nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Nightclubs- any duty of care?

Roger Hassenforder

So there we were last night in a late bar/nightclub establishment proximal to the GPO in Cork, on our Christmas night out.

No one really drunk, except at the end of the night one of our group was rather suddenly in very poor shape, and i dont recall her knocking back the gat like some of us. (Maybe her drink might have been spiked, maybe she was just wasted, i dunno).

Anyway, while we were minding her and formulating a plan to get her home, over come the bouncers, rather forcibly push us out of the way, lift her outside and deposit her on some kegs. And walk off.

I was struck by how little they seemed to give a sh1t, and if we werent with her, (not that they knew who we were, and whether we were with her), she was in serious trouble. In fairness, a lot of patrons were asking if she was ok, which is appreciated.

Notwithstanding the whole "responsible drinking" and personal reaponsibility for owns own actions, have such bars/clubs any duty of care or responsibility towards their customers.
In 30 years of drinking, i never someone so wasted treated this badly.

Thoughts?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

end of the road

TheChizler wrote: »

Can we not just pretend it's a hypothetical? Doesn't matter who doesn't believe who then.

exactly. ultimately people cannot prove or disprove the ops story, and this isn't a court, so it's not relevant as to whether it did or didn't happen really. only 1 poster is getting upset about what the op claimed happened. the business involved by the looks of it have and won't be saying anything (we'd surely know by now seeing as this thread is open 6 days)

the discussion itself and other relevant factors is a good discussion over all in itself.

Roger Hassenforder

leggo wrote: »

It's not relevant whether they'll sue him (though plenty of legal issues have emanated from boards, I've been the complainant for one myself sure) or whether he could've told a better lie (maybe he's just not very creative?), my point is that it's a massively exaggerated story to suit a point he's looking to make and it doesn't stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. So if he's going to get smart with everyone who doesn't agree with him, then maybe he should've thought of a better BS story or moderated his tone and people who can read into his story wouldn't be so quick to call him out.

Seriously
What is your malfunction?
What exactly is the point im trying to make?

You dont believe me? Fine. I'm not worried some anonymous poster on Boards doesnt believe me. Seriously, im ok with that. Its not even your word against mine, you werent there.

But to paraphrase "the lady doth protest too much methinks" , your repeated expressions of disbelief have me wondering have you more skin in this game than you're letting on. If you do, how about i come in and see the CCTV at your convenience?

Ive no problem admitting ive wronged the place.
I've no motive, and a pretty clear recollection of the incident, which corelates pretty well with others. Couple that with a curiosity whether any duty of care does/doesnt exist out of interest.

We've had plenty of contribution saying "no", by people not acting the proverbial. Thats great. Its the point of the conversation.
Any chance you can do the same?

Next time you call me liar ill have to report it.

Roger Hassenforder

leggo wrote: »

Anyway Roger, your friend was murdered by these lads, sure sure go on go on...

Stunning contribution.
Such wit.

Glad its not fsce to face, I'd wilt at such fare.

Roger Hassenforder

leggo wrote: »

No it's a fallacy to call to prove that something didn't happen when I said that I didn't believe him and pointed out massive plot holes in his story.

Lets remind ourselves: what massive plot holes?

leggo

Go home Roger.

leggo

end of the road wrote: »

exactly. ultimately people cannot prove or disprove the ops story, and this isn't a court, so it's not relevant as to whether it did or didn't happen really. only 1 poster is getting upset about what the op claimed happened. the business involved by the looks of it have and won't be saying anything (we'd surely know by now seeing as this thread is open 6 days)

the discussion itself and other relevant factors is a good discussion over all in itself.

It's really not, though. Like you've had a bunch of people give good reasons for why what happened happened, you even had one lad give you his entire life story, and took none of that in. The OP kept going back to "Yeah but they SERVED the alcohol" and not engaging anyone who explained why it wouldn't work, or coming up with bad ideas then getting smart when people went through why those ideas wouldn't work. For your own part, you're unhappy that pints are expensive, so you drink at home, you want the off-licences open later and you think I'm upset, we know all of this now and you continually post different iterations of the same point with varying enthusiasm. On behalf of the users of boards.ie: we officially understand your stance on this subject 'end of the road'. It's the end of the road for that point, you've driven it into a wall at this stage.

