This is by far the best discussion I've seen on Consumerist. Great job!

"Get a rope!!"

You gotta want to do it to do it, regardless of drunkenness. HE is the wife-beater.

It reduces your inhibitions. So you would be more LIKELY to do something that you were merely TEMPTED to do before. It's not the airline's fault that he wants to beat his wife.

I think the lawer should beat him for being so stupid.

Not the only one to catch it, just the only one to LOL.

Now I can finally sure McDonald's for making me fat!

...right after lunch.

@mythago: and if you cut them off the second you notice they're drunk, but they leave and get in an accident?

@mythago: you think the scum bag attorney is charging up front? Hah!

@mythago: McDonald's caused me to be fat. They should have cut me off years ago or at least 20 pounds ago. Now I can't run a city block without chest pains.

At least my bartender knows when to cut me off.

Point: the bar does have some responsibility, but so does the drunk. I don't care if it is a disease, my example above could also be an addiction (read: disease).

@jdhuck:
They aren't any more than waitresses now. Back in the day they had to be trained nurses as well as eye-candy. Then just eye-candy that were waitresses. Now they are just waitresses. They offer no value beyond that. And heck, on some flights they don't serve anything, so they are barely waitresses.

@Mr. Guy: Exactly! I'm pretty sure that this guy has beaten his wife before. It was just the booze that made him do it in public.

/Asian

What classic abuser behavior -- blame everyone but yourself.

The only one who should sue here is the guy's wife, who should get a restraining order against her woman-beating hubby, followed by a divorce and hopefully a substantial settlement...

(Gee, they should do the reverse. That's completely unreadable.)

Get paid from both Oh Yeah

I'm not prepared to speak on whether or not a bar should be responsible for its patrons' behavior, but if those precedents are already in place, then, whatever they are, they should apply equally to the airline.

Joke in poor taste aside. What lawyer actually takes up this case?

anyone who's not visibly drunk by then has either passed out and is therefore unable to give a sign of drunkeness other than boozey drool and snoring, or they're russian.

So say Callie and Butterscotch when I let them sniff my Evan Williams Single Barrel Bourbon.

I'm not saying this guy is in the right; I am saying that it's silly to say a business serving alcohol has no responsibility beyond taking the money and passing out the booze.

I don't get your argument that it's "arbitrary", either. With Customer A, the bar owner is in the clear because there was NO HARM for which anybody is responsible. If Bar Owner cut Customer B off as soon as he realized B was shitfaced, there's no liability either.

Alcohol may remove the inhibitions, but the desire has to be there in the first place.

First, those airlines should have at least a x/hour drink limit. Stewards should be marking the drinks off, and checking them when requested. Wine every 20 minutes? Who drains a full glass of wine in under 20 minutes?

Second, those alcoholic drinks should be EXPENSIVE, and never given out for free. I don't care what airline you are, you charge for beer, wine, and spirits.

Third, the guy was that drunk and was able to smack his wife around?!? They should have cut him off!

Go ahead, drag United through the court system, and let it air out. There won't be any money, but the airline industry will have to make note of it.

Since when can you find alcohol in vending machines? Got to go find me some of them!

As bug bunny once said;

"What a maroon"

My cats drink infrequently. They love the sauce but, hate when I take away their handguns, as I must when they're imbibing (but I let them keep their lil' bitty mouseskin shoulder holsters since they look s-o-o-o cute!)

What do you say to a woman with 2 black eyes??

Nothing, because you already told her twice.

Doh!

As for a bartender, in a crowded bar, where everyone is busy, it's not his job to babysit every consumer.

I'm not saying that I agree with the law at all (because I don't) ...but most state laws say that it is illegal to sell alchohol to a person who is "visibly intoxicated."

Therefore, when an airline, bar, or whatever serves an *obviously* drunk person alcohol, that bar or airline has broken the law and can be held accountable for the consequences of its *illegal* actions.

At its simplest level: the airline (probably) broke the law, and someone was arguably hurt as a direct result of it. The law may be stupid, but the suit is not.

It's really no different than if I sold someone some weird illegal drugs and he freaked out and killed someone with his car.

