Help me understand this, Bay State experts. For alcohol-related purposes of identification most of us probably have a driver’s license, but otherwise there exist both this thing called a Liquor ID and a regular ol’ state ID. Apparently purveyors of booze may refuse the latter as proper ID for buying alcohol, and I’ve very occasionally seen this happen at bars. But I can’t figure out why these two types of ID exist. Why on earth would a state-issued ID not be considered legal proof of age? And since it doesn’t appear that one must pay any extra fees for the Liquor ID, what is the point of it?
Just a guess - maybe because the state ID (not a driver’s license) can be altered to show you’re 21, but you can’t even get a liquor ID without proving it?
Just ftr, an MA driver’s license for under-21’s is in a vertical format, making it futile to even try to alter the year of birth.
No, the state ID cannot be altered. It is made the same way as a driver’s license, with picture, hologram, etc. I would also like to know why a bar can refuse a regular state ID.
Could it be a sort of “opt out” classification? With gambling, you can place yourself on a list and any casino that allows you near the machines gets fined. I could see something like you describe for those with drinking problems or health issues who want some extra protection when the will is weak.
New Mass resident here. I’ve got a liquor ID but no driver’s license (though I’ll get one soon).
The driver’s license is a legitimate form of ID for purchasing alcohol. But there are a lot of people that don’t ever drive a car, particularly in Boston which has good public transit and a huge student population. So why get a driver’s license? Plus there’s a fairly hefty fee to get a license, and even heftier to convert an out of state license after moving ($150 IIRC).
So Mass offer’s a liquor ID, which is pretty much an ordinary state ID card, but it only costs $15. It’s a pretty obvious choice if you’re moving here and money’s tight and you don’t have a car.
I’ve been thinking about something a bit like this but from the other end. Could it be that the liquor ID can be denied to someone based on some criminal or other legal basis? I don’t think bars and such are required to reject the non-liquor ID, but perhaps it gives them better grounds than usual for refusing to serve or sell to someone.
On another (but perhaps related) note, it seems that the non-liquor ID can be renewed like most normal IDs, but the liquor ID requires re-applying every five years. Not that I can see what difference that really makes on its own. Again the fees are the same.
I ask about this subject because this came up with a friend last night. She doesn’t drive and used to carry around the Mass ID she got at age 18 or so, and when that expired (at 23) she just renewed the ID, so she still doesn’t have the official liquor ID. It’s accepted with no problem 99% of the time, but yesterday was one of those very rare occasions when somebody gave her trouble about it. (Ultimately he was kind, though, and let her in with a mild scolding.)
There are 2 different types of non-drivers license ID - a liquor ID and a Mass ID. You have to be 21 to even apply for a liquor ID, but only 16 to get a Mass ID.
According to the website: “Some establishments which serve alcohol may refuse to accept a Massachusetts ID card. State law (c.138, §34B ) provides the establishment some legal protection if alcohol was served to a minor in reliance on a valid Massachusetts Liquor ID card but not if the establishment relied on the Massachusetts ID card.”
So it sounds like the liqour ID was established in law later, and provided more protection to bars if it was used. Given that they expire every 5 years anyway, it seems prudent to move to a liquor ID when you turn 21.
Here is my question regarding this topic, as i am in need of one of these forms of ID: my initial inclination was to get a liquor ID, but suppose i travel out of state and need to present identification - will someone in California or Texas know what the heck a “liquor ID” is?? so i thought maybe i should go with the regular state ID just for clarity and simplicity - but then i risk being turned away if my wife and i go out for drinks on a saturday night or if i stop at a liquor store to grab a six pack. the whole thing seems absurd. when you obtain a driver’s license, you get a driver’s license, not a “liquor driver’s license”. i wish MA would adopt just one alternate form of ID, or if they must distinguish it, call it a State ID (L) or something like that to help avoid confusion! would appreciate any insight here!
Most states have absurd liquor laws, e.g. can’t buy before x o’clock on Sundays. I am thankful to be able to get a drink at 4 am if I want to 365 days a year. Not that I often do.
IIRC, this started in the mid-80s with the raise of the drinking age to 21. Coinciding with that, the state wanted to beef up enforcement of sales to minors. Since ID cards back then were basically pieces of paper, often with no pictures, and issued mostly on the word of the person applying, the liquor ID was a document with more age proof requirements from the state that said “This person may purchase liquor.” Sort of the 1980s version of Enhanced ID.
Not foolproof, and laughable easy to get around by today’s standards, but legislative inertia what it is, things don’t change.
You can apply for a Mass Liquor ID card if you are not a resident of Massachusetts, but you must prove Mass residence if you are applying for a regular Mass ID.
When I travel out of state I take my passport with me, for those cases where an out-of-state entity doesn’t want to accept a Mass Liquor ID.
ETA - as to why retailers/bartenders can refuse a Mass ID for alcohol purchase I don’t know, since the proof of identity requirements are the same for all 3 things - License, ID, Liquor ID, and the proof of residence requirements for license and regular ID are identical.
In Vermont, where I’m from, they have a photo ID referred to as a “Non-Driver ID” which is available to both non-driver VT residents (as an alternative to a driver’s license) and out of state residents even if they have a valid license in their own state. I’m not sure what the exact letter of the law is, but in college towns it is common for stores, and occasionally bars, to refuse to sell alcohol to “twentysomethings” who only have an out of state license as proof of age (passports are ok), so, of course, the non-driver IDs are popular among out of state college students. Unlike Mass., however, I’ve never heard of a situation where someone with a VT driver’s license would also be required to have an additional non-driver ID.
ugh, so this muddies the waters even further! so a regular Mass ID establishes residence but a liquor ID does not? so for all non-licensed mass residents, you in a sense have to choose between either being able to prove your residency (Mass ID) versus being able to purchase alcohol - but potentially not in other states (liquor ID)?
i really don’t see why there can’t just be an alternate form of ID both as accepted and establishing all information that a license does, with the one obvious difference being that it doesn’t grant the privilege of driving. or would that be too easy?