Why attorneys should be kept out of strip clubs.

Brian, if someone racked up a big bill on your smut sites and then asked for a refund because he was an Internet porn addict and you enabled him would you refund?

 

I think the ' predatory lending' of banks to people who didn't understand math was a joke.

 

Ask yourself this, is it alright and legal to ask a senile, rich old woman to sign away all her money to you? She's not drunk, she just doesn't know what she's doing. Her judgement is terribly impaired, you know it, and you are taking advantage of it. How is doing that any different than accepting large amounts of money from a drunk person who doesn't know what he's doing?

 

Also, it makes a difference whether you are aware of something that is happening, or if there was no reason to believe there was a problem. Ignorance is not always an acceptable defense. People are required to have some level of common sense, and fortunately that's all it takes to abide by most laws.

 

I agree that the majority of the idiot people were responsible for their own actions when it comes to the mortgage mess.

Ask yourself this, is it alright and legal to ask a senile, rich old woman to sign away all her money to you? She's not drunk, she just doesn't know what she's doing. Her judgement is terribly impaired, you know it, and you are taking advantage of it. How is doing that any different than accepting large amounts of money from a drunk person who doesn't know what he's doing?

 

Also, it makes a difference whether you are aware of something that is happening, or if there was no reason to believe there was a problem. Ignorance is not always an acceptable defense. People are required to have some level of common sense, and fortunately that's all it takes to abide by most laws.

 

I agree that the majority of the idiot people were responsible for their own actions when it comes to the mortgage mess.

 

The difference is the senile woman can not alter her state. A drunk person made themselves that way.

Same here - the core fundamentals of the licensing laws are identical.

Going back to the guns analogy, ie there is an issue should marched into a shop and say "I would like a gun to murder someone" well change the gun shop to bar and say "Barman, I would like to get royally shit face drunk please" is he going to serve you?

 

PS Wash your keyboard out.

 

The difference is painfully obvious. It's not illegal to get drunk. It is illegal to murder someone.

 

He can also stop you from drinking from whenever he wants.

The difference is painfully obvious. It's not illegal to get drunk. It is illegal to murder someone.

 

He can also stop you from drinking from whenever he wants.

Drunk and disorderly not a crime then?

 

 

The laws here place some civil liability on establishments in that they can be held culpable for knowingly serving someone visibly impaired. The difference between these scenarios and the ones with banks and guns is that alcohol is involved. At some point the patron is incapable of informed consent because he is impaired. At that point some liability falls upon the establishment that continues to knowingly serve someone incapable of making autonomous decisions.

 

Can't believe I'm agreeing with Brian...

 

The major problem with this is in non clearcut examples it's impossible to discern who's too impaired. Unless a standard is placed to when someone is too impaired then the liability allows any idiot to claim they were overserved. It's bullshit. If I drink to a .081 % level and head on and kill 5 people then was I overserved? Truly the pussification of America is ridiculous.

 

*note I realize I'm the only resident of the US in this conversation.

The major problem with this is in non clearcut examples it's impossible to discern who's too impaired. Unless a standard is placed to when someone is too impaired then the liability allows any idiot to claim they were overserved. It's bullshit. If I drink to a .081 % level and head on and kill 5 people then was I overserved? Truly the pussification of America is ridiculous.

 

*note I realize I'm the only resident of the US in this conversation.

 

Well, that's just how the justice system functions and how it has to function. Not everything in life is black and white. There are flaws no doubt, but it is what it is, and in most cases it's pretty sound.

 

It's not like the bar is instantly guilty. There has to be some conclusive evidence and not all responsibility falls on you. I think there becomes a point when responsibility begins to shift and I think bars need to be aware of when that's happening and what they can/should do to not only minimize liability but also be ethically sound. Bartenders cut people off all the time and often ask people if they're alright, who they're with, call cabs, etc. I'm no lawyer, but I think it usually comes down to whether or not the bars actions were sufficient. There are limits to what people can do, and I believe that the law does recognize that.

Drunk and disorderly not a crime then?

 

Laws vary from state to state. In some places no, it's not illegal to be drunk. In some places it is. In some places it is not illegal to be drunk, but it is illegal for you to display it. So, sitting at a table laughing excessively and drunk may be legal, but falling over and being disorderly would then make it illegal.

