Who is responsible and who should be punished?

[SeaCat]

Several years ago a young man went to a bar on Cape Cod, had a few too many beers with his friends and then tried to drive home. He didn't make it, his car hit a tree and he died on the scene.

When his body reached the Hospital they found his false I.D.

The father sued the bar an won. It was his contention that it was the bars fault his son had gotten drunk. He didn't admit to the fact that his son had multiple D.U.I.'s, nor did he admit that he had always been there to bail his son out of jail.

Today I read a "Letter to the Editor" in the Cape Cod Times in which he is demanding the state do more stings to catch bars and stores selling to Minors. He wants the bars and stores to face heavier fines.

I do not agree with him on this. The Bartenders and sales clerks do not need more on their plates. They do not need to be police officers or parents for those who chose to drink. What about the "Minors" who chose to drink, who chose to use fake I.D.'s? Is it not their choice and their responsibility?

Cat

 

[Zeb_Carter]

It should be the responsibility of the parents. The current trend in America is shift the blame off of the parents. Parents don't want to take the responsibilty for their children's actions any longer. At least once they are in their teens.

I wonder why they have children in the first place if they don't want the responsiblity.

 

[Retrieval]

As far as I'm concerned it's all about the fake I.D.

Are bars supposed to be especially trained in how to recognize a fake I.D, like Police officers and the like?
I don't think they are.

If a minor gets served because he has a fake I.D and then dies, it is the minors fault not the bars.
If the minor didn't have any I.D claiming to be of legal drinking age and the staff still served that minor alcohol and the above happened, then yes I think the bar should be sued.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Cat, you've left out several relevant points.

1: Did the bar "card" him?
2: Did the bar continue to serve him after he was intoxicated?

The onus is on any establishment that has a liqour license to ensure that the customers are legally able to purchase and alcoholic beverages.

I would imagine that the facts about past DUI's etc would be irrelavant to the lawsuit.

 

[SeaCat]

As far as I'm concerned it's all about the fake I.D.

Are bars supposed to be especially trained in how to recognize a fake I.D, like Police officers and the like?
I don't think they are.

If a minor gets served because he has a fake I.D and then dies, it is the minors fault not the bars.
If the minor didn't have any I.D claiming to be of legal drinking age and the staff still served that minor alcohol and the above happened, then yes I think the bar should be sued.

And why should this be?

I have known many Minors who looked well above the drinking age. Are the bars to I.D. everyone who comes through their doors? Also is it not the minors choice to be drinking? (I don't know of many bars that have a person going around abducting teens to drag them in and buy drinks.)

(Oh, before you bring it up, yes there are limits due to common sense. Yes I would say I.D. someone that looks like a 14 years old Madonna Wanna Be.)

Maybe it's time to lay the blame where it belongs?

Cat

 

[SeaCat]

Cat, you've left out several relevant points.

1: Did the bar "card" him?
2: Did the bar continue to serve him after he was intoxicated?

The onus is on any establishment that has a liqour license to ensure that the customers are legally able to purchase and alcoholic beverages.

I would imagine that the facts about past DUI's etc would be irrelavant to the lawsuit.

Yes the bar did card him, as was in the court documents.

As for his being intoxicated, according to the witnesses he did not apear to be intoxicated while in the bar. (His Post Mortem Blood Alchohol Level was just above legal.)

Now again, why is it on the establishment to ensure that their customers are legally able to drink? Why is it not on the "Minors" or their parents?

Cat

 

[Retrieval]

And why should this be?

I have known many Minors who looked well above the drinking age. Are the bars to I.D. everyone who comes through their doors? Also is it not the minors choice to be drinking? (I don't know of many bars that have a person going around abducting teens to drag them in and buy drinks.)

(Oh, before you bring it up, yes there are limits due to common sense. Yes I would say I.D. someone that looks like a 14 years old Madonna Wanna Be.)

Maybe it's time to lay the blame where it belongs?

Cat

I understand your point and unfortunately this seems to be the only option:

...Are the bars to I.D. everyone who comes through their doors?

