Please read the "Huh?" thread in Risk Management

DeltAlum · #1 05-22-2003, 12:28 AM

Everybody on GC needs to read the "Huh?" thread in the Risk Management forum.

It's pretty scary.

If it happens, all the debate in the world will be moot. A fraternity will be dead.

Period.

Read it.

FuzzieAlum · #2 05-22-2003, 11:37 AM

Could you link to it?

texas*princess · #3 05-22-2003, 11:39 AM

Fuzzie, here is the link:

http://forums.greekchat.com/gcforums...threadid=34072

LXAAlum · #4 05-22-2003, 12:53 PM

Bumping back up to the top. Definitely a wake up call for all of us.

sigtau305 · #5 05-22-2003, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LXAAlum
Bumping back up to the top. Definitely a wake up call for all of us.

you got that right.

Tom Earp · #6 05-22-2003, 10:16 PM

Just made my post on on Risk Thread so wont be dedudant!

trisigmaAtl · #7 05-22-2003, 11:42 PM

all I can say is

wow.

I really hope that this doesn't become a trend

don't drink and drive, for the sake of your own life...not just your GLO's.

DeltAlum · #8 05-23-2003, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by trisigmaAtl
I really hope that this doesn't become a trend

Well, of course that's the problem. If this one goes the wrong way, every lawyer in the country will go for the same award. That's what is really worrisome.

AchtungBaby80 · #9 05-23-2003, 11:27 AM

How can it be proven that the National Office knew about the underage drinking? Just curious...I'm not a lawyer (yet), so I don't know.

Also, I find it hard to swallow that the whole fraternity (not just the local chapter) is being blamed for this...they didn't force the guy to drink and drive, so I see it as a lapse in personal judgement. But anyway. To me, this looks like a case of a lawyer seeing dollar signs dancing in front of his eyes, so he's looking to go after the fraternity, because everyone knows that all Greeks love to get underage people drunk.

It's sad. I just hope this attempt isn't successful, because who's to say others won't try to go after the rest of us?

DeltAlum · #10 05-23-2003, 12:11 PM

AB80,

I don't know about the burden of proof concerning whether the fraternity knew about underage drinking -- but, let's face it, the drinking occurs in every fraternity -- and they all know about it. They just have no real way to stop it.

Does that make them liabel? Guess the court will have to decide, if it comes to that.

In terms of your comment about the lawyers seeing dollar signs -- or course they do.

In terms of "getting the rest of us" if this suit is successful -- of course they will. For the same reasons.

In terms of holding the fraternity responsible for the "lapse in personal judgement" of a couple of members. Well, juries and judges have done dumber things.

That's why I'm worried.

honeychile · #11 05-24-2003, 12:08 AM

First of all, I agree with y'all - the GLO system as a whole has got to become more responsible about alcohol abuse. I do think that the NPC is doing a good job, and I hear that some of the NFC fraternities are going dry. This should be applauded, and better publicized.

Call it playing devil's advocate or whatever, but here's where I get angry:

What if the two young men who were killed had been at a party thrown by some friends who were over 21? Would the employers of those friends have been sued? Would the owner of the house or the campground or picnic area or wherever have been sued? Would the alcoholl manufacturerer have been sued?

Does anyone else think that the families think they're seeing a cash cow? Are they honestly naive enough to believe that closing the one fraternity house - and possibly its national - will teach a lesson?

Or should the lesson have been taught to the underage drinkers themselves?

No one wants to take responsibility for his or her own actions any longer. If you're under 21 and drink, you're breaking the law. Period. If you get drunk, your decision making process is compromised, at best. Period. If you get in a car with a drunk driver, you risk your life. Period. If you still manage to become drunk, even though you are underage and therefore breaking the law, you stand a better chance calling your parents for a ride home rather than with a drunk driver. Period.

Let's look at this another way. The underage drinkers went to a fraternity party to drink (decision #1). They got drunk (decision #2). They got into a car with a drunk driver (decision #3) and were killed. Should the fraternity sue their families for allowing them to attend their party? Not teaching them that drinking is for those who are over 21? Not teaching them to avoid getting into a car with a drunk driver? Not having them call their parents rather than get into a car with a drunk driver?

I really do feel horrible that these young men were killed, and that the drunk driver seems to be getting a slap on the wrist, please don't get me wrong. I just think that people are finding it much too easy to sue somebody else because they or their loved ones made bad choices.

Don't y'all think that it would be more constructive for those grieving if they tackled the legal system to keep drunk drivers off the road? Do y'all think that the dollar signs compromise their stance even a little bit?

Just curious...

DeltAlum · #12 05-24-2003, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by honeychile
What if the two young men who were killed had been at a party thrown by some friends who were over 21? Would the employers of those friends have been sued? Would the owner of the house or the campground or picnic area or wherever have been sued? Would the alcoholl manufacturerer have been sued?

Does anyone else think that the families think they're seeing a cash cow? Are they honestly naive enough to believe that closing the one fraternity house - and possibly its national - will teach a lesson?

I believe that what you say has a lot of merit -- mainly beause I've said it all before, both here on GC and elsewhere.

To briefly comment on the two paragraphs above:

It would not be uncommon for the over 21 people above to be named in a suit. It has happened before. Their employers probably had nothing to do with it -- but they also would have no connection whatsoever with the drivers -- unless it was a company party. The fraternity does. And they were at a fraternity function beforehand.

Are the families seeing a cash cow? Maybe. Or maybe their grieving and their lawyers see the rich bovine.

In terms of the company that made the liquor? Why do you think you see so many "drink responsibly" disclaimers on liquor and beer advertising?

Finally, I hope the hell it does teach a lesson. If it doesn't, we're going to see more people killed and more fraternities fail because they can't live up to the liability.

Kevin · #13 05-24-2003, 12:53 AM

Must be pretty important if there's a thread abouta thread in another forum

DeltAlum · #14 05-24-2003, 08:20 PM

Most important thing I've seen in a while. Everyone should read it.