The major problem with this is in non clearcut examples it's impossible to discern who's too impaired. Unless a standard is placed to when someone is too impaired then the liability allows any idiot to claim they were overserved. It's bullshit. If I drink to a .081 % level and head on and kill 5 people then was I overserved? Truly the pussification of America is ridiculous.

 

*note I realize I'm the only resident of the US in this conversation.

 

The only US resident?

 

This is an interesting debate, but I wonder how much of it is due to Brian's involvement versus someone else upholding his viewpoint?

 

With alcohol everything changes. I'm not saying you hold an establishment 100% accountable, but 0% isn't fair either, IMO.

The only US resident?

 

This is an interesting debate, but I wonder how much of it is due to Brian's involvement versus someone else upholding his viewpoint?

 

With alcohol everything changes. I'm not saying you hold an establishment 100% accountable, but 0% isn't fair either, IMO.

 

I meant within Brian,Porter,Chaos and I who were currently most active in the discussion.

 

Sure Brian likes to argue counter arguements. It's all good fun. None of us are going to change each other's opinions or ways of thinking. More of a way to pass some time and for me to argue with intelligent people.

....this is great.

US resident #3 signing in.

 

The main issue is:

 

Was the person visibly impaired before passing out or being served enough drinks to then pass out and be over charged??? No one here knows for sure. For all we know the guy could've been pounding shot after shot back to back to the tune of 10-12 shots in 5 minutes and not felt anything for the next 20-30 minutes. In that time then drinking another 2- 3 mixed cocktails and BOOM all at once getting completely smashed. When is the bartender liable for serving too much?? If the guy seems fine then it's fine to serve him. So are we now asking our bartenders to cut us off at a specific number of drinks or shots, regardless of how we're handling it???

 

ONLY when someone either walks into a bar wobbly or has spent all night at the bar and stumbling over himself to I EVER see tenders cut someone off... So which was it with this guy? The bar witnesses are going to be important here. Decent argument in court.

 

As far as the bill, probably drinking high level expensive shit, PLUS VIP/Champagne rooming it up, with lapdances galore, until he finally passed out. Not unlikely at all.

Brian, with all this are you stating that the person who put themselves in this position should not bear responsibility? I don't understand. Should the Gov watch out for everyone everytime they whip their wallets out? I am getting really tired of all this "predatory" fcuking nonsense. You sign a contract, you need to understand it. That goes for a mortgage, a credit card terms sheet or whatever. If you walk into a strip club, and you hand over your plastic to some big titted bar maid, you are responsible for what you allow to be put on it. Remember this, that is not just liquor that is on that tab. You go into those clubs and the first thing they do is try to take you to a "private room" to the tune of 1k an hour. It is fcuking crazy. And he likely just said, "no worries, let's rock" knowing the whole time he was going to dispute it the next day claiming negligence on the part of the establishment. That shit is criminal. It is also NO different with people that took out loans. Some lawyer opened the door saying, "oh, poor citizen, it isn't YOUR fault you signed those mean loan documents that you KNEW YOU WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO REPAY!"

 

Consumer protection laws, much like political correctness, are crippling this country. The idea of this country was not to turn everyone into monotonous drones that could pull their wallets out and have zero liability for their actions. Seems like one step towards being mentally enslaved. Pretty soon we will all be "Coppertops" for the machine like in the Matrix.

Seems reasonable. Maybe I'm mistaken, but can't bars be held liable to some degree some serving people too much alcohol? I think people should be held responsible for their own actions, but you have to place some blame on the enablers who obviously see what's happening.

 

How a bar determines when its " too much" is the challenge.

 

Some people could spend $10,000 on a night out and not even notice it missing from their bank account. Others spend $1,000 on a night out and couldn't make their mortgage and car payment that moth.

 

Some people have 5 bottles of beer and they are on the floor, others can drink 20 bottles and walk out the door just fine.

 

Also couldn't the lawyer, knowing he will be drinking that night, take reasonable steps to prevent overspending? IE leave credit cards behind or use a prepaid card with what ever amount your willing to spend on it. Or advise the bar at the beginning of the night that you have a cut off limit.

