I bartended for years without ever taking a class. Me and my Mr. Boston’s guide.

Because there’s a lot of damn stupid people out there. What if I just bought a girl a drink, and she dies later from some alcohol related accident? Do I need to go turn myself in as an accessory to murder at that point?

Or is it just your friends who should have to force you to stop doing something harmful, or suffer the consequences if they don’t? How good of “friends” do I have to be with someone before I’m legally liable for their stupidity?

What a freaking nightmare. I’m sorry she had so much to drink she died, but unless someone was actually holding her down and forcing drinks down her, or someone slipped her a mickey or some such; I don’t see blaming anyone who was with her when she drank that much.

I’m not saying nobody should feel bad about not having prevented this, but there’s a lot of bad things that you don’t see coming but could have prevented. Those aren’t legal liabilities under normal circumstances.

Professor Blather on March 1, 2008 at 5:49 PM

Thank you.

Then you either 1. Don’t live in Texas, or 2. Have never been to a bar that follows the law.

Esthier on March 1, 2008 at 4:19 PM

Spent last weekend in the DFW area. The bars there operated just like bars everywhere else in the country.

I repeat: how very strange. So when it’s Bob’s turn to buy a round, he takes his seven buddies up to get their beers with him where you live?

Must be very crowded at the bar.

A person cannot buy more than one drink without having more than one person at the bar to pick up the extra drink(s). If a place learns that a person is sneaking drinks to someone else, then those people get kicked out.

Esthier on March 1, 2008 at 2:00 PM

On what planet?

You may need to get out a bit more.

What bars do you go to where everybody in a group collectively heads to the bar together for their drinks? Nobody buys a round where you live?

How strange.

It doesn’t make any sense to give one freedom with implied personal responsibility while simultaneously prohibiting another freedom that is known to have lesser consequences.

budorob on March 1, 2008 at 4:12 PM

And it’s all off topic.

I’ve never, not once in my life, been at a bar and had them require other people come to the bar to pick up the drink that I just bought. I just buy the round, and if I can carry it all myself then I carry it all myself.

Then you either 1. Don’t live in Texas, or 2. Have never been to a bar that follows the law.

You’re out, and notice a guy who’s loud, obnoxious and borderline violent…is he drunk or stoned??

budorob on March 1, 2008 at 12:35 PM

Is this really a question? Or is this your advocation of legalized pot use?

Esthier,

I’m a staunch adversary of the War on Drugs. So, if that makes me an advocate, fine. I’m merely pointing out the absence of logic in our society, like the ritual of drinking 21 shots on your 21st birthday. It doesn’t make any sense to give one freedom with implied personal responsibility while simultaneously prohibiting another freedom that is known to have lesser consequences.

Unless they’re paying with cash, the girl should just have one tab. It’s very easy to look up a person’s tab to see how many drinks they’d had.

And even if they are paying with cash, it’s still the server’s responsibility. If she was being served by a waiter, then she’d only have one waiter. It’s bad waiting etiquette to steal someone else’s customer. If she was being served by bartenders, then they’d all be responsible.

Esthier:

Speaking from experience, when someone buys a group a round of shots they don’t put it on a tab. They just run the card. Also, friends take turns buying the rounds so one person isn’t stuck with a $300 bill at the end of the night. Also, as mentioned earlier, no one is buying their own drinks on their 21st birthday.

I’ve never, not once in my life, been at a bar and had them require other people come to the bar to pick up the drink that I just bought. I just buy the round, and if I can carry it all myself then I carry it all myself.

I, or my friends, have been kicked out a bar before for being too drunk (unable to stand up on our own or throwing up), but it’s a bouncer making the rounds who’s looking for people that are too drunk to continue, not the bartenders.

In an interview, the U of M’s Feld agreed. He said the college students not only contributed to her intoxication but also took Jax away from the bar so no one else could rescue her.

She was intoxicated, so her friends were supposed to leave her at the bar? No, when your friend has too much to drink at a bar, you take him home.

Relatives and lawyers said they thought Jax had her life under control, even though she had had two drunken-driving arrests before the age of 21.

They also challenged friends who told police that Jax drank often. “I’m not going to say that she didn’t drink,” Jenny Haag said. “But it wasn’t the hundreds of times that they said.”

Right, mom.

Johnson, Hannah Becker’s boyfriend, along with Becker, told police that they had seen or helped put Jax to bed drunk at least 50 times.

Sounds like they were used to seeing her in this state, and that’s why they weren’t overly concerned seeing her passed out and puking.

her intoxication created a situation that amounted to custody of Jax.

