Exactly. And like I’ve said, I don’t mind people drinking, and I love a glass of champagne every now and then (it’s the only thing that I drink). But, I’d rather be around a smoker than a drinker any day. A lady with whom I work buried her father-in-law yesterday from an accident with a 4th-time drunk driver. Her sister-in-law sustained brain damage and multiple fractures over her body. I am for total freedom and personal responsibility. But, maybe, just maybe, we should be HONEST and limit alochol use to the home just as what is increasingly happening with tobabacco. I’ve never had to worry about someone using a tobacco product getting behind the wheel or acting stupidly from intoxication. Maybe, just maybe, it’s time to stop picking our own personal vices. But, hey, I really like to socialize with other like-minded adults, whether it’s with other men enjoying a cigar or adult beverage with one another. Am I as strange as I think I am?
What's strange is that your attitude, though absolutely correct, has been denormalized by the Nanny Staters.
How do we reconcile those two ideas?
Assuming in this case, that A) the guy had indeed been drinking, and B) there was no defect in the railing structure, then the fact is it's his and only his own fault.
But juries can be made to blame the ballpark, regardless of that.
And is it worth it, to deprive millions of fans of their responsible enjoyment to save one schmuck?
This makes news because it doesn't happen very often. Most people's sense of self-preservation rules. Should we mourn the loss of those where that's not the case?