Should bar owners who serve alcohol to customers knowing they are driving be liable for prosecution if the customer is involved in a traffic accident? Should passengers in cars driven by drunk drivers be also liable for prosecution?

Monday 17th November, 08:52 AM JST

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 39 Total Comments Show All

kavikahi at 05:08 AM JST - 18th November

Driving drunk was not the bar owners crime.
Mato99 at 07:47 AM JST - 18th November

Violent Knife crime seems to be on the rise. Are we going to start holding the hardware stores responsible for selling knives? For me, bottom line is. If you drive it's your ass. If you're in a car with someone who is wasted behind the wheel you should have the guts to get out of the car, and hopefully convince your friend to find a different way home too! The absolute only way I could see holding a Venue responsible is if they were serving to underage guests who then went driving, which is illegal anyways.
gyouza at 07:54 AM JST - 18th November

People are focusing on the wrong side of this issue. More worried about being casually stoped and arrested for being a passenger when the driver is drunk. As far as I know, only people who have been involved in accidents have ben prosecuted for being a passenger of someone over the limit. I don't know of any case where a shop owner has been succsfully convicted yet, but my guess is that (for now) it will follow the same pattern. IF this detterent doesn't work, then expect it to filter to random testing and subsequent prosecutions. Those in Japan should get te message that there will be no tolerance.

There are a lot of contradictions where people are saying that they don't approve of drink/driving on any level but that there is no way you can tell how drunk a person really is. The law is saying that if you know the person has been drinking then you are going to be held responsible. If you were with the guy in a bar, and he was slipping off to get whiskey shots whilst you weren't looking, I don't think you'll be at risk. If you are out drinking with someone who might do this then in all honesty, you need different drinking buddies. For bar owners, here again, the law isn't trying to get to every bar owner who ever served a driver (knowingly or unknowingly) a drink. It is a deterrent. If you DID know, and in some cases it will be possible, then you are liable. Lets face it, if you did know someone was going to drive, and you did NOTHING about it, you must be as guilty as the driver. You have no idea what kind of accident that could happen. It isn't just Japan, the UK are also tryin to tighten up. If you want to research more, start here wit these stats - they might wake you up: http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=237
GW at 08:32 AM JST - 18th November

kinda sad here that some dont see any responsibility for others D&Driving when they know full well they have been drinking.

I live in the sticks a bit & have people over & insist the driver has no drinks, most just crash & we have no worries. Only once a friend said he wud crash & then around 11pm said he was going to drive home, I had to grab his keys & strongly insist he was making a huge mistake, he agreed & then tanked me in the morning over coffee.

There are way way too many drinking joints, ramenya etc that watch a car pull up 2,3,4 people get out & they all order beers & nobody does anything.

My wife sometimes works late & the road she has to drive has had several drunk driving accidents, worst claiming 4lives, of course the driver survived, so every night I have to hope their are no drunks around when she is driving, I damn well there are lots on the road because I see them weaving left & right, shame on you folks who sorta wanna look the other way
76waystofly at 12:51 PM JST - 18th November

Should bar owners who serve alcohol to customers knowing they are driving be liable for prosecution if the customer is involved in a traffic accident?

Good luck to any prosecutor that can prove beyond a reasonable doubt a bar owner has the uncanny ability to distinguish between which customers drive to his establishment, which ones are passengers, which ones hitchhike, and those who pogo stick their way to the saloon.

Should passengers in cars driven by drunk drivers be also liable for prosecution?

Liable for prosecution? I'm no grammar scholar, but the syntax of that phrase seems a bit off.

Unless the prosecutor can prove a passenger is an expert on the metabolic breakdown of ethyl alcohol in the variety of sizes of the human form, I doubt any prosecutor would waste his or her time on the prosecution of a passenger who may have entered the vehicle of a drunk driver; at the risk of providing convincing testimony to not knowing the level of the blood alcohol content of the driver beforehand.
Xeno23 at 01:24 PM JST - 18th November

Was a bartender for years in Southern California. Bartenders know who's drunk and who's not; also know who has a car, and who drove - it's pretty clear dealing with so many of the public on a daily basis like that. A good bartender is like Sherlock Holmes, my friends; it's part of the job. In California, both the bartender and establishment are liable in civil court, possibly criminal if injury results, but actual prosecution isn't all that common - not exactly sure why.

