I used to work in a gas station and I was told that according to Michigan state law we were required to card anyone who looked like they were younger than 37/anyone who wanted smokes. I rarely carded anyone who was obviously over 18. The only times I ever did is when it was a jerk customer.
But that card absolutly everybody rule is bullshit.
The last establishment in which someone told me that my ID was either fake or stolen lost my business, and the business of many people I know for having been so horribly insulting.
Especially after I told them I’d prefer they call the police rather than steal my ID and nail it to their wall.
I know of no law, at least in this state, that requires you to carry an ID on your person at all times.
“Your papers, please.”
Actually, this is true in all 50 states, IIRC, and is or has been up recently to the supreme court.
11-11-11 Hrm … I guess that’s fine, you won’t need to upgrade that software until January 1, 2021. But if I were mining that data, I’d put in a function to discard all hits over a certain threshold that come up with that information. So, if I had three people in the database of say 80,000 with a date of 11-11-11, I’d leave it in, but 200 in that same base of 80,000 with a ‘date’ of 12-12-12, I’d consider removing it depending on the need of the mining - or I’d flag it into a pile for data from the “no answer” group.
I have a friend whose last name is a popular test word and it gets rejected as “null” all the time; sometimes some complicated wrangling is required, iirc, to get the name to register.
Generally, I alternate the uses of my discount tags - either I provide almost no information or incorrect information - and I’d probably stop buying liquor or anything from anyone who required an electronic swipe of my Driver’s License. As I understand it, not even Wal-Mart of the Massive Data Collection ties specific addresses/information to specific purchases (ie, they get your address when you buy something and tie it to what you bought).
So when I shopped at BloodBathandBeyond, for example, for a while, I gave the zipcode (when asked) of the city I was moving to - they have no BBB up there, and I wanted data in their system to get one up there (customers from the area). But when I don’t want to give data, I usually say “no thanks” and a null is put in (or the store phone number if a number is requested).
The only time I walked out of a store without making a purchase was Radio Shack - for years I’d bought things and paid cash, always, and said “no thanks” when asked for personal data. I attempted to buy a TracFone there (prepaid wireless you don’t need credit or ID for at any other store) and they would not sell it to me (the computer was programmed) without customer information. The manager was practically begging me to give him “a name, any name, it doesn’t matter, the system just needs a name” and I didn’t. Went to Wal-Murt the next day and got the same phone at the same price - minus the data logging.
Of course, if TracFone is tracking purchased phone time cards versus used cards - I just bought a bunch to send to people in different parts of the country - pretty varied data spread there between point of purchase and point of use.
I agree on a purely philosophical level with everything being said here, pretty much.
But, the reason why stores implement “check 100% of IDs” policies is twofold. One, which has been covered, is to protect their own asses as far as legal stuff is concerned.
Secondly, though, is to help their employees do the very distasteful yet necessary job of asking for IDs in the first place. Picture the scenario:
16 year old clerk asks for ID of person of questionable age(in the eyes and judgment of clerk, which can vary significantly).
Asshat customer gets beligerant and upset at clerk. Refuses on grounds that he/she shouldn’t “have to” because he/she is clearly old enough. Verbal abuse continues.
With a no-exceptions policy, the clerk has the support of his or her employers and a store policy on which to fall back for support.
Do you have any proof that data is being kept and tracked?
I do systems administration. We have a lot of systems where data is entered (in our case manufacturing bar codes) to complete the transaction. Without grabbing the bar code, the item can’t move down the line. But we don’t keep that information. Too much data! We have terabytes of data as it is - which is expensive to maintain - we don’t want this stuff.
And I can’t see any reason why a store wants to track what liquor you buy. My guess is that your drivers license is swiped to confirm you are old enough and to complete the transaction - i.e. its an audit control step to keep clerks from selling their underage friends liquor. The specific data tables linking you to your purchases may never be saved. Yes, they know that a bottle of Jose Cuervo was purchased - thats in the inventory system - but they probably don’t care who bought it. It just count decrements.