It appears to be the lesser of many evils.

 

[glynndah]

I have read nothing here about the provider of the fake ID. It seems to me they bear as much responsibility as the bar does.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Now again, why is it on the establishment to ensure that their customers are legally able to drink? Why is it not on the "Minors" or their parents?

Cat

Because it is the law. A liquor license is a "privelege" license. When an establishment applies for a liquor license the licensee must meet certain conditions. One of the conditions of serving liquor is that the licensee must do all that he can to ensure that his customers are of the legal drinking age.

A person 18 years or older is presumed to be an adult with all things with the exception of purchasing liquor (ludicrous isn't it, old enough to be sent off to be killed in battle but, not old enough to buy a beer). In theory an 18 year old is beyond their parents control.

 

[Liar]

Yes the bar did card him, as was in the court documents.

As for his being intoxicated, according to the witnesses he did not apear to be intoxicated while in the bar. (His Post Mortem Blood Alchohol Level was just above legal.)

Now again, why is it on the establishment to ensure that their customers are legally able to drink? Why is it not on the "Minors" or their parents?

It should be both the bar and the minor/parent's responsibility. It is and shouldbe a bar's responsibility whithin reasonable limits.

And in this case the bar did it's part, by asking for ID. The bar got ID that it deemed ok. So the bar served. End of story and end of responsibility.

So the card was fake. Right on, that makes the bar a victim too, of fraud, or something.

 

[3113]

Are the bars to I.D. everyone who comes through their doors?

Bars in my part of town do. There's a guy at the door, you show him your i.d. or you don't get in...whether you intend to drink or not.

You know, I'm kinda amazed at these rants about people not taking responsiblity for themselves and all that--especially when you get into the old man rant of "Back in the day....!" yadda, yadda, yadda.

Do you really believe less people take responsilbity now than they did in the past? Do you really beleive people have EVER been responsible adults? The majority of people, I mean. If so, then you're stone blind. People are stupid. And guess what, they've ALWAYS been stupid, and there have ALWAYS been people who have, somehow or other, gotten their children out of jams instead of letting the kids take the consequences (or, as in this case, sued and won when they ought not have--Charlie Chaplin had to pay for a kid he didn't father because the Jury felt sorry for the kid, and thus, the mother didn't suffer for her irresponsible behavior).

Unlike you folk, I don't trust people to be smart, or act like adults or to learn from their mistakes. People will eat maggots on television. People will jump off bridges with a parachute. People, especially if they're between the ages of 15-25, will drink themselves sick. They'll have sex with a stranger without protection, they have kids they can't afford to feed or raise--and have another such kid and another and another. And in the history of the world...they've always been this stupid and this incapable of learning any lesson in how to be mature adults.

Those of us here are mostly exceptions to this rule. Very, very, very rare exceptions. Pat yourself on the back, and understand that most people are NOT like you and never will be.

My opinion--I don't give a shit if a kid gets drunk and runs into a tree. Excellent. One less idiot to reproduce and create more idiots. But I don't want him drinking and running into me or into a busload of elementry school kids. So, since I can't make HIM be responsible, or make his dad understand responsiblity, the only choice I have is to put the onus on those who sell the liquor and hope that they can keep him from killing other people.

This is not what I'd like to do. If I had my way, I'd Ijust give everyone a test at being an adult and taking responsiblity for their life--and if they don't pass it, line them up and shoot them. But I'm afraid that's not yet legal. Till it is, we're stuck with stupid people doing stupid things. And it's best that we protect ourselves from them. And so far, the only way we can do that is to treat them as what they are: little, irresponsible babies.

 

[SeaCat]

I have read nothing here about the provider of the fake ID. It seems to me they bear as much responsibility as the bar does.

This is true, but you are missing my basic idea here. Namely that of the "Minors" and their parents responsibility in this mess.

As another person here woul say, the provider of the I.D. is only providing a service that is in demand and making an honest dollar. (Sorry Ami, I couldn't resist.)