The major problem with this is in non clearcut examples it's impossible to discern who's too impaired. Unless a standard is placed to when someone is too impaired then the liability allows any idiot to claim they were overserved. It's bullshit. If I drink to a .081 % level and head on and kill 5 people then was I overserved? Truly the pussification of America is ridiculous.

 

*note I realize I'm the only resident of the US in this conversation.

 

I was just about to make this point! Who is to say he guy was shit faced or it's just an excuse and trying to save face to his wife? Were there witnesses that the guy was stone cold passed out for 3 hours and they just randomly charged his card?

 

Did he sign the bill?

 

How did he arrive/leave the club?

 

Did a medical doctor / psychologist evaluate him on that night and determine he was unfit to make a financial commitment? Because in the case of a senile elderly person, or someone with a rational disability, you would have a legal document in place preventing them from making such decisions.

 

There are gambling addicts who ruin their lives blowing through every penny they have in vegas, should Steve Wynn cut them a refund check because they fucked up? Many people will say that while sober, they are not in a proper mental state to make these decisions?

 

Nobody hog tied the guy and funneled a gallon of jack down his throat then stole his wallet. He ordered the drinks and drank them, this is his bag and he needs to pay up on principle alone.

 

We need to start instilling some fcuking accountability for ones actions in this country, this idea of self-entitlement is fcuking ridiculous.

 

Furthermore, when did we standardize strip clubs as a moral compass?

 

 

Brian, with all this are you stating that the person who put themselves in this position should not bear responsibility? I don't understand. Should the Gov watch out for everyone everytime they whip their wallets out? I am getting really tired of all this "predatory" fcuking nonsense. You sign a contract, you need to understand it. That goes for a mortgage, a credit card terms sheet or whatever. If you walk into a strip club, and you hand over your plastic to some big titted bar maid, you are responsible for what you allow to be put on it. Remember this, that is not just liquor that is on that tab. You go into those clubs and the first thing they do is try to take you to a "private room" to the tune of 1k an hour. It is fcuking crazy. And he likely just said, "no worries, let's rock" knowing the whole time he was going to dispute it the next day claiming negligence on the part of the establishment. That shit is criminal. It is also NO different with people that took out loans. Some lawyer opened the door saying, "oh, poor citizen, it isn't YOUR fault you signed those mean loan documents that you KNEW YOU WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO REPAY!"

 

Consumer protection laws, much like political correctness, are crippling this country. The idea of this country was not to turn everyone into monotonous drones that could pull their wallets out and have zero liability for their actions. Seems like one step towards being mentally enslaved. Pretty soon we will all be "Coppertops" for the machine like in the Matrix.

 

You can't be serious? We've all been drunk, seen friends drunk, and seen people drunk. I think it pretty obvious why you can't let people like that make such decisions. I could open a bar, give someone free drinks to the point that they can barely stand, then suggest them buy a shot of this whiskey I'm pointing to. Since they agree to just buy one shot and don't ask the price, then I can just charge them $1000 for the shot. Hey, I didn't make him drink so much. It's not my fault he didn't ask how much it was. You'd essentially drink yourself into a clip joint.

 

At a certain point, the responsibility shifts from them to you. Just like they have to be weary of the bar overcharging them, the business owner has to be weary of fraudsters and what's going on. If you own a bar and think a drunk guy charging $20K in one night doesn't need scrutiny, you should really hire someone to run it for you.

You can't be serious? We've all been drunk, seen friends drunk, and seen people drunk. I think it pretty obvious why you can't let people like that make such decisions. I could open a bar, give someone free drinks to the point that they can barely stand, then suggest them buy a shot of this whiskey I'm pointing to. Since they agree to just buy one shot and don't ask the price, then I can just charge them $1000 for the shot. Hey, I didn't make him drink so much. It's not my fault he didn't ask how much it was. You'd essentially drink yourself into a clip joint.

 

You havn't been to Ibiza have you?!

You can't be serious? We've all been drunk, seen friends drunk, and seen people drunk. I think it pretty obvious why you can't let people like that make such decisions. I could open a bar, give someone free drinks to the point that they can barely stand.

