var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
FuryOfFirestorm
December 17, 2008 8:25 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

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

Reply
8 replies
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
December 23, 2008 7:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FuryOfFirestorm:

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Krobar
December 18, 2008 2:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FuryOfFirestorm: pretty sure you missed that bus, I believe the wife was telling me there was an article early this year or last year saying that playgirl was closing/closed.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trunkwontopen
December 18, 2008 1:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FuryOfFirestorm: I'm goona sue my Egg Sandwich for breaking the Sears CEO's phone.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
private1111
December 17, 2008 9:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
CSedarka
December 18, 2008 4:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@private1111: Gay is okay and all but am i the only one to catch this?? LOL!

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Abusiveelusive
December 17, 2008 10:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@private1111: He is gay. So what?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
homerjay wants Boston Legal back!
December 18, 2008 12:40 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Abusiveelusive: With all the choices available to the gay man now-a-days, he chooses playgirl? Hmm...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
alexawesome
December 18, 2008 3:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@homerjay wants Boston Legal back!: Er, are you guys missing a fairly obvious alternate explanation? That FuryOfFirestorm might be a woman? Just a thought, since there's no obvious gender data for users, and FuryOfFirestorms is a fairly gender ambiguous username.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Abusiveelusive
December 18, 2008 7:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@alexawesome: Or you can click their name and see their profile. Looks like they link to their MySpace from there too.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
calquist
December 18, 2008 4:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@alexawesome: I don't think woman would use the term \"jack\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BustangBetty
December 18, 2008 5:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@calquist: Some girls use the word \"jack\" whilst others use the word \"jill\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mattarse
December 18, 2008 8:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'll sue playgirl for making me not jack off, and playboy for making me wank!

Get paid from both Oh Yeah

Reply
\"user-pic\"
slymaple01
December 17, 2008 9:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
OmniZero
December 17, 2008 8:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FuryOfFirestorm: I'm going to sue consumerist for making me angry at stupid people.

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
mcjake
December 17, 2008 8:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What a gentlemen. Get's drunk, beats his wife and then blames it on someone else.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
Dawnrazor
December 17, 2008 9:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
varro
December 18, 2008 4:10 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dawnrazor: Agreed. If you turn into an asshole when drunk, don't drink to excess. If you can't not drink to excess, go into rehab.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
m4ximusprim3
December 18, 2008 1:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dawnrazor: not to mention that 99.9% of the population would drink to the point of passing out without it ever occuring to them to beat the crap out of their wife.

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PittDragon
December 17, 2008 9:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mcjake: Hes just being traditional ;)

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
B
December 17, 2008 9:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PittDragon: Traditional would be to blame his wife.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Ash78 ain't got time to bleed
December 17, 2008 8:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
ceilingFANBOY
December 18, 2008 7:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@The Name's Ash78, Housewares: Of course they were cutting people off when the drinks were free. They didn't want to lose all that alcohol money.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bluewyvern
December 18, 2008 6:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@The Name's Ash78, Housewares: Exactly.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
joshua70448
December 18, 2008 6:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bluewyvern: I agree. The lawsuit's a crock, but the concept is pretty sound. The main reason why bartenders have to cut off drunk patrons is so they don't get in their car and kill someone. When someone is flying home (or getting a rental car at their destination), they're going to be driving drunk, just like if they had been at a bar. Heck, even when I was working as a grocery store cashier we weren't supposed to sell alcohol to drunks; the same thing should apply to in-flight drinks as well.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
OmniZero
December 17, 2008 8:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is ridiculous. Just because the man wasn't responsible enough to take care of HIMSELF, he feels the need to sue the airline. It's like when bullies pick on kids to make themselves feel better. The bully is the drunk and he needs to pick on the airline to make him feel better for his alcoholic tendencies.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
joeblevins
December 17, 2008 8:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
jdhuck
December 17, 2008 8:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@joeblevins: I know that the flight attendants really like it when you say, \"Hey waitress, get over here.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
joeblevins
December 18, 2008 3:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bluewyvern
December 18, 2008 7:04 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jdhuck: About as much as waitresses like it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RecordStoreToughGuy_starcommandseries.com
December 17, 2008 8:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@joeblevins: \"I thought that Airlines were already responsible if they serve someone enough that they are drunk then get a DUI.\"