Weren’t all her friends drunk too?

As of this posting the shows 54% saying “No!” That’s secular progressive thinking for you. No moral judgments. No judgments on personal conduct.

Wildcatter1980 on March 1, 2008 at 2:28 PM

The poll isn’t about a moral obligation. It’s about a legal one.

Our alcohol laws mean that children do not learn how to drink, and to limit their drinking, with their families.

njcommuter on March 1, 2008 at 6:44 AM

I don’t buy this. Parents can buy their children alcohol if they choose. There’s no law against it.

Hollowpoint on March 1, 2008 at 12:06 PM

I can only speak for Texas laws.

How would you know how many they had before they got to your bar?

You aren’t supposed to serve people who have already been drinking, so that shouldn’t be an issue.

How many other servers sold them?

Unless they’re paying with cash, the girl should just have one tab. It’s very easy to look up a person’s tab to see how many drinks they’d had.

And even if they are paying with cash, it’s still the server’s responsibility. If she was being served by a waiter, then she’d only have one waiter. It’s bad waiting etiquette to steal someone else’s customer. If she was being served by bartenders, then they’d all be responsible.

How many their friends bought for them, or that they bought for friends?

A person cannot buy more than one drink without having more than one person at the bar to pick up the extra drink(s). If a place learns that a person is sneaking drinks to someone else, then those people get kicked out.

You simply couldn’t- not in a crowded bar for each and every individual.

I’m speaking from experience. Yes, you can, and if you miss them at the bar, then someone can catch them throwing up in the bathroom or staggering away from/to the bathroom.

The truth is, without legal penalty an establishment has no reason to cut off a drunk. Drunks may be annoying, but they tip really well and spend a lot of money.

There are a lot people claiming the friends should be responsible, but the friends were likely drunk as well. Bartenders, waiters and managers are sober, trained and responsible for what they sell whether its bad oysters or liquid poison.

These laws holding bars accountable for the lack of personal responsibility are wrong in all but the most extreme circumstances.

These laws came about for a reason. My certification training required that I learn that reason. If alcohol is to be legally consumed in public, then society has an interest in seeing that consumption regulated.

Servers are in the best position to regulate that consumption. No other position can.

You’re out, and notice a guy who’s loud, obnoxious and borderline violent…is he drunk or stoned??

budorob on March 1, 2008 at 12:35 PM

Is this really a question? Or is this your advocation of legalized pot use?

I don’t think a money award is in order but I think it’s a stretch to say her friends are in no way responsible for pressuring their already incoherent friend to guzzle drinks that probably were fruity and seemed to cause no risk to an inexperienced drinker. I’ve never been a fan of friends encouraging their friends to get trashed beyond belief. Pressure somebody to do a shot once in a while? Sure, no problem. But this binge drinking thing on 21st birthdays is just insane. If these people didn’t know she was over a .4 BAC, then they were just not thinking clearly themselves. Liable? I don’t think so.

Tough one though. No criminal or civil repercussions are appropriate in my opinion, but her friends certainly do have something to feel bad about for the rest of their lives, as I’m sure they will.

How absurd.

Exit questions:

You’re out, and notice a guy who’s loud, obnoxious and borderline violent…is he drunk or stoned??

Depending on the state law, your question shouldn’t even matter. I was certified to serve alcohol, and legally we were required to cut people off long before they were wasted. We were also trained to count drinks and approximate the size of the person in order to calculate a BAC.

I believe the parents have a legitimate suit against place she drank; however, if her friends were shielding her from the place, making it difficult for them to monitor her, it would make sense to me that the place has a legitimate suit against her friends.

Esthier on March 1, 2008 at 2:14 AM

Sorry, but no matter how well trained a bartender or other server is or how strict the law, there is no way that barstaff can accurately monitor what’s going on with every person in the bar.

How would you know how many they had before they got to your bar? How many other servers sold them? How many their friends bought for them, or that they bought for friends? You simply couldn’t- not in a crowded bar for each and every individual.

These laws holding bars accountable for the lack of personal responsibility are wrong in all but the most extreme circumstances. It’s nothing more than scapegoating by the neo-prohibitionist set.

unseen on March 1, 2008 at 10:44 AM

Thank you for describing the golden age before alcohol caused problems.

Pam on March 1, 2008 at 8:42 AM

Likewise, I’m not picking a fight; however, I’ve made all those points on this thread so I’m not sure why you’re directing your comment at me.