Cat

 

[drksideofthemoon]

As another person here woul say, the provider of the I.D. is only providing a service that is in demand and making an honest dollar. (Sorry Ami, I couldn't resist.)

Cat

The manufacture of fake ID's is not honest work.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

I haven't read the entire thread, so I apologize if this has already been said.

I used to be a cocktail waitress in a restaurant that had a special bar upstairs. We did our best to check identification and spot frauds. Sometimes they slipped through the cracks, I'm sure. The things is, though, that we were exceedingly cautious about whom we let leave on their own. There were countless occasions that we called taxi cabs for those that were too intoxicated to even pay their tab let alone make it down the large staircase that lead out of the bar and into the restaurant (the ground floor) to leave our establishment. I believe that it is up to the employees of the bar to recognize when their patrons are beyond their means of safe functioning. Hell, we even assisted people in carrying their overly drunk friends downstairs and into a cab or the car of a designated driver. It's in everyone's best interest. One of my main functions as a cocktail was actually to alert the management or bartenders when one of my customers was getting too drunk or on the verge of becoming violent/beligerant. How this is too much to expect of an establishment is beyond me.

 

[Liar]

Good point, Lucky. At a bar, the crew has some responsibility for the patrons. Should they let a person leave roaring drunk, who drove there, for instance? Or should they make sure he's put in a taxt?

I've tended bar too, but it was inner city in Stockholm, so nobody, and I really mean nobody drove there or drove home. So that was never an issue. We kept the place cool indoors, and if people staggered down the sidewalk afterwards, no harm done.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Very much depends on the State, Cat. In Oregon, by law, both the bartender and the bar owner are at fault for allowing the deceased to become intoxicated. Doesn't matter that he was underaged and using false ID.

That means in this state, you walk into a bar and you get two drinks and you're cut off. If you walk in already drunk you get thrown out.

 

[SCcreampieLvr]

Parents responsibility

Everyone keeps talking about everyones responsibility but the KID.

Oh, thats right- he is dead so that means we have to find someone else to blame.

If he is 18, the parents should not be held responsible.

Why do we teach kids that they are not responsible for their actions until they turn 18? I think that is a big part of the problem in our society.

In this case, it appears the bar did their jobs. It could be argued that they did not do a good enough job checking the ID- but these days, anybody with a digital camera, photoshop and a computer can create a reasonably good fake ID.

I am truly sorry for him and his parents, but that does not change the fact that he dies because of HIS OWN ACTIONS.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

Everyone keeps talking about everyones responsibility but the KID.

Oh, thats right- he is dead so that means we have to find someone else to blame.

If he is 18, the parents should not be held responsible.

Why do we teach kids that they are not responsible for their actions until they turn 18? I think that is a big part of the problem in our society.

In this case, it appears the bar did their jobs. It could be argued that they did not do a good enough job checking the ID- but these days, anybody with a digital camera, photoshop and a computer can create a reasonably good fake ID.

I am truly sorry for him and his parents, but that does not change the fact that he dies because of HIS OWN ACTIONS.

I think you miss the point. Yes, the minor is responsible for his actions. Bars and Liquor establishment employees have the responsibiltiy to ensure customers are legally of age to purchase alcohol.

 

[Frank Noir]

Very much depends on the State, Cat. In Oregon, by law, both the bartender and the bar owner are at fault for allowing the deceased to become intoxicated. Doesn't matter that he was underaged and using false ID.

That means in this state, you walk into a bar and you get two drinks and you're cut off. If you walk in already drunk you get thrown out.

Damn.

Some of my favourite bars people wouldn't go to unless they were already drunk...

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by drksideofthemoon
Cat, you've left out several relevant points.

1: Did the bar "card" him?
2: Did the bar continue to serve him after he was intoxicated?

The onus is on any establishment that has a liqour license to ensure that the customers are legally able to purchase and alcoholic beverages.

I would imagine that the facts about past DUI's etc would be irrelavant to the lawsuit.

Yes the bar did card him, as was in the court documents.