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

^_^

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Chols
December 17, 2008 8:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@joeblevins:
\"While they can't be responsible for the womans inability to keep quiet, they also can't be blamed for the husbands actions.\"

This made me lol at work!!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Skipweasel
December 17, 2008 8:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Airlines are certainly responsible for making me not want to fly - can I sue them for this?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
TechnoDestructo
December 17, 2008 8:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Maybe angry drunks should get visibly branded so people know not to give them alcohol?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
bravo369
December 17, 2008 8:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Rhayader
December 17, 2008 9:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bravo369: I agree. Inebriation should not be a legal defense, and usually is not. However, this whole idea of an airline (or regular old bar, for that matter) being responsible for deciding when people have had too much to drink muddies things up.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 18, 2008 7:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rhayader: Yes, lets make it legal for MORE stupid people to be irresponsible and injure / kill others. Great Idea.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
katylostherart
December 17, 2008 9:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bravo369: true, but this doesn't mean someone visibly drunk shouldn't be cut off.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pb5000
December 17, 2008 9:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katylostherart: The should have cut him off, but his actions are not their fault.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
fjordtjie
December 17, 2008 8:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
snowburnt
December 17, 2008 8:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fjordtjie: Because people are stupid. Know this though: just because someone else is responsible for your actions, you still have to take responsibility as well. Kind of like if you get rear ended then because of that you rear end the person in front of you. you and the person behind you will share in the responsibility for the person you hit (they'll get more of the blame).

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Ash78 ain't got time to bleed
December 17, 2008 8:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
testsicles
December 17, 2008 8:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
weakdome
December 17, 2008 8:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
magic8ball
December 18, 2008 12:15 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@weakdome: Wait, what happened to the gin-and-tonic option?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
m4ximusprim3
December 18, 2008 1:46 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@magic8ball: 4) After you beat up your wife, should the paramedics give her gin-and-tonic for the pain? probably, but they won't

Reply
\"user-pic\"
weakdome
December 17, 2008 9:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Canino
December 17, 2008 9:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rhayader
December 17, 2008 9:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Canino: Yeah, we need to get back to the good old days of DIY spousal abuse. This outsourcing shit has got to stop.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
sir_eccles
December 17, 2008 8:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wine conesur um conoseur um connosseur um tasting cat remembers to spit.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
ceilingFANBOY
December 18, 2008 7:56 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sir_eccles: For a second there, all I saw were o, u, and e's in that comment and thought you had been reverse disemvoweled.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
DH405
December 18, 2008 8:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ceilingFANBOY: I'e ee ea o u a i.

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 18, 2008 7:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SMSDHubbard: Agreed. I've found it pretty easy to get the jist of what disemvoweled comments say. However disconsonanted doesn't sound as cool or foreboding as disemvoweled.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Mr. Guy
December 17, 2008 8:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

i love how his wife is going along with this. the judge should laugh them out of court.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 18, 2008 7:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Mr. Guy: Victims of spousal abuse most often blame themselves, or others, for their abuse - never the actual cause - their spouse.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Ninjanice
December 18, 2008 3:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Jim
December 17, 2008 9:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Mr. Guy: Were we people of lesser morals and values, I'm pretty sure I could convince my wife to take a punch for the opportunity to become instant millionaires.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Chols
December 17, 2008 8:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can I blame the bar if I spent all my money there and no longer afford my college bill?