Maybe airlines should be allowed to operate the aircraft and people should try to control themselves in public a little bit.

How is this the airline's fault? He says he hit his wife because he was drunk. So had he gotten drunk anywhere, even in a bar or at home, that would have made him beat his wife. So his own reasoning works against him.

That said, maybe airlines should have a limit, that is stated along with its cancellation and baggage policies. Only 2 drinks allowed during any 3-hour duration, or something like that.

9 years of ignored signs of a Ponzi scheme is the SEC's fault, not the investors'. But however many drinks one guy downed on a plane is his fault, not the airline? Or a guy who ran up $70K in debt is a victim of evil and greedy companies, but a guy who had way too much to drink is on his own? That doesn't fit.

There either has to be personal responsibility or not. It's silly to be outraged at everybody but the individual when they shirk all their own responsibilities when it comes to finances and be outraged at an individual when they shirk all their own responsibilities when it comes to alcohol.

I don't think the man here is justified at all, but I can't say I'm surprised that he believes nothing in his life is his fault or problem to deal with.

Ok, first off, beating your wife is a lot different than a DUI...secondly, comparing such a flight to a 'flying bar' is just nonsense. This flight from Japan to LAX takes 14-16 hours; which is a bit different from even spending 8 hours (a FULL work day) at a bar. The claim that they filled his wine every 20 minutes is just a lie...I've flown that route many times with United (1st, business and coach), and let me assure you, they do not have the time to fill it that often, nor would they!

Me thinks he has a better chance of suing the immigration/customs people who 'unduly aggrevated him through ridiculous safety regulations and hours of waiting'

@mcjake: Creating misery and then shifting blame somewhere else is what alcoholics and drug addicts do best!

I totally disagree that the airline (or any other establishment serving libations) bears ANY responsibility at all. The person choosing to imbibe is solely responsible for his/her behavior; the time to decide to say "enough" is well before becoming intoxicated to the point one is out of touch with reality and at risk of acting-out towards others. The concept is RESPONSIBILITY, completely lost on this asshat (and drunks/addicts in general).

@FuryOfFirestorm: Dontcha mean playBOY??
Gay is okay and all but am i the only one to catch this?? LOL!

@weakdome: LOL. I still think it could be worded better... saying "is an airline just a flying bar" doesn't really address whether or not they should be responsible in the same way that a terrestrial bar would be, for over-serving their customers... while we all know that, literally, an airline is a method of transportation that also happens to have a bar. What are we really trying to answer with this post?
Did you mean to ask "should airlines have bars?" because then, those answers make sense...

@Rhayader: Yes, but I didn't drink it very carefully.

It goes like this: you prove to the jury that the victim was a slut and "was asking for it". The jury no longer blames the rapist, even though no viable doubt was raised about what actually took place. Not guilty.

I'm sorry, but showing up drunk to work hurts your performance a lot more than getting stoned on friday night.

I agree that someone serving alcohol can and should cut someone off if he or she is deemed sufficiently drunk. However, they should not be held legally responsible for making that call. It's sometimes hard to tell if someone is really smashed, particularly if he is sitting quietly in an airplane, and the douche 3 rows back keeps ringing his service bell, and there is a screaming baby across the isle, etc etc. Being a flight attendant (or bar tender) is hectic enough without trying to monitor the BAC of everyone in the joint.

Simply put, you are responsible for what you put into your body. I'm sorry, that's just how it should be. Incidentally, this same rationale can (and should) be used to argue for the legalization of other drugs.

@Murph1908:
I don't know about suing the bar, but you'd have a good case against getting fired - when I worked in retail, my boss told me that at a manager's summit she attended, she was told that if an employee was a habitual drinker and came in drunk, she couldn't fire him because alcoholism is a disease.

I'm not saying UA is in fact at fault here, but the OMG LAWSUIT crowd is tiresome. Apparently responsibility only applies to sellers, not buyers.

Then the headline for you is: Man sues Playgirl for getting him aroused causing him to beat his wanker off!

The airlines are not flying bars. Bars would card me, I could drink on a flight at around 16.