Had numerous professional training courses as a lead bartender and bar manager; psychology of drunkenness, physiology of drunkenness, chemistry of alcohol, state laws, responsibilities of purveyors, tactics and strategies for responsible bartending. Been in three DUI court cases and been thrown out of the jury by the defense every time; know too much. Bartending pros aren't just schleps slinging cocktails...
CaptDingleheimer at 03:00 PM JST - 18th November

As a passenger riding with a driver who's been drinking, your only responsibility is to reach into the cooler in the back seat and get him a fresh beer so he can keep his eyes on the road.
Rudd at 03:01 PM JST - 18th November

Definite qualified no to the first one. The comparison to a doctor giving out medicine they know will be harmful is bogus, because all medicine and alcohol can be both harmful or beneficial depending on the way the patient/customer ends up using it. If a doctor prescribes a month's worth of medicine to a patient with strict instructions to take 1 after a meal three times a day, but the patient decides to take the entire month's dose in one go, and subsequently dies in a pool of their own bile and vomit, the doctor cannot reasonably be held responsible. Likewise if a customer abuses their responsibilities by driving after consuming a certain amount of booze at a licensed establishment, then providing the bar owner was not breaking any laws or procedures (or "common sense" in the case of paralytic patrons) then it's unreasonable to hold them responsible for the customer's actions after they leave. The only fair way to implement some sort of responsibility is to instigate a procedure nationwide that if followed indemnifies the owner - for example whenever a customer or group of customers arrives, have them formally asked if any of them will be driving. Anybody that says they are will not be served anything with alcohol, and if they're seen drinking somebody else's alcohol they will be kicked out and their license plate will be reported to the police. And I can't see anything like that happening.

Second one, would have to depend on the circumstances. Knowing about something but doing nothing generally isn't a crime for a good reason, but if it can be demonstrated that the passenger in the car or anybody else for that matter (including the bar owner) had been overly persuasive in encouraging the driver to drink while fully aware he would be driving should certainly be prosecuted for incitement.
thundercat at 04:00 PM JST - 18th November

Japan has a ZERO TOLERANCE law. As far as drunk driving is concerned here one drink is over the limit. Anyone arguing that we can't 'know exactly how drunk someone is' had better think long and hard about what zero tolerance actually means.

In countries where there are varying legal limits of intoxication I would argue 'no' to both questions... but assuming we are talking about Japan I stick with 'yes' to both.
outofmydepth at 04:04 PM JST - 18th November

YES and YES. enough said. why would anyone risk having an accident or worse injuring or killing someone over a drink or more. it is just plain nuts in any country where there are cars, drink, drivers, pedestrians, etc. if you are going to drink, have a DD (desginated driver or stay where you are).
ptolemy at 04:33 PM JST - 18th November

Only if 7-11, Family Mart, Ito Yokado, and the rest that sell alcohol are too. No difference if its a restaurant selling 10 beers to a bloke or gal at once or a store. What about all the good law abiding salarydrones sitting in their cars right in conbini parking lots downing a can then starting their car. Same as a restaurant to me.
DeepAir65 at 05:11 PM JST - 18th November

Yes to the first and depends on the second. If the passenger is too drunk as well then how can you hold them liable?
meiwaku at 07:20 PM JST - 18th November

And I think the cops too!
nikoniko at 11:53 PM JST - 22nd November

you will have to hit the sellers in the pocketbooks on this one or things wont change -- if they are held responsible then they will start applying common sense to this issue
eze666 at 03:05 PM JST - 24th November

late response, but just checked back - i can't believe people think the bar is responsible... if you die of lung cancer is marlboro responsible? cirrhosis; is kirin to blame? maybe you get drunk and are a violent idiot and beat your wife to a pulp, then it's the bar's fault surely? what if you drink too much and don't drive, but get knocked over? sue the bar for serving a person they knew was going to be walking? people who can't take responsibility for their own actions (whether intoxicated/otherwise influenced or not) rile me soooooo much - man up a bit and admit you made the decision rather than passing the blame. pathetic idiots