As for his being intoxicated, according to the witnesses he did not apear to be intoxicated while in the bar. (His Post Mortem Blood Alchohol Level was just above legal.)

Now again, why is it on the establishment to ensure that their customers are legally able to drink? Why is it not on the "Minors" or their parents?

Cat

In that case, or those cases, it was the kid's own fault. As long as he was carded and the fake ID was a good one, the bartender should not be held responsible. As for serving an intoxicated person, they didn't. If he was just above the legal limit, that would mean he was below the limit when he was served his last drink. In this case, the bar got a bad deal.

Besides the kid, I would blame the father as an enabler. If he kept bailing his son out and paying his fines to keep him out of jail, he didn't do the kid any favors. The old man should have taken some action after the first DUI.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

The father sued the bar an won. It was his contention that it was the bars fault his son had gotten drunk. He didn't admit to the fact that his son had multiple D.U.I.'s, nor did he admit that he had always been there to bail his son out of jail.

"Those bastards served alcohol to my boy whom I hadn't taught to be responsible enough not to drink and drive!!!"

WHEN are we going to see mandatory courses in good parenting?

 

[CeriseNoire]

"Those bastards served alcohol to my boy whom I hadn't taught to be responsible enough not to drink and drive!!!"

WHEN are we going to see mandatory courses in good parenting?

I agree there. I know when I was a minor under my parents' roof, they would at least have let me sit in jail for the night, and it would have been up to me to prove I was responsible before they even let me drive again.

These days it does seem like parents responsibilities are limited to having sex and delivering the child. My thought is, if you don't have the time/want/ability to raise kids, don't have them!

 

[Svenskaflicka]

I agree there. I know when I was a minor under my parents' roof, they would at least have let me sit in jail for the night, and it would have been up to me to prove I was responsible before they even let me drive again.

These days it does seem like parents responsibilities are limited to having sex and delivering the child. My thought is, if you don't have the time/want/ability to raise kids, don't have them!

Amen!!!

 

[R. Richard]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaCat
Yes the bar did card him, as was in the court documents.

As for his being intoxicated, according to the witnesses he did not apear to be intoxicated while in the bar. (His Post Mortem Blood Alchohol Level was just above legal.)

Now again, why is it on the establishment to ensure that their customers are legally able to drink? Why is it not on the "Minors" or their parents?

Cat


I used to own a bar.

We would card anyone who even appeared to be close to age 21. We did have some problem with fake IDs, as did the other bars in town. The Alcoholic Board of Control (ABC) had a sort of policy. If a bar served a minor with a 'good fake ID,' the bar got off the hook. If a bar served a minor with an obviously fake ID, the bar was hit with a penalty, up to and including closing the bar permanently. [I saw fake IDs that were printed on the same paper as state IDs and with the same type face and layout. I defy anyone to determine that the ID was fake by just looking at it.]

If a customer does not appear to be drunk, a bartender will serve that person. If the bartender refuses to serve a non-drunk person, the bartender could get into a fight with that person [I have seen it happen.] If a person appears to be drunk, the bartender will not serve that person [if the bartender wants to remain employable.] Of course, a bartender will also not serve a person who is dressed inappropriately for the bar, who stinks so bad that the other patrons might leave, who is loud and abusive, etc. Again, the ABC takes reasonable judgement into account. If a bartender serves a reeling drunk, goodbye bar license. If a bartender serves a person who appears to be sober, probably 'no harm, no foul.'

It is the responsibility of a bar to determine that potential patrons are of legal drinking age. It is a part of the 'agreement' when a liquor license is obtained. However, the ABC can shut down every bar in a city if they want to. Normally, common sense is used.

If a parent keeps bailing an underage child out of jail and providing him/her/it with the wherewithal to go out and get drunk, then the parent is contributing to the delinquency of a minor child. This last offense is prosecuted very very infrequently.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

I knew someone who used his older brother's real ID to get into bars, since they looked enough alike that you wouldn't know it was the wrong person holding the ID.