I think you, me and the OP have all made our points abundantly clear by now and don't need to re-state them another 500 times in roundabout ways, so let's leave it for other people to discuss shall we? This hasn't been a pleasant experience for anyone so far, but there are the bones of a semi-decent discussion left salvageable here.

Stonedpilot

@leggo.

If you are so passionate about this have you asked the venue what happened?. You have a time a date you know the venue all you have to do is email the link to this thread to em and ask for an opinion.
Will seperate the wheat from the chaff

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I know the pub your're talking about from the description, and the bouncers there have always been weird, I'm there a lot and don't find the story hard to believe at all. I shudder to think what would happen if there were a fire or any kind of panic in there because they absolutely cram the place full of people and let in people who couldn't spell their own face they're that drunk; because of the layout of the place if there was any kind of rush for the doors it'd be catastrophic. I work nearby and so does my partner, I'd often be sitting by those kegs waiting for him, stone cold sober and I cannot figure out even the vague outlines of the the admissions and ejections policy.

And yeah bouncers in Cork have a rep for a reason, dunno why it is the way it is but it is.

end of the road

leggo wrote: »

It's really not, though. Like you've had a bunch of people give good reasons for why what happened happened, you even had one lad give you his entire life story, and took none of that in. The OP kept going back to "Yeah but they SERVED the alcohol" and not engaging anyone who explained why it wouldn't work, or coming up with bad ideas then getting smart when people went through why those ideas wouldn't work.

the op did engage with them. the only poster he got smart with was you because you got a bit hysterical over nothing.

leggo wrote: »

For your own part, you're unhappy that pints are expensive, so you drink at home, you want the off-licences open later and you think I'm upset, we know all of this now and you continually post different iterations of the same point with varying enthusiasm. On behalf of the users of boards.ie: we officially understand your stance on this subject 'end of the road'. It's the end of the road for that point, you've driven it into a wall at this stage.

this is inaccurate and a lie. i have made the point once along with many other different points.

leggo wrote: »

I think you, me and the OP have all made our points abundantly clear by now and don't need to re-state them another 500 times in roundabout ways, so let's leave it for other people to discuss shall we? This hasn't been a pleasant experience for anyone so far, but there are the bones of a semi-decent discussion left salvageable here.

it's been a very pleasant experience for me.

Roger Hassenforder

leggo wrote: »

It's really not, though. Like you've had a bunch of people give good reasons for why what happened happened, you even had one lad give you his entire life story, and took none of that in. The OP kept going back to "Yeah but they SERVED the alcohol" and not engaging anyone who explained why it wouldn't work, or coming up with bad ideas then getting smart when people went through why those ideas wouldn't work. For your own part, you're unhappy that pints are expensive, so you drink at home, you want the off-licences open later and you think I'm upset, we know all of this now and you continually post different iterations of the same point with varying enthusiasm. On behalf of the users of boards.ie: we officially understand your stance on this subject 'end of the road'. It's the end of the road for that point, you've driven it into a wall at this stage.

I think you, me and the OP have all made our points abundantly clear by now and don't need to re-state them another 500 times in roundabout ways, so let's leave it for other people to discuss shall we? This hasn't been a pleasant experience for anyone so far, but there are the bones of a semi-decent discussion left salvageable here.

Correct. I hope someone isnt trying to derail it.

Now, Can you point out to me where im making serving her the issue. You might have to start at the beginning.

Also, as i have you, still waiting on the "plot holes" that have exposed my tissue of lies...

leggo wrote: »

Go home Roger.

Stay classy!

leggo

Stonedpilot wrote: »

@leggo.

If you are so passionate about this have you asked the venue what happened?. You have a time a date you know the venue all you have to do is email the link to this thread to em and ask for an opinion.
Will seperate the wheat from the chaff

I've no idea of the venue, I'm not from Cork and don't know the club scene there. People keep trying to find reasons to deflect away from discussing the facts and act like I have a stake in this when the truth is what I'm telling you: I just don't believe the OP and find it funny (you can report away OP, believing you isn't in the charter last time I checked). It's others that have said they can identify it from the OP's description, one more person actually did so since you made this post. I'm just pointing out that the comments are actually defamatory without proof now that he's given that identifiable information about a real business with real people away, and explaining how the burden of proof works (i.e. That witnessing something, if disputed which this almost definitely would be, doesn't count as proof and that asking someone to prove something didn't happen is a fallacy and not how anything works anywhere).

