WTF? Teenager's brain removed after drinking cocktail.

[Nate]

Ah ok so just human fail then

 

[old.Tohtori]

No, he was slightly sloshed but was able to type his pin into the card reader on the first attempt so was fairly with it.

If pin number typing is an accurate measure in the UK, i want to go drinking there 'cause i can do that no matter what the condition

 

[soze]

I have never tried a flaming Sambuca after seeing it KO a mate. He did the whole putting a bigger glass over the shot then sucking all the air out of the glass with a straw thing and ended up in a ambulance.

 

[Everz]

I have never tried a flaming Sambuca after seeing it KO a mate. He did the whole putting a bigger glass over the shot then sucking all the air out of the glass with a straw thing and ended up in a ambulance.

I do this on the regular and other then the odd drunk shenanigans it does nothing harmful?

 

[Poag]

If pin number typing is an accurate measure in the UK, i want to go drinking there 'cause i can do that no matter what the condition

Well you can't exactly give everyone who wants a drink a 30 page questionnaire to fill out before serving them. So seeing how quickly/easily they type in a code is a fairly simple test.

How do they do it in Tohtori-land? Bloodtest? Breathalyzer?

 

[soze]

I do this on the regular and other then the odd drunk shenanigans it does nothing harmful?

I believe the medical diagnoses we came up with was he took in a whole lung full of not CO2 hence the dizzy light headed fall over condition

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well you can't exactly give everyone who wants a drink a 30 page questionnaire to fill out before serving them. So seeing how quickly/easily they type in a code is a fairly simple test.

How do they do it in Tohtori-land? Bloodtest? Breathalyzer?

By looking at the guy. If he's "pretty sloshed" then a shot of alcohol on fire that can set the whole bar on fire isn't a good idea.

Judging by pin number is asswards though, which is evident by your bar setting on fire

 

[Poag]

By looking at the guy. If he's "pretty sloshed" then a shot of alcohol on fire that can set the whole bar on fire isn't a good idea.

Judging by pin number is asswards though, which is evident by your bar setting on fire

Well i disagree, anyone can spill a drink even when totally sober.

Its all well and good you saying "Oh its so much better done another way" but you don't say another way. Also people look drunk at different stages. I've had people who looked and sounded totally fine...right up until they trip over there own feet and projectile vomit. Conversely there's been people who looked completely gone after one.

Eitherway unless you can write something down here which is a better test...dont

 

[old.Tohtori]

Don't serve dangerous drinks. Thought it was implied

If there's cases where a guy standing at the bar can be totally f*cked up and look sober, and look totally f*cked up and be sober, then it's clear that any arbitrary system to see if someone is or isn't sober goes right out the window.

Especially since a firehazard, as i said earlier and you repeated, can happen to anyone at any time regardless of state of drunk.

 

[Poag]

So nothing even remotely dangerous should be allowed ever?

Well, no cars, bikes then.

or pens pencils paper


Infact nothing..ever.


My point is that flaming drinks have been around for a really long time and there's never been a problem with them being around. People got them knowing exactly what they were, if they buggered it up and set themselves on fire then it there fault.

Seriously if as soon as someone hurts themselves with something no one else is allowed that thing...there would be nothing left.

 

[old.Tohtori]

That's taking it to the extreme. Tell me what's the benefit, versus the possible damage, of dangerous drinks that are for example on fire, or made with liquid nitrogen?

Then when you reach the inevitable "it makes money" reasoning, tell me if it's -really- a good idea when people are drunk around the said dangerous drinks.

I've made points about why it's a bad idea, especially with your self-acknowledged "we don't necessarily know how drunk they are", now i'd appreciate some reasoning beyond "stop nannystating stupid people".

Oh and, if a bar serves a drink on fire to someone who in their intoxicated state might not realize how dangerous it is and get burned, it's the bars responsibility for handing a proverbial loaded gun to them.

 

[Poag]

My point is. The flaming drinks have existed for a long time. They have existed without any major furor about them existing. Probably millions of them are drunk each year.

One idiot comes along and hurts themselves.

Suddenly any remotely dangerous drink is a threat to humanity and must be eliminated.

---
Why are they a benefit? They are fun, a bit different, remotely a bit dangerous so adds a bit of adrenalin to peoples lives. Yep, i'll admit they are ever so slightly remotely dangerous (the alcohol content in most drinks is not able to maintain the fire for very long).

 

[Scouse]

i'd appreciate some reasoning beyond the hugely pertinent, very strong, argument-winning-argument you made of "stop nanny-stating"

Fixed for ya m8.

 

[old.Tohtori]

We used to smoke in bars for ages, i'm guessing you're against that ban too Poag?

