Serving Drunk People?

[Ding-Dong]

If pub landlords refuse to serve drunk people because 'they've had enough', should fast food outlets refuse to serve fat people for the same reason?

(This was on the letters page of the currect issue of Viz - yes, I really am that sophisticated).

Semi-serious point behind the question though - NHS burden etc etc etc...

[Loosehead]

The drunk issue is a point of statute the others are not but if you are saying "should" then I suppose it comes down to liberty. On balance you cannot stop someone doing something legal just because it's bad for them. If you are going to stop fat people ordering fast food on the basis of the health cost then are you going to stop people putting salt on their dinner or buying a pack of snout?

[loopey]

might be a way of keeping me on my diet.................

[sandbach99]

As previosly said a landlord is not allowed to serve anyone who is drunk, although most seem to carry on.

Alcohol is the reason for the drunks condition therefore he should not be served, if the fast-food outlet can prove that a persons diet has caused their weight problem then yes they should not be served, but although the media never mentions it there are other reasons for being overweight. Some medications ie steroids cause a massive appetite and weight increase, some illnesses actually cause a weight increase although the appetite has remained the same

[stevie21]

The time lag between going to the McDonalds counter and lying in a hospital operating theatre make any direct relationship to one particular fast-food visit imopssible. Although, in general, we can say that overeating fast-food is a burden to the NHS there isn't the immediate relationship that the pub landlord can see :
"You've just had 10 pints, you're wasted, no more".

Still - I'd say yes anyway. Starve the burgers!!
As I said earlier - discriminate! It's good for the economy!!

[Zen]

Should Body Shop refuse to serve ugly people ?

[Buddy]

Drunks can cause serious grief to other people.Fat or chubby people are only causing grief to themselves.

[stevie21]

Buddy, they're only causing immediate grief to themselves but they are an unnecessary strain on ther NHS. Maybe the operation I'm waiting for is delayed or unavailable due to a lack of finances after the NHS has spent lots of money on fat-related illnesses.
A bit of an extreme example but there's some logic in there.

[Ouisch]

A drunk can get behind the wheel of a car after the bartender gave him that extra pint and kill someone. The overweight person is much less likely to trip and fall and cause bodily harm to someone while exiting McDonald's. The issue is liability - say a person is already obviously tipsy, and the barkeep continues to serve him. The drunk person then leaves to go home, and hits someone head-on on the way. These days, the pub has to bear some of the legal responsibility for contributing to the driver's impairment.

[libertie]

I imagine that when drunks are refused any more drink it's more to do with the fact they they are likely to be falling around, spilling drinks, maybe being abusive and generally getting on everyones nerves - hardly the same behaviour you would expect from an overweight person in a queue at MacDonalds!!

[Ding-Dong]

Yeh, it was kind of a jokey question in a way - personally I hate the nanny state and really couldn't give a monkey's if the fat bar stewards ate at McCrap all day long!

[Englishbird]

When it gets to the point of not serving someone alcohol, you do it when they are in immediate danger to themselves or others. As for it not being legal to serve 'drunk people', it'd be a slow night if you had to stop serving everyone who was drunk. It's more about common sense and social responsibility. Exactly as buddy says, the overweight people are only hurting themselves.

As for this 'drain on the nhs' bull, I can only assume you don't drink, don't smoke, are not overweight, don't drive a car, are holier than thou and can afford to look down on other people and say because of what they do they are less worthy than you for treatment on the nhs. I pay my taxes same as anyone, in fact I pay a lot more because i smoke, if i'm ill, i'm ill, and have every right to access to the nhs.

And ding-dong, I totally agree about the nanny state, i can't bear it, blair and crony's are smothering us. Someone cut the apron strings please ...

[tomd]

Not before tobacconists are allowed to refuse to serve heavy smokers.

[Dakota2]

I absolutely cannot believe some of the responses I have read!

I hardly think that putting salt on their food or being to ugly to buy from the Body Shop can possibly be compared to refusing to serve someone who has clearly had too much to drink and cannot handle it.

We have all been in the position where you are enjoying a nice evening in the pub and some idiot is making a fool of himself because he/she clearly cannot handle the amount of drink served. Please don't sit there and tell me that you and your friends did not discuss this person and agree that he/she should not be served anymore and they should just go home and sleep it off!

[shonna]

I agree with Dakota2