Should bars and clubs be finanically responsible for drunk Patrons?

Yes

Clubs should by law have drunk tanks

99 times out of 100, no. Every once in a while though I hear/read a story where I think the server shows such monumentally poor judgement that I think they're liable.

HELL NO! Guys that go to clubs are ADULTS who should be able to handle themselves. A group of guys the drink and don't use a designated driver or get a taxi DESERVE what they get! Drinking and driving is not cool and should be come down on hard. And it is not the club's fault you decided to do it, it is YOURS!

I am fucking tired of people demanding that I be responsible for someoneelse's actions. Several years ago I have a friend that was involved with a church youth group ( he was active in when he was a youth and wanted to give back to his church community) and after several incidents elsewhere in the country it was determined that all youth leader should be trained in youth protection. During the training he was told that if he did not spot and report any abuse that happens to any of the youth in the group whether or not it occurred under his direct supervision he could be held liable! He ask the question if the abuse occurred outside the group activities could he be held responsible for not seeing symptoms of abuse and reporting it. He was told that the way California law was set up the answer was; he would have to prove to law enforcement that symptoms were not evident no matter how small in order to not be charged as an enabler. Needless to say he immediately got up and left telling them he was done helping and please do not call him ever again.

It's difficult enough for one to take care of himself these days, let alone look out for others.

You need to be responsible for your own actions. I think what led to this are irresponsible drunk drivers with no money killing or injuring someone and then the victims or victims family try to get some money to pay bills from the people who gave alcohol to the drunk.

What that could lead to is every bar putting a small limit on how many drinks you can have during the night irregardless if you are driving or not or how much you weigh or how quickly your body processes and removes the alcohol or irregardless if you had a big meal. no thanks.


Now if bars and clubs put free anonymous non recording breath analyzers at their door to determine if customers were legal to drive and allowed people to re enter the club without being served any alcohol if they were not legal or borderline, then I think that would be a great idea as long as it's at least an hour until closing time. That way for those who wondered if they had too much, they could feel reassured that they had waited long enough. I know I wouldn't want to use something some drunk guy slobbered all over though. Might need throw away straws. If you could get everyone drinking alcohol to do this, it might save thousands of lives. If you're not legal, you can't drive. Some drunks don't care. Those are the people causing trouble.

Dram Shop Laws, these laws that impose liability on bars, are intended to protect the general public from the hazards of serving alcohol to minors and intoxicated patrons. Holding the server of alcohol (bartender/bar owner/party host) responsible for any damages inflicted on a third party by anyone to whom they serve alcohol is a pretty persuasive incentive to serve responsibly. New York courts interpret this law strictly. In a decision about 10 years ago from NY's top court, four bars were held equally liable to pay a multi-million dollar fine for the actions of a patron who ended up driving while intoxicated and killing someone in a car accident, despite the fact that the patron only had one drink in each of the first three bars before drinking very heavily in the fourth.

The majority of states allow for recovery when the defendant knew (or should have known) the customer was intoxicated. Some states have attempted to address this problem through more exacting tests. Missouri's recently revised dram shop law requires proof that the party demonstrates "significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction." In Texas, a patron must be so obviously intoxicated that he presents a clear danger to himself and others. I believe that mean he must actually be having intercourse with a cow that looks like an immediate relative.

Big cocky thanks he is an Adult lol...to funny

No, the law is pretty clear about that and I can't help but agree. But I can already see the counterarguments and they may be pretty solid depending upon how you present them.

Clubs and bars try to push you to buy more drinks. strip clubs push you to buy the lady a drink. They push and some people may get worn down and do it just to shut up the bartender (and because they're horny since the waitress is hot). Then they drink and and inhibitions get low and a whole bunch of scientific evidence is shown here. Before you know it, you're drunk off your ass. Like I said, all depends on presentation

From some stories on the site I've read here, some clubs take some fun initiatives on supporting the customers. Like with Hong Kong Gentleman's club. A ride to and fro the club, generally since they expect you to be a drunken mess. I'm impartial, but to those who want to fight for the right of responsibility be on the club, good luck with that. There's never just one answer

NO HOW, NO WAY!

Jail house in the club house

Back in the 70s, Sweden required all bartenders to issue a coupon with each drink. If the customer was caught DUI, or got into an accident, the barkeep that served him the last drink was in deep kimchee. Not sure if they are still doing that, but it wouldn't surprise me.