The fact of the matter is that if someone can hurt themselves with a product, it shouldn't be served to people who might or might not have their judgement impaired. Especially as you can't tell how intoxicated they are.

 

[Poag]

We used to smoke in bars for ages, i'm guessing you're against that ban too Poag?

The fact of the matter is that if someone can hurt themselves with a product, it shouldn't be served to people who might or might not have their judgement impaired. Especially as you can't tell how intoxicated they are.

SO back to my original statment.

Anything anyone's hurt themselves with should be banned then?

Pens, Pencils, paper, cars, bikes everything. Seeing as at some point in time someones always wondered "hey i wonder if this will fit up my nose" or got hit by a car.

No i do agree witht he smoking ban. But dont forget the ban isn't becuase it might burn down a building..no its because it will give you cancer and those who dont smoke around you.
If the flaming/freezing drinks made you exlpode and kill everyone around you, then yes i'd support a ban...but they dont, they just hurt you if your to dumb to know how to use them, and guess what? After the first time you fuck it up..you dont again.

 

[old.Tohtori]

So you're saying it's an impossible scenario that a barkeep, who doesn't see i'm drunk, serves me a flaming drink and i then in my completely smashed stupor trip and the whole burning shebang goes flying over some other patron?

Didn't think so. Cars are banned from drunken people as well because they shouldn't operate them when they're not in their full senses.

And a far as the smoking ban goes(which is to protect people, as would banning these drinks); nanny pampering to people who choose to go to places where there's dangerous stuff, right? Same as choosing to have a dangerous drink.

 

[Poag]

No. I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying your an idiot who threw his drink over someone else and thus its your fault.

 

[old.Tohtori]

And i'm saying it's the bars responsibility to see if someone is able to handle the drink appropriately and if you can't tell that, you shouldn't serve it at all.

Otherwise it's irresponsible to serve it and you yourself said that it's not always clear if they are drunk or not.

 

[DaGaffer]

And a far as the smoking bang goes; nanny pampering to people who choose to go to places where there's dangerous stuff, right? Same as choosing to have a dangerous drink.

That's not how the smoking ban was forced through - it was a staff health and safety issue rather than a customer protection issue that allowed the anti-smoking nazis* to implement the ban. Once the Americans came up with that little gem everyone else could follow.

(*strangely enough the first attempt at a smoking ban in the modern era was actually by the actual Nazis)

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah i edited that bit to show the correlation of protecting the people being the keypoint.

Especially since smoking in a bar doesn't kill everyone around you.

Funny how people think subject A is nannypampering and subject B is to protect people and then try to use that as a reasoning.

So which is it? We shouldn't nannypamper people, or we should nanypamper them when it fits our individual agenda?

On a sidenote; cool thing that nazi bit.

 

[Job]

She is not an idiot, in fact quite a bright girl at school everyone knows the effect of fire, but few know the effects of liquid nitrogen and at what point it boils off and exactly what temperature it is at any time.
She trusted a bar that was routinley serving the drink to get it right so the patrons didn't harm themselves.
They are looking at a multi million payout for this one.

 

[Raven]

Well, the fact that she didn't think of the dangers of liquid nitrogen before drinking it shows she hasn't really got a lot of common sense. Which is more important than being able to memorise a syllabus tbh.

 

[Ormorof]

if you buy a drink in a bar you assume its safe, i don't usually go around demanding an ingredients list and/or a production method description of everything i eat or drink in a bar or restaurant that would be absurd

if for my birthday someone hands me a drink with smoke coming out on my birthday i would assume its safe to drink if it was served in a bar... if it had been at a house party or something then i would be much more skeptical about the contents

 

[opticle]

The "too drunk to serve" issue is tricky to be sure of some times.

Provided that is satisfied, if you buy a drink advertised and served to you as clearly on fire, it's pretty common knowledge that it's hot. IF you don't know that, I think we can 'safely' call that natural selection.

 

[opticle]

Well, the fact that she didn't think of the dangers of liquid nitrogen before drinking it shows she hasn't really got a lot of common sense. Which is more important than being able to memorise a syllabus tbh.

Dude, not that many people really know what liquid nitrogen is. "Common" sense ?

Regardless, as I've said before, to serve a drink in a bar you must have a license, and with that comes "safety" approval of what you serve. If there isn't a very clear disclaimer about specific and unusual dangers about the drink you have bought at the bar, you should be safe to assume you can drink your drink much like any other drink, because it's a drink, served in a bar that serves drinks, selected from a menu of many other drinks.

I really don't know how much fucking thought you guys put into buying a drink ffs.