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
katylostherart
December 17, 2008 8:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

the airline should be fined for serving alcohol to someone who was visibly drunk. anyone who has permission or license to serve alcohol needs to be responsible for cutting patrons off. but they should be fined by the FAA or whatever, not sued by an idiot and his wife.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
katylostherart
December 18, 2008 4:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LandruBek: well flight from osaka to san fran is about 9 hours. so wine every twenty minutes for 9 hours. they give you one of those 8oz bottles if i remember correctly not a true 6 oz serving. so let's say he only drank wine for half the flight every 20 minutes that's still a lot of freaking wine. that's the hobo jug amount of wine if he even drinks for four hours regularly. he could get 16 full servings of wine at that rate by 4 hours in.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
failurate
December 17, 2008 9:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katylostherart: Yeah, there is no freak'n way this tool should profit from beating his wife.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Sanspants
December 17, 2008 8:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Did United Airlines charge him the Spousal Abuse Fee?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Jfielder
December 17, 2008 8:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Murph1908
December 17, 2008 9:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Hmm. Let me see how I can profit by this line of stupidity.

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!

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
docrice
December 17, 2008 9:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rhayader
December 17, 2008 9:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@docrice: Yeah, I have heard that too. And yet, if they find a little weed in your urine (which is no indication of on-the-job intoxication) they can fire your ass immediately.

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Parting
December 17, 2008 9:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I hate people refusing to take responsibility for their actions.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
mythago
December 17, 2008 9:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Meltdown: You mean like selling alcohol to somebody who's obviously already wasted? Yeah, I hate it when bartenders and bars don't take responsibility for their actions in doing this.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Parting
December 17, 2008 11:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mythago: Define obviously wasted? And how do you know the person was obviously wasted? Do you seriously thing a flight attendant will get traveler drunk on purpose? There is no bouncers, and you cannot throw out an asshole from the plane. At least no until landing.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Parting
December 17, 2008 10:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mythago: Alcohol does not justify evilness. If you know that alcohol brings out the worst in you, don't drink.

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mythago
December 18, 2008 2:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Meltdown: Bad news: it is the bar's responsibility to make sure that it doesn't serve alcohol to people who are already wall-climbing drunk. That might mean having more staff than a single overworked bartender on duty.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Porkchop Express
December 18, 2008 3:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@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).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mythago
December 18, 2008 10:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Lo-Pan: Who said the drunk has NO responsibility? It's not a zero-sum game.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
December 18, 2008 12:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Meltdown: Absolutely. Yes, the airline should have probably stopped serving him, but him blaming United for his getting so wasted that he beat his wife is beyond stupid.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Parting
December 17, 2008 9:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Meltdown: I've seen a guy so drunk, he crawled out of the waiting line at customs. And he still was polite, and didn't hit anyone. HE GOT OUT ON HIS KNEES, AND STILL ACTED HUMAN.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
couldberunning
December 17, 2008 9:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dohtem
December 17, 2008 9:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's people like this that mess it up for everybody. :(

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
testsicles
December 17, 2008 9:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Rhayader
December 17, 2008 9:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@testsicles: Sounds like you were mixing up some Pan-Galactic Gargle Blasters.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
testsicles
December 17, 2008 9:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
sogmasta
December 17, 2008 9:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Jigen
December 17, 2008 9:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
mythago
December 17, 2008 10:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jigen: If you think lawsuits are a way to get 'free money', you don't know jack about lawsuits.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Porkchop Express
December 18, 2008 3:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rhayader
December 17, 2008 9:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jigen: Hah, while it's not used as a legal defense really (and not grounds for a law suit), that very line of reasoning is often used to get people acquitted on rape charges.

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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Burgandy
December 17, 2008 9:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Courteous_Gentleman
December 17, 2008 9:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This might make sense if his wife was the flight attendant?

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Tedicles
December 17, 2008 9:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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'

Reply
1 replies
","","
\"user-pic\"
Jim
December 17, 2008 10:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I agree, the guy is responsible for his own actions, but if you don't expect personal responsibility in some situations, only in others, how does that work?

