In what states is this not true? The National Minimum Drinking Age Act said that states needed to make the age 21 or else they would lose federal funding. Looks like they all complied from my quick research into it.
There is no minimum drinking age in Wisconsin if you are with a parent or guardian. Minors can order, possess, and consume alcohol legal at any age, under the discretion of the bartender, as long as they are at the alcohol establishment with their parents or a legal guardian.
All countries are states, and a good handful or so countries are federations which call their largest constituencies states, so Germany for example has states, as does Malaysia, as does Australia.
Edit: just reading now that there's no consensus on what a state is exactly, so, fuck knows.
Post is probably fake. Anyone that thought they were talking to another American WOULD just say 50 States, or all the States.
I reckon someone is using multiple accounts so they can "murder" something to make a point. I'm surprised they didn't throw some metric stuff in their to really throttle the pretentiousness.
United States states, yeah that makes sense. States within the boundaries of the United States. How else would you say it? If you just say "states" it doesn't necessarily clarify them to be American states but could be ones in other countries.
It's not cool, but it is an easy drink. Even with a sensitive stomach, you can probably had it. No common allergens or irritants, bar the alcohol itself.
Ok, I’m getting some reports about potentially xenophobic comments and insults in this thread. I’d like to remind everyone to be nice and abide by the rules. I’m going to lock the thread now because I’m the only mod and I need to go to sleep. Have a good weekend everyone, and remember, it’s just a stupid post on the internet.
Why should the restaurant/ bar take a loss though. Should just chalk this up to a lesson in responsibility- being responsible enough to know when to quit drinking, and responsible enough to not ask someone to pay for your mistake.
Because if they refuse and then if the person downs the drink, gets too drunk and injures someone the bar and bartender are held responsible. Bar tenders are supposed to cut you off at a certain point to avoid this.
Yes, I'm not arguing that the bar shouldn't have given the patron a refund. That was incredibly sweet and good business. I'm arguing that the patron shouldn't have asked in the first place.
I know it's not the point of the post but in what way is that ballsy and sincere? There has to be a name for this kind of post, it's either a gross glorification of a completely uninteresting interaction, or just completely made up because it sounds... I don't know, heartwarming or something?
Considering the price of drinks at some pubs it sounds true to me. Not something that one generally does but I can definitely see a teenager trying to get their money back