 

The flaw here is that a responsible person will cut themselves off before they get to that point. If someone is drunk enough to do that, then it's probably a lesson they need.

 

 

 

The flaw here is that a responsible person will cut themselves off before they get to that point. If someone is drunk enough to do that, then it's probably a lesson they need.

 

So then a business should have no integrity or accountability? You're pretty much saying it's ok to take advantage of people. It's not ok, and it can be illegal. Laws exist to prevent stuff like that. Businesses need to be held accountable just as much as people. If that wasn't the case, you couldn't trust anyone for anything.

I bet he spent some time in VIP fcuking or getting blown by the girls there and is now trying to save face with his wife.

You havn't been to Ibiza have you?!

 

Nope, but it sounds like I should open a bar there and invite half of LP

You can't be serious? We've all been drunk, seen friends drunk, and seen people drunk. I think it pretty obvious why you can't let people like that make such decisions. I could open a bar, give someone free drinks to the point that they can barely stand, then suggest them buy a shot of this whiskey I'm pointing to. Since they agree to just buy one shot and don't ask the price, then I can just charge them $1000 for the shot. Hey, I didn't make him drink so much. It's not my fault he didn't ask how much it was. You'd essentially drink yourself into a clip joint.

 

At a certain point, the responsibility shifts from them to you. Just like they have to be weary of the bar overcharging them, the business owner has to be weary of fraudsters and what's going on. If you own a bar and think a drunk guy charging $20K in one night doesn't need scrutiny, you should really hire someone to run it for you.

 

I am 150% serious. Your argument is the most flawed and one of the things I find wrong with the world. No social responsibility. If you let yourself get that drunk, you deserve the consequences. You know who doesn't, the people who's lives you affect around you if you further your retardation by hopping in a car to go home and hit someone, or if you default on your mortgage and expect the taxpayer to pick up your slack. You have lost your mind if you think I am wrong on this one. It is NO ONES responsibility to watch over you Brian. No ones. If he has no common sense or fortitude, what is he doing in a strip club getting bombarded by hot chicks that are naked and putting booze in the mix to affect his already limited ability to make a decision. Recipe for disaster and he needs to own it. I have been in situations Brian and have never made poor choices of the magnitude this guy did. And I have the spending power to do it if I wanted to. You know why it has never happened? Because I am a responsible person and would not inject myself into a situation like that in the first place, let alone not be able to make the right choice if I got myself there.

 

Good luck fixing other peoples problems. Good luck supporting people and their bad choices. It is tenets like that which are bring the world to its knees. I weep for our future if you logic bares a premium over mine.

You can't be serious? We've all been drunk, seen friends drunk, and seen people drunk. I think it pretty obvious why you can't let people like that make such decisions. I could open a bar, give someone free drinks to the point that they can barely stand, then suggest them buy a shot of this whiskey I'm pointing to. Since they agree to just buy one shot and don't ask the price, then I can just charge them $1000 for the shot. Hey, I didn't make him drink so much. It's not my fault he didn't ask how much it was. You'd essentially drink yourself into a clip joint.

 

At a certain point, the responsibility shifts from them to you. Just like they have to be weary of the bar overcharging them, the business owner has to be weary of fraudsters and what's going on. If you own a bar and think a drunk guy charging $20K in one night doesn't need scrutiny, you should really hire someone to run it for you.

 

 

 

Hahahahaha, this is great. Let me ask you this- when was the last time you left your house and went to a bar?

 

Seriously, is there ANYONE here, who after drinking a shot, and getting a $1000 bill for it, would lean towards paying it vs calling the bartender an idiot?

I bet he spent some time in VIP fcuking or getting blown by the girls there and is now trying to save face with his wife.

 

Bingo! I'm thinking the wifey found the bill.

 

Bingo! I'm thinking the wifey found the bill.

 

 

Hahahahaha, this is great. Let me ask you this- when was the last time you left your house and went to a bar?

 

Seriously, is there ANYONE here, who after drinking a shot, and getting a $1000 bill for it, would lean towards paying it vs calling the bartender an idiot?

 

You realize you're contradicting yourself, right?

 

You said gun owners shouldn't be responsible for gun crimes, yet you now think bar patrons shouldnt be responsible for their actions.