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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
TruthAndTheory
December 17, 2008 10:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Is no one responsible for their own actions?
Why not sue the wine manufacturer, and the winery while he's at it?

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.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Jim
December 17, 2008 10:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TruthAndTheory: 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.

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

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
BStu
December 17, 2008 10:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I could see the wife having a case. Him, not so much. He's still an offending party and deserves no reward for his efforts.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
maztec
December 17, 2008 10:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This lawsuit needs to fail.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
shufflemoomin
December 17, 2008 10:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Are they taking the piss? Are they actually saying real bars in the US can be sued for this type of thing? Please tell me I misunderstand something here?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
mythago
December 18, 2008 12:45 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shufflemoomin: If by \"this type of thing\" you mean that establishments in the US can be sued for selling drunk people EVEN MORE to drink, yes they can. I'm really baffled as to why this is such an issue for some people.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
testsicles
December 18, 2008 1:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mythago: maybe because I shouldn't have to babysit you and determine if you're too drunk to buy some more beer. Plus it's completely arbitrary. If Customer A gets stumbling drunk and gets driven home to sleep it off, Bar Owner is in the clear. If Customer B only gets half as drunk as Customer A but goes out and plows into a school bus, now it's potentially Bar Owner's fault. It's all a scam. Responsibility is squarely on the drunk. Morally there can be some discussion but legally I think it's B.S. There's really no reason to be baffled.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mythago
December 18, 2008 2:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@testsicles: Maybe if you're going to run a business that involves the sale of alcohol, you have some responsibility to whom you sell that alcohol? Oh, wait, I forgot; all you need to do is slap an \"Inc.\" after your name and that pesky personal responsibility thing goes right out the window.

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.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Porkchop Express
December 18, 2008 4:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
\"user-pic\"
testsicles
December 18, 2008 11:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mythago: But it's not about whether the customer was shitfaced, it's about whether the customer caused harm. My point is that the amount of drunkeness doesn't matter so how can the car owner be responsible? Sell one drink to everyone? Theoretically, a person could go to a bar, have one or two drinks that puts them over the legal limit and the bar owner could be found liable for the harm that customer does. On the other hand, a bar owner can serve a customer till he or she passes out but if no harm is done, then the bar owner did nothing wrong. So where exactly should the bar owner draw the line. Let's not even bring up that a person can buy their own liquor and have a viable endless supply.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Ubik2501
December 17, 2008 10:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Earthbound drinking establishments are overrated anyway. They either charge you way too much for a cup of coffee that ends up attacking you, or have doorways to weird alternate dimensions.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
FortyMegaFonzies
December 17, 2008 10:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
em2thrasher
December 17, 2008 11:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This reminds me of a joke a heard the other day...

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

Nothing, because you already told her twice.

Doh!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
December 18, 2008 12:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Oh thank Gods.
Not for beaten wives, drunken passengers or lame excuses but for Consumerist Connoisseur Cat! Great picture!

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!)

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
varro
December 18, 2008 4:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Cat: \"Yuck! That smells like vet!

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

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
December 18, 2008 12:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't think it should be an issue of whether the airline overserved the man (if he had driven a car and killed someone, it would be), but rather about whether the overservice caused the harm. The reason that overservice can be liable for a vehicle accident is that intoxication, among other effects, slows reaction time and is a direct cause of accidents. Alcohol doesn't make someone beat his wife. It may make him more likely to do so than he would otherwise be, but there is an intervening cause here: his own abusive tendencies. Regardless of the airline's negligence in overserving, it shouldn't be held liable.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
bigmac12
December 18, 2008 1:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

As bug bunny once said;


\"What a maroon\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
endlessendres
December 18, 2008 1:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"No, it's a flying vending machine.\"

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

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
December 18, 2008 1:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm shocked that I'm the first to say, In vino veritas.
Or as the Moms says, \"Alcohol only makes you more of what you are.\"

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Jim
December 18, 2008 3:19 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: You're mom thinks I'm double-awesome!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
STrRedWolf
December 18, 2008 1:40 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think the lawsuit is worth it, even though it's highly unlikely the guy will win anything.

