Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think he really knew the difference, but he refused to sell, so I just left and went to WalMart. The funny thing is that at WalMart you can go in grocery shopping with a toddler and pick up alcohol at the same time.
In my experience no one is worried about small children if you're buying alcohol, especially if you're doing other shopping as well. It's only on their radar if the minors or potential minors are of an age to be drinking recreationally.
In my experience no one is worried about small children if you're buying alcohol, especially if you're doing other shopping as well. It's only on their radar if the minors or potential minors are of an age to be drinking recreationally.
I figured that was the case, I just thought it was a silly policy. If a legal adult was going to buy a minor alcohol, why would they go in the store together? Wouldn't you want the kid to stay outside so that you wouldn't get seen together, and on the store security cameras? That was my line of thinking anyway.
Walgreens has a right to have that policy as long as it is in accordance with state and local law, no matter how silly I think it is
my wife is 67, and i am 75. this morning i was with my wife in the liquor section of a well-known drug-store chain in Espanola, NM, where she was shopping for a bottle of wine for our Christmas dinner. she selected one, and with her ID and credit card in hand went to the checkout line with me right behind her. when we got to the counter, she put the bottle on the counter and handed the cashier her driver's license and credit card. the clerk said to me, "i have to see your ID also." i said, "why, i'm not buying anything?!" she said, "obviously you are with her (referring to my wife), and so i have to see your ID also." "i said this makes no sense," and the clerk replied, "because you are with your wife, i have to see your ID also." so reluctantly, i handed her my ID, feeling like she was violating one of my constitutional rights. i assured the clerk i would never return to her store to purchase anything under any circumstances. sometimes i fear we are fast-heading to a time when we will be hearing "halt -- hand me your papers."
This has nothing to do with the law, it has everything to do with the policy of the store. I would suggest shopping elsewhere.
If it was an isolated incident involving store policy, this thread would not be pushing 20 pages long.
15 NMAC 10.33.12 lists the valid defenses for selling to a minor. It isn't enough that the purchaser appear to be 21 years of age or older; they had to produce ID. Just because you're 89 years old doesn't mean that you aren't pulling out for some 17-year-old miscreants, and that basis is why card checks are so draconian- judges and juries don't care who actually didn't have to show an ID when that 17-year-old then kills a family of four driving drunk. The requirement of ID is the liquor license owner's insurance that this doesn't happen.
I don't agree with the way the law's worded, and many people here don't either.
Liquor licenses are artificially limited by the state and as such they form a rent-seeking apparatus, highly susceptible to forfeiture for violations, for those who pay hundreds of thousands for the privilege of legally serving alcohol. The owners of said licenses are not keen to let their servers endanger property that is so scarce and valuable.
Liquor licenses are artificially limited by the state and as such they form a rent-seeking apparatus, highly susceptible to forfeiture for violations, for those who pay hundreds of thousands for the privilege of legally serving alcohol. The owners of said licenses are not keen to let their servers endanger property that is so scarce and valuable.
New Mexico is a quota state and has a limited number of Dispenser type Licenses. Licenses of this type are bought and sold, transferred to new locations or leased, with the prior approval of the Alcohol and Gaming Division. That is not uncommon in other states (I am not going to count them all up...)
But yes, owners of those licenses pay dearly for them and don't wish to lose them like the owner of a gas station/grocery store in Bernallio whose loss was in the millions when his whole property was shut down (restaurant, grocery store, gas station).
If it was an isolated incident involving store policy, this thread would not be pushing 20 pages long.
15 NMAC 10.33.12 lists the valid defenses for selling to a minor. It isn't enough that the purchaser appear to be 21 years of age or older; they had to produce ID. Just because you're 89 years old doesn't mean that you aren't pulling out for some 17-year-old miscreants, and that basis is why card checks are so draconian- judges and juries don't care who actually didn't have to show an ID when that 17-year-old then kills a family of four driving drunk. The requirement of ID is the liquor license owner's insurance that this doesn't happen.
I don't agree with the way the law's worded, and many people here don't either.
Liquor licenses are artificially limited by the state and as such they form a rent-seeking apparatus, highly susceptible to forfeiture for violations, for those who pay hundreds of thousands for the privilege of legally serving alcohol. The owners of said licenses are not keen to let their servers endanger property that is so scarce and valuable.
One of the reasons this thread is so long is because you keep stating that the law requires sellers to ask for ID when it doesn't. I've parsed it for you before. There is absolutely nothing in the law that requires a seller to ask for ID, but there is a requirement for the buyer to produce ID if the seller asks. If the seller does not ask for ID and the buyer is over 21, no law has been broken.
The simple fact is that many retailers do not trust their employees to accurately assess the age of the buyer, so they require their employees to ask everyone, regardless of the stupidity, under the guise that it would be discriminatory not to ask everyone. I shop at most of the major retailers around town and very seldom get asked for ID (and there is no way that I will mistaken for under 21).
One of the reasons this thread is so long is because you keep stating that the law requires sellers to ask for ID when it doesn't. I've parsed it for you before.
The trouble, Jim, is that you're not a lawyer.
"Just because I think I'm a doctor doesn't make me a doctor. These fancy clothes do."
-Doctor Zoidberg
"Just because I think I'm a doctor doesn't make me a doctor. These fancy clothes do."
-Doctor Zoidberg
Your trouble is that I am (albeit emeritus).
Please point out in the law where it requires a seller of alcohol to request ID.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
