Especially since it's changed hands multiple times in only 2 years

EXACTLY!

>Its one of the bigger reason why bars take peoples keys when they order a drink.

That's a thing in the US?!

In the article they are turning the outside lights off at the breakers.

The issue is the teachers can't even control the lights in a class room so students can watch videos.

It was a bad system installed by a bad company.

Yes she made the choice to buy alcohol, but the provider supplied it to her at their location. If she got drunk at home, went to the venue, was kicked out and crashed then thatd all be on her. But the venue provider her alcohol, enough for her to become intoxicated thus changing her from a person capable of making her own decisions reasonably to a person unable to reasonably make her own decisions (with regards to her safety and the safety of those around her). The moment that switch occurs her safety and those around her are the responsibility of the provider and removing her from the venue/location requires a safe/reasonable means of transportation. Its the same reason you cant just drop a drunk person off on the highway. Its unsafe for them and those around them. Its also the same line of logic for why an intoxicated person cant consent. They are unable to make soind decisions regarding their own safety. So, you cant kick someone out of location after getting them drunk only to have them drive a vehicle.

Its one of the bigger reason why bars take peoples keys when they order a drink.

I am an electrician that does lighting controls. This is a non-story. These lights can be turned off, no one wants to. There are circuit breakers, lighting control panels, override switches, and photocells. The school or town leaves them on for security reasons. Light is always your first defense.

Looks like pretty cool to me.

[deleted]

Thank fuck. My love for Canada is sustained.

The fact she can legally win this case and not be held liable, makes you think they might change the laws related to this Right?..... Right?

That's just insane to me. No-one "got her drunk". She ordered the drinks. Glad that this lawsuit would be loughed out of our courts.

An automated function without an manual override function is a bad automatic function.

People always take the ease & convenience of automation for granted -- until they need control of the situation and can't take things manually.

This is the problem with putting everything under software control. Not everything needs to be 'smart' and connected. Sometimes low-tech solutions are the best.

Unless Canadian law is vastly different from America, she's isn't going to become rich as fuck. The most she could win would be the amount of damages she suffered. That's only $15 million here because she caused $15 million in damage to others. Anything she wins is going to go straight to paying for that.

This makes sense in the context of the law. Thanks for taking the time to answer my question

You couldnt assume an intoxicated person would make the decision of using the phone or calling a taxi/uber. It is on the provider to do that, which is a 60 second process for a sober person to do.

Basically if they are intoxicated they are deemed to not be of sound mind and therefore you cannot assume that they would make a reasonable decision (such as calling a cab) to get home safely. Therefore the onus is on the provider to make that call.

Just turn off the goddamn panel. It's not that hard.

Put in a few time clocks beside the lighting panel. Hell just buy a cheap lighting contactor panel. Holy shit how is this a problem. You could hire an electrician and have this fixed in a day. With cheap parts. This is not an issue. What in the hell.

Unless the entire building installed some kind of lighting fixture that takes a data cable to turn them on and the fixtures themselves won't work without it - and I have never even heard of such an abomination - I don't see why you can't just tear out the automated control cabinet and put in something that's not stupid.

Even if you don't want to fix it you can still at least just turn the stupid thing off. What is it like hardwired right off a locked dedicated transformer off the utility with no disconnecting means?

Jesus I want to drive out there and just take a look at it to see what kind of cluster mess they have.

Reading the article it feels like this school district is getting scammed and skinned from here to Sunday by everyone they contacted.

I never tried. Even if you called me marbleblows they'd sell em. I always called em Marlbros and they still sold em.

Tax dollars at work

This is true for the majority of the US too. As much as I do understand it and promote responsible alcohol service, you can’t exactly control what someone does once cut off. There could be other issues at play here.

Small anecdote - had to cut someone off as a bartender before. He came in appearing sober, had one drink, stepped the the bathroom, and came back severely intoxicated. He had clearly taken something we didn’t sell in there. Called him a cab and he pulled off shit-faced in his car before it could arrive. Gave police his tag number and never heard back about it. Had he done something similar to this woman, I would’ve hated to be on the hook despite doing the right thing.

Couldn’t you argue a cellphone And access to Uber is more than reasonable as an avenue for getting home?

Same idea, but I switched to Pall Malls in college because I couldn't pronounce "Marlboro" after walking through the cold to get to the gas station

So wearing massive prosthetic breasts is wrong?

I guess people shouldn’t do it in front of children, then.

Yup. To expand on this.

Across Canada the law (roughly) is that any alcohol provider (personal or corporate) must ensure that anyone imbibing in alcohol that they have supplied either get home safely or the responsibility is passed onto a reliable/reasonable party. That is to say a provider must also supply a safe drive home, usually a taxi or other reasonable transportation. If a provider sends a supplied individual out of their location without a responsible means of getting them home or passing the responsibility to a sober individual then any harm to the intoxicated person or done by the intoxicated person in the responsibility of the provider.

So since the venue sent this obviously intoxicated person home without providing any reasonable transportation (thus resulting in her driving drunk) any damages caused by her after being placed into a state of intoxication by the venue is the responsibility of the venue.

Basically all the venue had to do was call her a cab and it would have been fine. Someone chose to kick her out and send her into the wild while she was obviously drunk, so yeah in Canada the damage was caused by the person (company) that gave her alcohol and then kicked her out without a reasonable way of getting home.

While some may not like it there is some logic to it. If youre going to get someone drunk then they are no longer able to make soind decisions. You placed them in that position and so it is on you to get them home (within reason).

drrpen sperngs