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.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
sxs3200
December 18, 2008 2:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

simple answer to \"Is an airline just a flying bar?\". If they pour the drinks, they are a bar. If they hand you the bottle and the glass, they are a vending machine.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
joellevand
December 18, 2008 2:49 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

This post needs the Personal Responsibility Toy icon, as much as I like Drinky Drinky Kitteh.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
madog
December 18, 2008 4:57 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I know a posting rule is to not blame the OP or the \"victim\", however, I believe the victim is the airline (what's happening to our society when a worthless and shitty industry can be called a victim?). Therefor, I believe this greedy tool should be shot or at the very least be beaten in the same fashion as he beat his wife.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
sonneillon
December 18, 2008 4:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Is an airline a flying bar? Are they responsible for this sort of thing? Is anyone other than you responsible for you beating up your wife?\"
Maybe the mouthy wife.

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

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
ceilingFANBOY
December 18, 2008 8:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Because this is an international flight, why are U.S. laws trying to be enforced?

Reply
1 replies
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
December 18, 2008 1:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd say that if the guy was in fact visibly overly intoxicated, then the airline should get some sort of punishment for serving an intoxicated person. However, such punishment should not benefit the person that got intoxicated.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Mfalconieri
December 18, 2008 2:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I am going to get drunk, beat the piss out of this guy, then sue him.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
jpdanzig
December 18, 2008 2:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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...

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
RurouniX
December 18, 2008 2:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

He has dishonored his famiry.

/Asian

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
quirkyrachel
December 18, 2008 2:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? It's their fault that I got drunk. It's their fault we argued. It's all their fault.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
darkryd
December 18, 2008 3:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This guy is scum.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
thesum
December 18, 2008 4:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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


...right after lunch.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
calquist
December 18, 2008 4:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

When I was a freshman in college, I bought a Mr. Beer brewery for my boyfriend from Target ( I was underage). We planned to make the beer, drink the beer, then get hurt and sue. However, we just drank the beer and forgot to get hurt.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
aerick79
December 18, 2008 6:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

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

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
kwsventures
December 18, 2008 6:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

United has filed bankruptcy a few times during its history. They need to make money. So if a customer wants wine, and will pay for it, give him wine. Last time I flew United nobody forced a funnel down my mouth and made me drink wine. Never happened. But, in this case, I guess personal responsibility means nothing. Maybe the Nanny State can make a new law limiting the amount of wine one can drink. What would that limit be? Will some bureaucrat decide for you?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
The_IT_Crone
December 18, 2008 6:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Alcohol doesn't MAKE you do anything.

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.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
james
December 18, 2008 7:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Is he suggesting that he beat his wife because he was drunk? Weak explanation. I have been drunk many, many, many times and never beaten anyone. I am sure he would have beat her drunk or sober, and best case maybe being drunk made him forget he was in public and beat her with witnesses. Hopefully now he will go to jail and get beaten himself.
One question though. I understand that a bar is liable for incidents caused by people they served while obviously drunk, but does this include if the people go home and beat their spouses? I hope not as this would suggest that alcohol is responsible for the attack rather than the asshole who did the attack.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
BrianDaBrain
December 18, 2008 7:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

... I'm honestly not sure what to say here. Speechlessness ensues. When are people going to learn to take responsibility for themselves? As much fun as it is to play Blame the Airlines, I don't believe they have any fault here. They didn't drink the alcohol, nor did they strike the man's wife. He did all that, so hold him accountable.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 18, 2008 8:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The airline MAY be responsible for serving him whilst he was intoxicated, but they are in no way responsible for his spousal abuse.

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

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
banmojo
December 22, 2008 4:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Another frivolous lawsuit?

\"Get a rope!!\"

Reply
","");