of the drunk, and hope someone would admit to serving him.
The law was repealed.
66 posted on 12/12/2004 5:14:52 PM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exnavychick
Serving someone who comes in drunk, just to make a buck is pretty irresponsible, and probably should be punished in some way, though, imo.

It is illegal in many States, and can result in loss of license, fine and jail time for the server.
67 posted on 12/12/2004 5:17:17 PM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

Yes, I know that. I believe I was simply trying to make my position clear. As I stated in other posts, I was a cocktail waitress awhile back...believe me, I know the law on that. :)


68 posted on 12/12/2004 5:23:06 PM PST by exnavychick (Just my two cents, as usual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

Thanks, and good luck to you, too! Hope you find what you are looking for.


69 posted on 12/12/2004 5:28:34 PM PST by exnavychick (Just my two cents, as usual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
From the Code of Virgina:

§ 4.1-227.
B. In suspending any license the Board may impose, as a condition precedent to the removal of such suspension or any portion thereof, a requirement that the licensee pay the cost incurred by the Board in investigating the licensee and in holding the proceeding resulting in such suspension, or it may impose a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000 for the first violation, $2,500 for the second violation and $5,000 for the third violation in lieu of such suspension or any portion thereof, or both. However, if the violation involved selling alcoholic beverages to a person prohibited from purchasing alcoholic beverages or allowing consumption of alcoholic beverages by underage, intoxicated or interdicted persons, the Board may impose a civil penalty not to exceed $2,500 for the first violation and $5,000 for a subsequent violation in lieu of such suspension or any portion thereof, or both.

70 posted on 12/12/2004 5:38:13 PM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

Please don't attribute things to me that I do not espouse.

I am all for personal responsibility, regardless of the issue.

When I have a party at my house I am paying attention to how much alcohol is consumed by my guests. I don't want someone leaving my house behind the wheel of a car who shouldn't be - and most bartenders I know feel the same way.


71 posted on 12/12/2004 5:47:28 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Quick Shot

Not flamed from this quaterer - you make many valid points.


72 posted on 12/12/2004 5:50:24 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
Please don't attribute things to me that I do not espouse.

I apologize for my misconstruing of your posts that I have replied to.

However, I have read them and understood them to the best of my ability my FRiend.

73 posted on 12/12/2004 5:52:21 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

Your point is????

I'm aware of the Virginia ABC laws....some of them are really weird, but the one about serving an intoxicated person is a no-brainer to me.


74 posted on 12/12/2004 5:56:50 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

Apparently we just seem to be misunderstanding each other. So let us leave it at that.

OKAY with you, my FRiend?


75 posted on 12/12/2004 5:59:18 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
OKAY with you, my FRiend?

So mote it be, so let it be done. : ~

76 posted on 12/12/2004 6:26:56 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

This law is not very clear. Does it mean an obviously drunken person, or what? I know many people that can drink a gallon of whiskey in less than an hour and still walk a straight line and act totally normal. There is absolutely no way to know what they had drunk, or hadn't, just by looking at them or even by observing them afterwards.
I have a problem with this especially since others said he DID NOT appear drunk. This level of responsibility should not be placed on anyone but the person doing the drinking.


77 posted on 12/12/2004 6:33:38 PM PST by always paddle your own canoe (Love many, trust few)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

Thanks - I feel better now.


78 posted on 12/12/2004 6:41:31 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: JTanner

Out Damn troll!


79 posted on 12/12/2004 6:46:43 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

BUMP


80 posted on 12/12/2004 7:05:50 PM PST by SweetCaroline (Give thanks to the GOD of heaven, for His mercy and loving kindness are forever!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson