The family of an 11-year-old girl paralyzed when the family car was hit by a Giants fan heading home from the game with a blood alcohol level of 0.26 is suing the NFL, the Giants, Paul Tagliabu, Aramark, etc. What happened is a shame. I'm not sure if the 5 years the drunk got is enough. But I see this as indicative of a tendency I've argued about elsewhere on Hatrack: blaming people other than the ones who commit crimes.
The NFL is to blame because they, um, sell beer at stadiums. Riiiight.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
What I just can't comprehend is how a family could look at the tragic accident that parylzed their child as an oppurtunity to rip someone off.
Hobbes
[ October 12, 2003, 12:57 AM: Message edited by: Hobbes ]
Posted by ludosti (Member # 1772) on :
I agree that ultimately it is the drunk's fault that the girl was killed. I don't think her family should be suing the NFL, etc. I also think it is not a good idea for stadiums to sell alcohol. Sure, they make more money on concessions, but I have been to too many baseball games watching couples down drink after drink and praying that their 2 kids with them make it home safe...
I agree that this is yet another example of the current trend of blaming anyone and anything.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Anyone and anything that can pay out big. This just makes me sad.
Hobbes Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
I agree with you to a point. I think the drinking culture that exists at sports games just asks for an accident.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
The NFL would be nearly broke without the commercials encouraging drunkeness.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
Can you say "deep pockets", children?
Actually I agree that there should be some sort of limit, other than only being allowed - in theory - to buy two beers at a time at the concession stand, to the number of beers an individual is allowed to buy and consume at a game. And, in my opinion, 14 beers in a day is more than excessive. I also do agree that one of the things that is encouraged in the tailgate culture is alcohol consumption.
But, you know, no one at the stadium or in the team's organization held a gun to the guy's head and made him buy and drink those beers.
I guess if one wanted to, they could make a case that the employee who took the tip, broke the rules, and sold the guy more beers at once than was supposed to be allowed could be judged culpable in some way. But that individual probably doesn't have anything to sue for, so these people are going after the people who do have money.
Posted by Ethics Gradient (Member # 878) on :
US stadiums don't limit sales? In Australia, the stadiums are only able to sell light beer (50% of the alcohol level of regular beer), they must be in "middies" or 285mL cups and they can't sell a patron more than 4 drinks at once. This has reduced drunks and drunken violence significantly.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
In the US, a patron can't buy more than two beers at a time (a rule which this person circumvented by essentially bribing a salesman), the beer is American beer, which would qualify as light beer most places, and beer sales must cease after the third quarter. In point of fact, beer sales at the stadium in question ended at the beginning of the third quarter.
Posted by Tristan (Member # 1670) on :
Alcohol level of 0.26? Is that promille? If so it is below the legal limit for driving in many countries. If you'd drunk 14 beers I expect it to be higher, though.
Posted by Zan (Member # 4888) on :
I agree that stadiums should limit sales, but doing away with beer sales is unfair to those of us who can control how much we drink - the vast majority of those there.
quote: The Kentucky family of a teenage girl who was bitten by a shark during a Florida vacation in July 2000 has sued Volusia County officials, arguing they should have been warned of potential shark attacks.
Amber Benningfield, who was 13 at the time, was attacked by a shark in New Smyrna Beach while she played in the surf. The shark bit her left calf and scratched her hand as she tried to escape. The Bowling Green, Ky., teenager was treated at a hospital and released.
According to the lawsuit filed Sept. 16, the county should have provided a warning "of the dangerous condition created by the sharks." The suit argues the county acted negligently and is responsible for Amber's permanent scarring, disability and disfigurement. The suit seeks unspecified damages of more than $15,000.
Since Central Florida has one of the highest rates of lightening strikes in the world, maybe we should put up billboards warning tourists about it.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Alcohol level of 0.26? Is that promille? If so it is below the legal limit for driving in many countries. If you'd drunk 14 beers I expect it to be higher, though.
Just for comparison's sake, most states in the US have either a .08% or .10% BAC limit. This person's blood alcohol content was about 3X the limit for drunk driving arrests in this country.
Most of Europe has LOWER legal limits, not higher.
I'd be interested in learning of countries that have higher limits. Which countries? What are their limits? I know that a few don't set limits (probably most of the Middle East and Africa, for example). A person who reaches .26% BAC is really, really drunk.
Suing the NFL isn't right and it probably won't work. But in their grief, and looking at the new need for lifetime care for their daughter (and/or intensive therapy along the lines of what Christopher Reeve is getting), they'll need some help from somewhere.
I'll bet this suit isn't just tossed out though. Many states have tavern laws making the proprietors responsible if they continue serving someone who is obviously intoxicated who then goes out and commits vehicular manslaughter while driving drunk. I'm not sure that a stadium is any less liable if it is going to sell alcohol. The catch is that this guy might've been served by a dozen or more people during the course of the game, and if he was buying his beers while seated, he may not have even appeared drunk to a casual observer.
Ultimately, if I were in their shoes, I would sue the stadium owner and the concessions since they are operating LIKE a tavern and do have some responsibility to ensure that service stops when a person is intoxicated.
Posted by Jacare Sorridente (Member # 1906) on :
I'd like to see drunk driving punished much more severely than it currently is. Every time it occurs there is a huge potential for it to end in death. Since the driver's license is supposed to guarantee that the driver is reasonably competent and responsible I think a mandatory five year suspension of license for a first offense and a lifetime suspension for a second offense is definitely in order.
As far as litigation goes- it is absurd that our society has gotten to a point where anyone can be sued for a vague connection to misbehavior. The man who got drunk irresponsibly is completely responsible for his actions end of discussion.
Posted by Tristan (Member # 1670) on :
Bob, I get it. I was confused. It's percent, not promille. Using this notation, Sweden would have a limit of 0.02. Sorry. When we are talking about it, we say 0.2 promille, thereby my confusion.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
quote:Alcohol level of 0.26? Is that promille? If so it is below the legal limit for driving in many countries. If you'd drunk 14 beers I expect it to be higher, though.
I believe it is per cent. And just for comparison, blood alcohol poisoning is typically fatal for intoxications over 0.4%. So this guy was halfway toward killing himself.
-Icarus
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
More than halfway!!!
Tristan, not a problem. I was pretty sure it must've been something like that. I've seen some European reports of alcohol and driving and y'all are VERY strict.
Germany has zero tolerance, for example. Heck, they don't even put cup holders in cars...or so I'm told..
Posted by Robespierre (Member # 5779) on :
I think the main point here is that the drunk driver is responsible for drunk driving. That person could have just as easily bought a 30pack(for much less money) then decided to go for a joyride. There is absolutely no reason to ban or restrict alchohol sales at sporting events. Those who cannot control themselves need to be made examples of.
The penalties for drunk driving should more closely reflect the damage they can do. But restricting the freedom of stadiums to do business is the wrong way to solve this problem.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
The problem is this isn't about alcohol at stadiums.
Its about a family who's daughter will need expensive medical help for the forseeable future.
Its about a lawyer looking around to see whom he can sue to cover those expenses, and make himself some money while he's at it.
Its a hope that the NFL and the Stadiums etc will through a few thousand dollars the families/lawyer's way to avoid the hassle and expense of going to court.
Posted by Robespierre (Member # 5779) on :
The problem is that the NFL and stadium owners are NOT responsible for that little girl's health. They did not get drunk and run into her, nor were they negligent in selling alchohol to someone who attended their event. It is tragic indeed, but the only people who should held monetarily responsible are the man driving, and his insurance company.
Posted by Caleb Varns (Member # 946) on :
Hmm.
Responsibility, obviously, lies with the drunk driver.
On the other hand, I've long thought that allowing several thousand sports fanatics to get drunk together in a mob-like setting is like playing with fire in a Kuwaiti oil field.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
Is that your experience of sporting events? Because it's not mine. I have certainly seen some individuals get very drunk, but I wouldn't say that it's even close to being a majority. In fact, I would say that these drunks are the exception in my experience. Same goes for tailgating: most people I have seen tailgating were anjoying a little barbecue, maybe a beer, and throwing a football around or listening to the radio or watching a pregame broadcast on a battery-operated TV. I know some people get drunk, but I would call them a small minority. Typically, at games I have attended, the people getting really wasted are teenagers or thereabouts. (Which is another issue, of course.)
Posted by Caleb Varns (Member # 946) on :
No, I agree with you; the vast majority of drinkers at sporting events are well within the limits of responsibility... some of that may have to do with the fact that it is VERY expensive to get drunk at a football game, where you have to spend five dollars for just 12 ounces of beer-flavored water.
However. I do think that the environment itself, outside of the freeway, is one of the more dangerous places to introduce alcohol. It's a very mob-like setting where emotions are likely to run high anyway.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
Good point. I hadn't thought of it from the angle of the emotions people were already subject to at sporting events.
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)