How bad were her injuries? The fact she's going along with it makes it sound like a planned scam to get free money from someone, as most lawsuits seem to be these days.
Either way, its your own damn fault if you can't control yourself. Whats next, a man sues some lady because her slutty outfit made it so "that he could not manage himself," resulting in his raping of her.

OMG. I'm disgusted. Not with the story but with myself because my sick depraved little mind actually finds this funny.

I blame Family Guy. Imma sue FOX right now

@weakdome: Is anyone other than you responsible for you beating up your wife? HELL NO

I agree. If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself.

Seriously though, the airline needs to cut people off who are drinking excessively.

I once tried to sue the makers of Southern Comfort for an exceptionally horrific one-night stand I had back in 1987.

negligent infliction of emotional distress, false advertising, failure to provide warning labels, etc.

The airlines have to make there money somehow. Care for another drink?

I know. I'll go out and get drunk. Then, I won't show up for work the next day.

I'll be fired.

Then I can sue the bar for not stopping me from drinking, and making me lose my job. They will need to pay me my wages and give me my health insurance until I find another job.

Which is gonna take me a while, because people typically won't hire someone who shows up drunk for an interview.

Then, the first bar can sue the second bar for allowing me to get drunk and not get the job!

Brilliant!

Obviously this couple is just going after the deep pockets of a large corperation. If I got "overserved" at one of my local watering holes (which is quite easy here in MI... in fact I don't think the staff is happy until you are overserved), went home, beat my wife, could I blame it on the bar? Or how about we blame it on the company that manufactured the booze that turned me into a violent wife beater? This is ridiculous, it had better get thrown out of court.

Did United Airlines charge him the Spousal Abuse Fee?

If so I'm not gonna hold back!! A round on me everyone!!

I know this are fact because I saw it on teh Law and Orderz.

^_^

This made me lol at work!!

In this case, if a guy gets a DUI after driving home from a bar. He'll still have a DUI. If the bartender didn't properly cut him off, they will be held responsible as well. It's partially for safety and to stave off unchecked greed...mostly for safety though, who better to look out for someone than someone who could stand to lose a lot of money if they don't?

There are more ridiculous trails of responsibility out there...this is just the beginning

@fjordtjie: But bartenders CAN be held responsible for their patrons' actions IF it can be proven that the bartender served the patron while they appeared visibly intoxicated. It's hard to prove, so I just assumed it was a way to keep bartenders alert and responsible.

@fjordtjie: "would that also make the bar owner responsible when some moron decides to drink and drive and hits someone"

Google "Bar Owner Sued DUI" for some eye opening revelations.

Can I cast a vote for clearing up that poll, please? As of right now, it warrants 3 very different answers:

Is an airline a flying bar? YES
Are they responsible for this sort of thing? NO
Is anyone other than you responsible for you beating up your wife?HELL NO

why are companies responsible for an individual's inability to limit their own consumptions? would that also make the bar owner responsible when some moron decides to drink and drive and hits someone--apparently mcdonalds is responsible for someone eating their crap 3 times a day, why wouldn't it?

ridiculous! i guess if we're going for frivolous lawsuits, this would be the way to go.

i don't care whether it's an airline or a bar, it's your own fault you drank like an idiot and did stupid things because of it....whether it's getting into an accident or getting into a fight. take responsibility for your own actions and don't blame the bar/bartender/sports arena/fraternity. Lots of people get completely drunk and still do the right thing.

I thought that Airlines were already responsible if they serve someone enough that they are drunk then get a DUI.

And the Airlines do seem to charge coach. So what is the difference? The flying waitress takes your order, pours the drink and takes your money (if in coach).

While they can't be responsible for the womans inability to keep quiet, they also can't be blamed for the husbands actions. But if bars are held to that standand for DUI, then airlines should.

(not you...and not really...love the site!)

What? Even back when alcohol was free on intercontinental flights, the attendants were always polite, but firm about cutting people off (in coach, at least). Especially if most of the plane is trying to sleep.

So the airline isn't responsible for his domestic violence, but they should be treated like a bartender.

I'm going to sue Playgirl for making me jack off.