What pisses me off is that the government charges high taxes on alcohol be cause it causes so many social problems. So duh, why don't they spend the money to AVOID the problems. School and peak bar hours don't have much overlap. Why not use school buses as bar shuttles? Just have to make sure there's enough sawdust for both the kid and the drunk puke.

@ilbbaicnl, I dunno what nation you hail from but if it is America, then I call shenanigans on you. Try buying booze in canada even at a duty free shop, it's still more then the us.

Regardless of that however, I think every man should accept responsibility for his own actions. If he raped a woman after leaving the club, or assaulted a person, or entered into a written contract after getting drunk at that club, they wouldn't be on the hook for it. Yet if he drives a car they certainly are!

Both the drunk driver and the person serving him/her should be held accountable. But when someone hits more than one bar and has a drink, or a few drinks, at each one, then only the drunk driver can be held accountable because the people serving him/her have no way of knowing about the other places where s/he drank.

To those that believe a bar should be responsible.

Do you also think a restaurant should be held responsible for an obese person dying of a heart attack? How about a convenience store for some one that dies of lung cancer? See where this could go? We, each and every one of us are responsible for our behavior. That is unless there is a reason someone else is responsible. IE: Parent of a minor.

I said that in rare occasions the bar should be held liable, not responsible. This doesn't excuse the guilty party who is absolutely responsible. Example: a bartender serves drinks to a guy who has just fallen off his bar stool and orders it from the floor, then helps the guy out to the drivers side of his car (I saw this happen). Now that's an extreme which is why I said only on rare occasion.

The scenarios you've compared are just silly. A drunk in a car is a serious danger to everyone they drive past. The fat guy with the heart attack is only a danger to women who fuck him missionary.

No, but what should be banned is drink minimums at places.

The laws that hold Servers responsible for giving alcohol to an intoxicated person ARE GOOD laws.

I like sharkhunters idea of a breathalyzer on site. But there could be issued if the machine gave a false reading which put a driver on the road who thought he was not impaired but was. That could cause even more issues.

There are so many scenarios that could occur where a bartender could not know if a patron was drunk or not it's inherently unfair but as we know things are not always fair.

I know I don't want that responsibility. Ive been a manager at an establishment where my bartender didn't show and I had to serve drinks. Not a comfortable situation for me.

Don't serve the alcohol if you have any doubts about the possible intoxication of a person. BE SAFE rather than sorry later.

jester,

You are incorrect. All the examples I used can and often do impose damages on the rest of society. Or are you limited to physical damage?

FYI - Check synonyms and a thesaurus. You will likely find:
liable = responsible
responsible = liable

Just so you get it correct the next time.

There is only one answer: Prohibit the manufacture and sale of alcohol.

Ban cars and DUI's are non-existent. You don't hear about DUI's in Amsterdam, do you? No. They all ride bikes, sniff tulips, and cut off their ears cause the Dutch are the ultimate PL's.

^^^^ Starry, starry night.

@jackslash: Yeah, because that worked so well the last time. And is working so well for other drugs now.

But then, that's why you posted it, isn't it? :)

Bottom line, you can't ban human nature. Well you can ban it, but it won't stop it.

Speaking of alcohol, I gotta bottle my home brew tomorrow.

Hopefully the club is smart enough to know when to cut someone off.

While the club may not necessarily be financially liable, I will say this: It's my hope the club does what's best for ALL it's customers. Goes back to something said in another thread: The last thing you want to have happen at a club is getting robbed, shot, arrested, whatever. Not only would that suck, there's the added stigma of it happening at a club and your wife, family, parents, employer, etc., passing judgement on your use of free time in addition to the hardship. Clubs know this, and (you hope) clubs budget for adequate security to avoid that happening -- bouncers, parking lot cameras/security, etc. Heck, I once misplaced a newish phone in a club, and I give the club credit -- the last girl I was with and a number of available bouncers helped with search and we did find it between the cushions of a bar chair. That's good club customer service and a way to ensure someone comes back.

I, personally, would also be OK with a club budgeting for the occasional cab ride home for the drunk dude that would otherwise hop in his car and hit eight other cars in the parking lot on his way out were he to try and drive home. If that makes my cover go up a buck or two, it's worth it to not have to explain that an accident happened in strip club parking lot.

Does that mean that a guy who blows a .09 after he hits three pedestrians six miles from the club should be able to join the victim's families in a lawsuit against the club for its serving him? No. But the club should step up a little in the foresight to make sure the really obvious potential problem children don't create larger issues.