• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should a retailer refuse to sell alcohol to a legal adult if a minor is present?

Should a retailer refuse to sell alcohol to a legal adult if a minor is present?

  • Total voters
    58
radcen said:
There's something of controversy going on here. A local retailer is refusing to sell alcohol to legal adults if a minor is present with them. Doesn't matter how old or young the minor is, and it doesn't matter if the minor is the adult's own kid.

The retailer is not breaking any laws by doing this, so that's not the issue... but should they? How would you react if a retailer refused to sell you alcohol just because you had your kid with you?

Please note that in this state it is perfectly legal for parents to serve their own minor children alcohol.
Click to expand...

PRESENT? What in the hell's wrong with that? Is alcohol - something legal and permissible in advertisements - suddenly so taboo that kids can't even know it exists? LOL

Sounds like this retailer needs to quit selling alcohol since they have such a problem with it.
 
Cryptic said:
I agree, for most purchases. But.... due to the potential for harm from irresponsible drinking, any alcohol vendor should be permitted to refuse any sale for any reason- or simply for "no stated reason".

I believe that gun store owners have this same privelage. Even if the purchaser is legally able to buy they weapon and has the cash, the owner of the store can refuse the sale simply because he has a bad feeling about something.



Driving?- probably not, unless you are in say, an extreme demolition derby and the child is not old enough to make a risk evaluation on their own.

In the end, due to the potential for harm to third parties if some products are mis used, any vendor selling weapons, alcohol, or in Colorado, weed should be able to refuse any sale they dont feel comfortable with. They should not even need to give a reason.
Click to expand...
I promis you I'm not not buying booze or guns for my 10 y/o lol
 
Jerry said:
10.

....
Click to expand...

Haha, that's silly. But what do you expect from Walmart? It's not like they can give employees room for judgement calls.
 
CLAX1911 said:
I know Texas pretty well actually. I have never heard of a "moist" county but I believe it. There are laws enforced by the TABC (Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission) and then there are local laws.
Click to expand...

images
 
CLAX1911 said:
I know Texas pretty well actually. I have never heard of a "moist" county but I believe it. There are laws enforced by the TABC (Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission) and then there are local laws.
Click to expand...

I guess they are actually called semi-wet or semi-dry. Some allow by the drink but only with membership to a private "club," some allow by the drink but not by the bottle, I'm unaware of any that allowed by the bottle but not by the drink, some are just plain wet and allow all.
 
It's another one of those trifling reservations that no one actually sweats over. Even this retailer doesn't care. S/he simply has his/her own reasons for what s/he interprets as wanting to keep up appearances.

Like it could possibly make any difference. To anything. Ever.
 
AlbqOwl said:
But the question should not be: is what they are doing proper and/or ethical. If we believe in liberty; if we believe that under liberty each person is free to be who and what he/she is so long as no rights of others are violated; then we cannot dictate to another what must be proper or ethical for that person or what cannot be proper or ethical for that person. Personally I don't believe children are harmed in any way by seeing their parents buy beer or wine or consuming it in moderation. And I say that as a child of alcoholics whose childhood was made a living hell in part by booze.

But it is not for me to dictate to another person how he must see or understand alcoholic beverages or whether he should condone or accept such as the way society should be.

And my understanding of what liberty is extends to a person doing business on his own personal property as much as anywhere else.
Click to expand...
No. The question regarding ethics is valid. It is simply asking for your opinion on a narrow aspect of the overall scenario. We established in Post #1 one that the ability to refuse was legal and thus not an issue, not the question.
 
radcen said:
No, it is not against the law. A handful of stores are doing this on their own.
Click to expand...
Maybe we should make "no booze = no $$$" cards like we do for gun buster signs.
 
radcen said:
No, it is not against the law. A handful of stores are doing this on their own.
Click to expand...

We'll then, it's an odd go to market strategy, but maybe they were burned by adults buying booze for underagers and they just want to protect themselves.
 
tres borrachos said:
We'll then, it's an odd go to market strategy, but maybe they were burned by adults buying booze for underagers and they just want to protect themselves.
Click to expand...
The police in this area are known for doing random sweeps trying to catch merchants selling to minors, so maybe that is it.

Someone mentioned the name earlier, so I will say the store name. It is Walmart. Several stores in this geographic region are doing this. It was a local news station doing the story, and they didn't say if it was state-wide. Walmart corporate denied there is a company-wide policy to do this, but otherwise had no comment.
 
Now, I would suggest that if it isn't every store, just go to a different store if at all possible. This is what I did with Safeway. I will not shop there unless I absolutely have no other choice because they refuse to take my military ID as proof of age. I realize that I don't look 33 (I've been told several times just in the last month that I look late teens/early twenties, shocked the hell out of some people at work with my age), but still. It's frickin annoying when I have ID that has my picture and birthday on it and they won't take it because they think they could identify me better with height and weight.
 
radcen said:
The police in this area are known for doing random sweeps trying to catch merchants selling to minors, so maybe that is it.

