Bummer

Wow that just shows the courts can not be trusted to get it right.
 
Wow that just shows the courts can not be trusted to get it right.

Gets even better . .
In civil court, the drunk collected damages ($$$) from the bar that over served him prior to him driving to the crash.
 
Gets even better . .
In civil court, the drunk collected damages ($$$) from the bar that over served him prior to him driving to the crash.
This is evidence that an attitude of non responsibility is pervasive in this culture. It is always some body else's fault. The idea of personal responsibility is gone.
 
Gets even better . .
In civil court, the drunk collected damages ($$$) from the bar that over served him prior to him driving to the crash.

I've seen the victim or victim's estate sue before but not the driver lol

a statute (Dram Shop Act) or case law in 38 states which makes a business which sells alcoholic drinks or a host who serves liquor to a drinker who is obviously intoxicated or close to it, strictly liable to anyone injured by the drunken patron or guest. To the contrary, California recently passed legislation specifically banning such strict liability. It is often hard to prove that the liquor bought or served was the specific cause of an accident (such as an automobile crash while driving home), since there is always an intervening cause, namely, the drunk.
 
This is evidence that an attitude of non responsibility is pervasive in this culture. It is always some body else's fault. The idea of personal responsibility is gone.

Unless you are a rich Anglo-Saxon male, then you are responsible for everything.
 
This is evidence that an attitude of non responsibility is pervasive in this culture. It is always some body else's fault. The idea of personal responsibility is gone.

Tis the current pervasive America standards:
1) The gub'ment will take care of you.
2) Tis always someone elses fault.