Lack of personal responsibility

It seems to me that recently there has been a move towards avoiding personal responsibility - after all, if something goes wrong, so much the better to blame someone else rather than yourself, right? I was just listening to NPR's "Talk of the Nation" asking the question, "Who's to Blame When You Get Drunk?" and I'm disgusted to hear talk of making the bartender responsible (legally and morally) in cases where the person is obviously intoxicated. Wait a minute - was the bartender force feeding the alcohol to the patron? Who qualifications does the bartender possess to be able to make this determination of obvious intoxication? Is the bartender liable to further civil suits, e.g. if he refuses to serve someone of another race and is then accused of racial discrimination?! Further, where do we draw the line? I see hardly any difference between the scenario of a person who's clearly intoxicated purchasing more alcohol and being served and an obviously, morbidly obese person purchasing high calorie meals at a fast food restaurant. In both cases there are "clear visible" indicators (although again, I ask, what qualifications do the servers possess that will enable them to make this determination in an equitable and objective manner?), clear negative potential consequences (drunk driving, health-related issues including diabetes, etc.), and occassionally false/seductive advertising (strong proof than advertised/perceived, greater calories than advertised/percevied).
Ironically, I feel this attitude pervades even into the medical establishment. When something goes wrong, it's rarely a single person's fault, e.g. the attending. No, it's the system's fault - the nurses, pharmacists, doctors, and the whole infrastructure. Hence the whole emphasis on systems analysis. Whatever happened to ideas like commander-in-chief, captain of the ship, pilot-in-command?

In the air, there is always one person designated as "Pilot-in-command" (PIC), and no matter what else happens - even if air traffic control dictates one thing or other, the PIC is the sole person responsible for the safety of the flight. It's a serious responsibility, and one not taken lightly. I would venture to guess that a similar idea exists in the captain of a ship, and there is still some vestiage of that notion in drivers of vehicles - you don't see people complaining about system errors when they are involved in accidents/incidents - they are held accountable. Period.

Similarly, I feel the attending doctors should step up to the plate and take responsibility for everything - even the actions of the medical student. Ultimately, it's under his authority that the student is acting/learning. There should be an equivalent "Doctor-In-Command" principle and dictates no matter who says what, what rules exist or are absent, that doctor is ultimately the sole person responsible for the health and safety of the patient. Period.

So who's to blame when you get drunk? I think the keyword here is "...when you get drunk" Who decided to drink? You. Who decided to drink more than you should? You. Who decided to drive after driving? You. As others have pointed out in the comments for that NPR article, who decided to drive to a bar, intending to drink, and then walk out intending to drive home? You! Gee - who should we blame, then?

How about that argument that once you become intoxicated, you lose your ability to think clearly and make proper decisions. Gee - if a person became that intoxicated, and the bartender cut him off, where do you think he's going to go next? That's right - back into his 20,000 pound SUV and drive to another bar or go home. Do you think that a person who can no longer be trusted to make a judgement call as to whether or not he's had "too much" is perfectly fine to drive a vehicle? How does cutting him off from further drinks help this situation? Are you then going to have the bartender make sure that he's not driving? What if he walks back to his job (a surgeon, let's say) and kills someone? Who's responsible then?

Keys

When I was a kid, I used to love keys - they represented to me power and responsibility, I guess - a symbol of adulthood. I still recall being especially proud of having a nice large key ring with many keys - bicycle locks, house keys, and even keys for such small things as diskette storage bins, etc. Now that I'm older than 30, I find myself appreciating smaller key rings. I've since shed most of the ancillary keys, keeping just the bicycle lock, house, and car key. I hope it's sign that I'm maturing...