🚀 go-pugleaf

"ZsaZsa" <reply@ng.org> wrote in message
news:fwar6.21370$p66.7342285@news3.rdc1.on.home.com...
>
> "John Smith" <fatjohnny72@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6Z5r6.217$q46.14964784@news1.tor.primus.ca...
> >
> > AlexF@cc1.bhc5.org wrote in message ...
>
> > >    If the customer had one too many, no.  But if the
> > >bartender saw that the customer was clearly drunk out
> > >of his mind, and yet served him another drink anyway,
> > >just because he wanted to make an extra buck, then
> > >yes, if I get hit by that drunk driver you can bet
> > >I'm suing both the drunk and the bar.
> >
> > How absurd.  Bartenders shouldn't be under any obligation to define and
> > enforce consumption limits on their customers.  They sell a fully legal
> > product to people who request it and can stop requesting it at any time.
> > The consequences of this exchange rest with the buyer.  End of story.
>
> On the contrary, in Ontario people who serve booze, and those who sell it
in
> retail establishments , are required to deny service to people who are
> obviously drunk.  The license holder of an establishment can lose his/her
> liquor license for "permitting drunkeness", that is allowing drunks to
> remain in said establishment.  This is as much to protect other patrons
and
> the public as the drunk.
>

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?