Now, however, despite me being quite identifiable to the point people here can find a pic of me and a bunch of info I have out there voluntarily with one click, it's a conspiracy where I work in the bar and was one of these bouncers and I'm burning the CCTV footage to cover up my 'not even illegal if they were true because it's such a weird problem to have' actions. And they say I'm upset and hysterical. :pac:

TheChizler

If the mods feel that a company are being defamed and likely to take action over someone describing a not uncommon occurence which resulted in zero harm done in this instance, then I'm sure they'll step in.

leggo

Haven't called for the mods to close the thread or anything of the sort, again just illustrating that when you make a serious claim the burden is on you to prove it and not others to disprove it. The fact that you say you witnessed it isn't enough, Gardai won't even take statements off drunk people. It's this way legally for a reason: because a lot of people talk ****e and aren't to be believed and this way cuts right through that.

I'm sick of typing this, can people just re-read what I say until they understand it? Or just learn about proof, and what differentiates a fact from a claim, before arguing with someone who actually knows what it means. I've made my point, OP has decided to create a conspiracy rather than deal with it (mumbling "oh I've addressed that..." doesn't count if you haven't), I won't expect end of the road to buy a round anytime soon, we're going round in circles and I'm over this now.

Roger Hassenforder

leggo wrote: »

I just don't believe the OP and find it funny (you can report away OP, believing you isn't in the charter last time I checked). It's others that have said they can identify it from the OP's description, one more person actually did so since you made this post. I'm just pointing out that the comments are actually defamatory without proof now that he's given that identifiable information about a real business with real people away, and explaining how the burden of proof works (i.e. That witnessing something, if disputed which this almost definitely would be, doesn't count as proof and that asking someone to prove something didn't happen is a fallacy and not how anything works anywhere)

When youre finished Matlocking away, recall from your days in Blackhall or Kings Inn, a defamatory statement must be false.
There's a bit of a problem here. (Look up how evidence works v proof while youre at it)

No doubt your post might make Mods uncomfortable, and shut the thread. Theres a welcome change of tack from the "liar" though

The "massive plot holes" though...waiting on those if you get the chance...

leggo

I literally made like a thousand word post with about 64 questions that you didn't address beyond saying, "My what a rant" and "Oh I addressed all that." That happened! It's all in writing! :pac:

This is the problem, people are making valid points to you and you're shrugging it off if it doesn't suit your argument, then going "Anything else?" Yes! Address the things people are asking you to address! :pac:

Roger Hassenforder

leggo wrote: »

I literally made like a thousand word post with about 64 questions that you didn't address beyond saying, "My what a rant" and "Oh I addressed all that." That happened! It's all in writing! :pac:

This is the problem, people are making valid points to you and you're shrugging it off if it doesn't suit your argument, then going "Anything else?" Yes! Address the things people are asking you to address! :pac:

Notwithstanding the latest hyperbole, your "rant" was just that. Replete with "liar liar pants on fire stuff", misquotes and downright inaccuracies.
More of it above. Any valid points have usually been acknowledged. Except your 'Miranda/internment one", which as previously discussed, i didnt distinguish myself in my response.

So go on now, point out one " massive plot hole" that has you certain I'm lying; that clears the fog and reveals my my conspiracy.
Just one.
In your own time...

leggo

You literally did the thing I just said you did. "All those questions with the question marks? They weren't questions! Now ask me a question so I can answer it!"

I can't keep doing this Roger. It's Christmas, I'm having a nice night watching Scrooged, and I honestly don't care about your made up story anymore.

pilly

Roger Hassenforder wrote:

The "massive plot holes" though...waiting on those if you get the chance...

There's one massive massive plot hole that I can spit without looking too hard.

If you were "all" with this lady at the time why did you just stand there and allow the bouncer to throw her on to a keg?

And yes that's a question. As signified by the question mark.

Roger Hassenforder

pilly wrote: »

There's one massive massive plot hole that I can spit without looking too hard.

If you were "all" with this lady at the time why did you just stand there and allow the bouncer to throw her on to a keg?

And yes that's a question. As signified by the question mark.

Fair enough question i suppose.

Nowhere have i said she was "thrown" on the keg. The door staff moved us back, brought her accross the alley and deposited* her on the keg.
We could i suppose have attempted to not "allow" this by means of a melee. Not the wisest course of action.

( is that a plot hole? - that we didnt resist the removal? It would certainly have added some spice to the story).

*placed/put etc.