Some states are easier than others. If they don’t have a solid reason they likely aren’t from new jersey. If they need a fake I’d they likely aren’t mature enough to prep a believable backstory. If if is a fake I’d and they can tell a convincing back story theyve earned it.
But like…why even care as the shop owner? They provided an ID so you did your job. The risk of arguing with a babyfaced 25 year old from New Jersey on vacation seems overkill to ‘protect’ some 20 year old soldier who is home on leave with a fake ID from having a bud lite.
Because if it can be proven in court that the ID was identifiably fake, they can be held liable for any damages should the minor become intoxicated. “Checking” an ID means there was a reasonable attempt to verify the legitimacy of the document and that it matches the individual using it.
Since what is identifiably fake is a somewhat vague category that can be litigated in court, most bar and booze store owners try to err on the side of too careful–which usually just leads to annoying people–rather than not careful enough, which can lead to fines, damages, or the loss of license to serve alcohol. Any of those can be bad enough to close a business.
Also to add, this looks like a doctor’s office/pharmacy and not a liquor store. Probably trying to keep people from stealing shit or getting prescriptions under fake names.
It’s easier to just say no and not take the business if you think it’s a risk. Don’t wanna lose your liquor license to a babyfaced undercover cop testing fake IDs. I’m not saying our laws on alcohol aren’t ridiculous, but as a business owner it makes sense to protect your ability to sell alcohol when it’s your money maker.
If you’re in Salem, Oregon and last week 6 kids came in with fake ID’s from New Jersey, just decline kids from new jersey until one kid from new jersey actually has a decent reason to be in Oregon from new jersey.
Fake ID’s.
Some states are easier than others. If they don’t have a solid reason they likely aren’t from new jersey. If they need a fake I’d they likely aren’t mature enough to prep a believable backstory. If if is a fake I’d and they can tell a convincing back story theyve earned it.
But like…why even care as the shop owner? They provided an ID so you did your job. The risk of arguing with a babyfaced 25 year old from New Jersey on vacation seems overkill to ‘protect’ some 20 year old soldier who is home on leave with a fake ID from having a bud lite.
Because if it can be proven in court that the ID was identifiably fake, they can be held liable for any damages should the minor become intoxicated. “Checking” an ID means there was a reasonable attempt to verify the legitimacy of the document and that it matches the individual using it.
Since what is identifiably fake is a somewhat vague category that can be litigated in court, most bar and booze store owners try to err on the side of too careful–which usually just leads to annoying people–rather than not careful enough, which can lead to fines, damages, or the loss of license to serve alcohol. Any of those can be bad enough to close a business.
Don’t all IDs have scannable barcodes nowadays? Or is that just certain states?
Most do but scanners aren’t cheap or perfect. There are scannable fakes.
Also to add, this looks like a doctor’s office/pharmacy and not a liquor store. Probably trying to keep people from stealing shit or getting prescriptions under fake names.
It’s easier to just say no and not take the business if you think it’s a risk. Don’t wanna lose your liquor license to a babyfaced undercover cop testing fake IDs. I’m not saying our laws on alcohol aren’t ridiculous, but as a business owner it makes sense to protect your ability to sell alcohol when it’s your money maker.
A solid reason for what, exactly? Being from New Jersey? Does “I live there” not qualify as a reason?
If you’re in Salem, Oregon and last week 6 kids came in with fake ID’s from New Jersey, just decline kids from new jersey until one kid from new jersey actually has a decent reason to be in Oregon from new jersey.
Stores have the right to refuse service, but interrogating patrons just seems impractical /shrug.
OK, thanks. TIL.