People think we keep a ton of data - in truth my professional life is spent trying to dump the stuff and keep a lid on the growth.
No, but it’s a good idea not to piss off anyone in a position of authority. Especially if they have a gun. 
No, I have no proof. All I know for sure is the register is supplied with that number in digital form (whether swiped or typed). It may link to a state database to verify authenticity; it might not (but if it doesn’t, what’s the point?).
But if the system stores this data even for a nanosecond, it is technically feasible to store it forever. It’s not a major programming task.
As far as the quantity of data to be stored, think of what is stored already associated with a discount/store card purchase: as a minimum, the product number and the purchaser’s ID number. That is a lot more data per typical basket than just a single DL and a single product number for a liquor item.
I am tempted to make a purchase under the system just to see if the DL number, or part of it, or recognition of it, shows on the receipt. But if it doesn’t, the possibilities are still there. The mind boggles.
The possibilities are there. And its possible they do. However:
is something you have no proof of. Much less that they will use this information for some nefarious purpose.
Let me rephrase that. They can easily build a database showing who, when and what for all liquor items and they haven’t told us that they aren’t.
Such information is not required by law and is unlikely to benefit the consumer. All that is required is that the purchaser be of legal age. That can be ascertained by visual appearance or by asking for an ID if uncertain. Entering this data into the computer is where the consumer loses control of it.
If you are so unconcerned, Dangerosa, about others knowing more about you than is absolutely necessary, please send me, by private email, your full name, address, SSN and mother’s maiden name. I probably will not use it for some nefarious purpose.
I like your rephrasing just fine.
And although such information is not required by law, there is no law preventing they collect it either.
What nefarious purpose do you think they are going to use “Musiccat bought a bottle of Captain Morgan’s on 8/16/2004” for? My guess is that they’d use it to market - and while that’s annoying it isn’t nefarious. And marketers probably think they are doing you a favor letting you know Captian Morgan’s is going to be on sale when they know you drink it - I’m not the type of person to think this is useful - but given the number of stores I’ve been to that want me to voluntarily give them my mailing address so they can tell me this sort of thing - and the eagerness with which the other people in line fill out the little card so they can get coupons for Victoria’s Secret and know when the sales are - I’m in the minority.
There is a big difference between them collecting your social security number, and them figuring out that you buy vodka three times a year.
Because in Pennsylvania where all liquor stores are state owned and operated, they could decide that frequent purchases of vodka (with whatever definition of frequent they choose to use) means that you should lose your driver’s license.
Knowledge of consumption of six beers a day was enough for one man to lose his driver’s license, despite no evidence whatsoever that he actually drove drunk.
Dangerosa, many supermarkets (all of them in my neighborhood) already collect information of that sort and use it in manners as you suggest. But this program is voluntary. The DL ID scheme is not.
And a store discount card can be issued to anyone. Since they primarily want demographic info, they don’t insist on a valid name and address, so they couldn’t reliably link the data they gather to a specific person. The DL ID scheme changes this.
So you don’t care what they gather; fine. Some people do, and think that this info is none of the store’s damn business.
Musicat, my GF puts people through that everyday, and she hates it.
In Virginia, especially in Virginia Beach, the workings of the Alcohol board is beyond comprehension. They’re either okay with letting 18 year old girls (but not guys) into clubs serving booze and letting customers shoot each other in the parking lots, but they set up sting operations to see if every customer, no matter what age they appear to be isn’t getting served without having a valid driver’s license (or other appropriate ID) in their possesion.
She’s been told by her boss that the fine for a first offense is $5000 for her and another 5G for the bar. Third offenses are rare, because they’ll do everything to get the license away from the owner after the second time it happens.
Does she have customers, regulars even, of your age who she cards? Yep, for their first drink when someone is in there that no one recognizes. If there are no strangers about, everyone of legal age can buy without showing a driver’s license.
1010011010
Interesting handle, the mark of the beast in binary.