Someone mentioned the name earlier, so I will say the store name. It is Walmart. Several stores in this geographic region are doing this. It was a local news station doing the story, and they didn't say if it was state-wide. Walmart corporate denied there is a company-wide policy to do this, but otherwise had no comment.
Click to expand...

I know they did this years ago, in some in our area. My mother had my siblings and aunt in WalMart once and we separated to pay for stuff so that they wouldn't have a cow about us being with her. It really is a dumb policy because it assumes that people don't ever buy alcohol during their normal shopping trips which they might have their children with them. Our WalMart here doesn't seem to have an issue with it from what I remember, but it is possible.
 
radcen said:
No. The question regarding ethics is valid. It is simply asking for your opinion on a narrow aspect of the overall scenario. We established in Post #1 one that the ability to refuse was legal and thus not an issue, not the question.
Click to expand...

But the problem is that what is ethical for you, what is ethical for me, may not be ethical for the person selling the liquor. Ethics is simply too vague a term to use as a principle other than as it applies to each individual. So my point is, if the person selling the liquor considers it unethical or unacceptable if a minor is present, then our position should be that it is his decision to make. So long as nobody's rights are being violated, those of us who value the liberty to follow our own conscience must also allow all others that liberty or there is no liberty.
 
AlbqOwl said:
But the problem is that what is ethical for you, what is ethical for me, may not be ethical for the person selling the liquor. Ethics is simply too vague a term to use as a principle other than as it applies to each individual. So my point is, if the person selling the liquor considers it unethical or unacceptable if a minor is present, then our position should be that it is his decision to make. So long as nobody's rights are being violated, those of us who value the liberty to follow our own conscience must also allow all others that liberty or there is no liberty.
Click to expand...
Yes, ethics are individual, that's the whole point. What's YOURS? Not hiding behind paper theory. Seriously, I don't understand why having an opinion needs to be so absurdly complex. :shrug:
 
I don't find much merit in drug testing, I don't find much merit in laws that ban minors from buying certain goods, and I surely don't find much merit in not selling to someone because a kid is around. The man in question is retarded and seriously needs to get over it. In any event, if he wants to lose his business because of idiotic business decisions that is his business. Good luck to him doing something else in his life.
 
For every person here who thinks their business will be negatively affected, there's probably two others who think it's a great idea. "It'll protect the chiiiildrun".
 
radcen said:
For every person here who thinks their business will be negatively affected, there's probably two others who think it's a great idea. "It'll protect the chiiiildrun".
Click to expand...

If a business decision affects when people can do business with you it will surely affect your bottom line.
 
radcen said:
Yes, ethics are individual, that's the whole point. What's YOURS? Not hiding behind paper theory. Seriously, I don't understand why having an opinion needs to be so absurdly complex. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Well it doesn't actually. It is quite a simple concept to see liberty as allowing a person to be who and what he/she is no matter how silly or wrong or misguided or whatever we think that might be. But when so many seem to insist that the concept be seen through the prism of the Constitution or court decisions or local or federal laws or equal protection or political correctness or whatever, it then becomes complex.
 
Summerwind said:
I guess they are actually called semi-wet or semi-dry. Some allow by the drink but only with membership to a private "club," some allow by the drink but not by the bottle, I'm unaware of any that allowed by the bottle but not by the drink, some are just plain wet and allow all.
Click to expand...

it's a mess
 
radcen said:
There's something of controversy going on here. A local retailer is refusing to sell alcohol to legal adults if a minor is present with them. Doesn't matter how old or young the minor is, and it doesn't matter if the minor is the adult's own kid.

The retailer is not breaking any laws by doing this, so that's not the issue... but should they? How would you react if a retailer refused to sell you alcohol just because you had your kid with you?

Please note that in this state it is perfectly legal for parents to serve their own minor children alcohol.
Click to expand...

It is a form of discrimination and sounds illegal to me...
 
Dittohead not! said:
No doubt it is a liability thing. If someone buys alcohol, then gives it to a minor, then some lawyer somewhere has figured out a way to stick the retailer with the liability for whatever that minor might do while under the influence. That's how absurd our liability laws have become.

BTW, I just returned from a trip to Idaho, where I noticed signs in some of the businesses: "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." I don't see those in California, Oregon, Washington, or Nevada. It must be part of a state law.
Click to expand...

Those signs are here and in Texas....and have been for decades.
 
Should they? No, I think that's a stupid policy.

It's still not my store, so they can have that policy if they want to.

In all honesty, I don't drink, so the policy probably wouldn't affect where I shopped one way or the other. I wouldn't care enough to be part of a boycott. I wouldn't be surprised if folks got this policy changed by refusing to buy their alcohol there, however.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom