🚀 go-pugleaf

ZsaZsa wrote:
> 
> "Carter Lee" <crlee@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:3AAE7D12.801BD149@ns.sympatico.ca...
> > ZsaZsa wrote:
> > >
> > > "Gerry Carter" <gerrycarter@home.com> wrote in message
> > > news:Wafr6.22878$p66.7967158@news3.rdc1.on.home.com...
> >
> > > > By the time someone is obviously drunk, they are already to drunk to
> drive
> > > > etc.  How does allowing them to get more drunk remove from them the
> > > > personal responsibility for their own inebriation?
> > >
> > > I'm afraid I don't understand the question.
> >
> > LOL!  I think you do.
> 
> LOL yourself.  I wouldn't have said I didn't if I did, and I resent you
> saying so.  I find the phrasing convoluted, and am not sure what he is
> asking.

You can resent it or not but one would have to be thicker than two
planks not to understand that question.  There is nothing convoluted
about the phrasing, it is straightforward.  However, let me break it up
into simple parts so that you may stand a chance of understanding;

1.  An obviously drunk person enters a bar and orders a drink (with me
so far?)

2.  The bartender serves him a drink.

3.  The obviously drunk person drinks the drink. (keeping up?)

4.  The obviously drunk person leaves the bar gets into his car and
drives away.

5.  The obviously drunk person has an accident because he is
..well..drunk and he is injured.

Question:  Who is responsible for the obviously drunk person's injury,
himself or the bartender who served him his last drink?  If you think
the responsibility lies with the bartender explain why.

Carter