Drunk drivers(and people with drinking problems who don't drive drunk), affecting their families and others,alcoholism,people coming to work drunk(I've seen this,trust me).Or is it buyer beware,like everything else? Your thoughts on this.
2007-01-23 07:37:05 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Food & Drink ➔ Beer, Wine & Spirits
twogado,what is that,pig Latin?
2007-01-23 07:49:16 · update #1
Nate Dogg-WHAT??????
2007-01-26 01:44:44 · update #2
This is one of those questions that is hard to answer were everyone agrees. on one side you have people that believe producers are at fault for what happens do to the consumption of there product in certain individuals. On the other side you have people that believe it is the consumers responsibility to do the right thing. I myself partake in drinking and very rarely smoking. I don't smoke around non-smokers, and i never drink "to much". I am one of the millions of people that have curbed my appetites in a way that it becomes pretty much harmless to others. I enjoy my "Privilege" to drink and smoke. Now, i believe with many others that it is the individuals responsibility to take control of their actions. For people to be able to drink and smoke their has to be producers, they cant be blamed for faults of their consumers. the real problem today is the people that believe drinking and smoking to be their god given right, and it is a right to an extent but one that should be able to be taken away if abused.If a person is stupid enough to drink and drive, they should lose their privilege to drink, plain and simple. People in general on the other hand need to get off their high horse and accept that the majority of people that drink, or smoke aren't doing anything wrong. As long as you are responsible, drinking and smoking are just fine, these things are acceptable. Now that I've covered all of that my answer to the real question at hand is no beer companies should be able to be sued for the actions of their consumers and for that matter neither should ciggerette companies.
2007-01-23 08:05:36 · answer #1 · answered by levcue_21 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that neither should be sued. People use both substances of their own free will. We all have the choice to use them or not. The same goes for gun industry, if someone shoots up a school or a disgruntled employee comes back in on Monday and unloads a clip, it was their choice, not the compnay that produced the gun. It is sad to say, but the person who does the shooting, or gets behind the wheel while drunk, or gets lung cancer because they light up, shouldbe held responsible. If I go out and an slit someone;s throat, well it wasn't the knife's fault was it? The person who made the knife could have intended that knife to peel carrots, well why not sue them anyways? Ifthey wouldn't havemade it well then I wouldn't have done it.
Its all crap. People make their own choices and if the advocacy that is being done in this day of age, people are aware of the risks that are involved. We know smoking causes cancer, and that if you have some beer, well it is going to hinder your ability to think clearly and to react at normal timing.
Sole responsiblity lies with those that use the products.
2007-01-23 08:13:23 · answer #2 · answered by jonmarbles 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Drinking and smoking are choices. Cigarette companies are sued for lying about the problems associated with their products. Alcohol producers do not lie about their products.
12-step programs also remove the responsibility of the problem drinker and blame it on the booze. That makes suing brewers a good idea.
2007-01-23 07:57:47 · answer #3 · answered by voodooprankster 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you don't know drunk driving is wrong (with all the ads and promotions of that very message), you should be taken out of society. I'm a bartender and we get charged with neglect if we allow someone to leave the bar incoherently drunk along with getting sued by the drunk for letting him get that drunk. We get the double whammy for other people's stupidity because we couldn't babysit a bar full of people. Fortunately, that's never happened to me before and I hope it never will.
2007-01-23 09:01:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
To a certain extent it is consumer beware. There is a dram shop law which requires bars and restaurants to cut off alcohol to drunk customers. If they are allowed to drive drunk they can be sued.
2007-01-23 07:44:06 · answer #5 · answered by Tiger by the Tail 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I feel they should be...I smoke cigarettes and that is my choice...and I have never killed anyone with my cigarettes...yet you can buy alcohol, drink and drive and kill a whole family and they blame the driver, not the company who sold it in the first place...As long as the gov't is making money then they don't care. Same thing with marijuana...it's not legally all in most places because ithe gov't is not profiting from it. Money talks BS walks....
2007-01-23 07:42:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
this is a robust question, i assume i've got on no account concept approximately it. maybe because of the fact tobacco is a lot nastier and alcohol is greater entertainment? it could be sort of hypocritical so which you may sue them in case you drink in any respect, while the social gathering suing in all hazard does not smoke or bite tobacco.
2016-11-01 02:35:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In addition to giving voodoopra...'s 2nd and 3rd sentences a Right On! it should be pointed out that use of tobacco as intended is harmful; use of alcoholic beverages as intended is not and is actually a bit beneficial for health.
2007-01-23 09:00:08 · answer #8 · answered by Hank 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO, it's ludacris that the tobacco companies can be sued. You think any of the people out there that smoke think it's good for them? They just have zero will power thats all.
2007-01-23 07:55:26 · answer #9 · answered by Rob H 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think there are a lot of people who normally drink beer every day in moderation and do not abuse it and do not drive drunk. Its those who abuse it and turn themselves into alcoholics who have to be held responsible.
2007-01-23 07:41:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