system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
ELI5: If one cannot give consent while intoxicated why can one still engage in transactions, such as buying something while drunk?

I mean it seems like the merchant would be unable to sell you something as you could not legally consent to buying it. Is he not taking advantage of you?
gpt
Law student here who is really good with contracts:

To briefly answer your question -- **technically**, if Person-A is intoxicated then Person-B should **not** engage in a transaction with them. Despite what some commenters have said, "contracts" can be oral or written... and they can be as simple as buying a stick of gum.

So let's say Person-A ("Adam") goes to the store. Adam is intoxicated. He picks up a pack of gum, walks it to the register. When the check-out person scans the item and presents the price, Adam pulls out his money to pay for it. This is an offer to purchase the gum. The store clerk can "refuse service" (reject the offer), or accept it by taking the money in exchange for the product.

If Adam wakes up the next morning and can't remember what the heck he did last night because he was so black-out drunk... but he comes across a pack of gum and a receipt... he could go back to return the gum (assuming it isn't opened). If the store says "no," then Adam could bring a law suit to recover his money by showing that the "contract" (agreement) between himself and the store is invalidated for lack of "mutual assent." If he could show that he was wasted at the time of sale and -- most importantly -- the clerk should have reasonably known that he was wasted, then he can argue that he was not in a fit state to engage in the transcation.

**WITH THAT SAID....**

Would anyone ever really go through all that trouble for stupid things like that? No. But if instead of a stick of gum it was *every* stick of gum in the entire store... and maybe all the candy, liquor, etc. If Adam just burns his credit card buying everything he can -- then that would be a bit more predatory of the clerk to engage in a transaction with them.

Keep in mind though -- if you are conscious enough to purposefully "get drunk" as a strategic measure to avoid being bound by a contract... it could be shown that you, in fact, were not drunk enough at the time. You'd have to essentially get so hammered that your "auto-pilot" kicks in, and you lose the conscious ability to assent. It's not a very high bar. In fact, it is one of the lowest bars required as far as mental health comes... lower than the level required to get married and far below the ability to devise a will.