Oh yeah, you better believe it.

We might as well sentence the drunk driver as a juvenile, since the staff at Outback are required to make all the grownup decisions for him.

Yes, it's a known intoxicant. That's the point. The customer knows the risks. It's on him, entirely. We should not be treating the minimum-wage college student waitress as though she's his mommy.

Why do you think bouncers and exist at corporate AND independently-owned restaurants? If you facilitated the drink, you assisted in the accident.

There's a reason this is examined on a case-by-case basis. In some instances, the waitress/bartender/staff can clearly see that the customer is a potential danger to him/herself and/or others. A lot of staff (in both corporate and independently-owned places) are told to cut people off once they've had too much.

Hey man, we're just asking for a little accountability.

EDIT: By the way, I'm not advocating absolving the drunk driver of responsibility. Drunk driver = driver + drink. The college-aged waitress isn't making the grown-up decisions for the person, she's making an intelligent decision to cut him off when he becomes a potential hazard. If she keeps bringing him drinks to the point of him having trouble walking straight as he fumbles for his car keys ... well, it doesn't take a college student to figure out that he probably shouldn't be driving.
It's not unheard of for staff to call a cab or a friend. It's part of good customer service. We try to aim for a low death rate.


Unfortunately, when some people get drunk, they are incapable of making intelligent grownup decisions.

The sober college-aged staff, however, are.

the problem (one of many) that I have with making the bartender/server responsible for the drunk: by the time a person is visibly drunk enough to get cut off, he or she is already too drunk to drive. at this point, he or she may (and often times do) get angry with the bartender for cutting him off, storm out and drive away drunk.

do we still hold the bartender responsible?

on the other hand, some people can be utterly plastered and exhibit very little outward signs of drunkenness. these folks usually do not get cut off, but still drive away drunk.

still wanna hold the bartender responsible?


I believe in the doctine of personal responsibility. if YOU chose to do something stupid, and something bad results, its YOUR fault and YOURS alone.

Here is another case of misdirected blame. I wonder what it must be like to debate assigning blame during jury deliberations. Do the majority really think that U-Haul is to blame for someone not tieing down what they haul? I guess pickup truck owners are blameless as well and the truck manufacturers should be blamed when something flies off the back.

I believe in personal responsibility, for both parties (drunko and outback). It is Outbacks responsibility to limit drinks to a person who is getting very intoxicated but why should they be responsible for how they leave? If you're going out to drink YOU need to figure out your way home. Saying that Outback is responsible for a drunk mans ride home is asking a company to be a babysitter for an alcoholic.

Making it a legal requirement that restaurants are responsible for a drunk's actions further denies the addiction that most likely is taking place.

As for the people hit, it must be awful to have expierenced that and with all the doctors visits and pain management there is probably a hefty bill, one that could probably not be afforded by the drinker. But is it really Outback's responsibility to pay for that? So, if I get drunk at home, leave and wreck, can I sue the makers of Hennesey? I mean if Outback is responsible for it, why not the damn company that advertises and sells that shit.

Where did they get the number $39 million anyway?