Well, child pornography is forced because the law says that someone under the age of 18 is incapable of giving consent to having naked pictures and video taken of them. If those laws are nullified, then presumably, if the child agrees to it, you’d have child pornography. Prostitution is even easier. We have laws preventing prostitution. Without them, there is nothing to stop an enterprising and attractive person from whoring themselves out. No force required.
People can argue about what age this is true, but, a child cannot give consent to anything. It’s force.
Because we have decided through legislature that a child cannot give consent. You remove age restrictions and there is nothing to protect the interests of the child.
Damn straight! So all those children being forced to buy cigs and booze and drive cars – we’ve gotta protect them! But how?
Oh, wait…
I don’t know how you got sidetracked on this, but the fact that children cannot give consent has nothing to do with the legislature.
Carol, the restrictions on the sales of tobacco were forced upon businesses because they refused to regulate themselves. They even went so far as to hide data which indicated that they should practice some restraint, especially with respect to minors. Not satisfied with mere obfuscation, these companies actively marketed to minors while simutaneously manipulating the product to make it more addictive, thus ensuring themselves of a captive revenue stream. In effect, tobacco companies preyed upon children, and continue to do so in countries where tobacco sales are less regulated. A government which will not act against companies whose business plan relies on selling poison to children is not something to wish for. The fact that you are not only okay with this, but are advocating it, makes you a misanthropic jerk at best. I hope you never breed, but if you do, please give your children free access to all the tobacco, alcohol and pornography they desire.
The legislature has defined the age of consent, and thus what ages constitute childhood.
What fact? Our societal morality says that children are incapable of giving consent and that was codified into our system of laws. This is not an immutable law of the universe, here.
Time to find a new job.
Rhubarb you really don’t get it, do you? It’s none of your business if some folks want to smoke cigarettes,whether they are 25, or 15.
Irrelevant.
Why yes, your posts generally are.
Says you.
I don’t think Rhubarb is the one who doesn’t get it.
Again, what about alcohol?
The question is, what about your creepy reliance on the government to tell you what to think?
Oh, what a cunning riposte. I did not see that one coming. Allow me to respond in kind. Ahem. It takes one to know one. Thankyew, thankyew.
Getting back to the OP for a moment (I know, I know…) what sort of crazy policy does your company have if they a) know that someone may send out a 25-year-old secret shopper to catch you not carding him b) will penalize you harshly for not carding him, but nevertheless c) has the policy that you don’t need to card them if they “look 27”. Who the hell can be expected to reliably tell the difference between a 25-year-old and a 27-year-old?
The whole idea behind sending out 25-year-olds, surely is an implicit recognition that you might easily be as much as seven years out in your estimation - your store’s response to that ought to be to set the stores “auto-card” age to 32 at least, maybe even 40.
Or BARTS ought to stick to sending out 18- or 19-year-olds, which would come a lot closer to fulfilling its supposed mission
We agree that they can’t really consent to sex because at 12 they can’t possibly understand the risks or the consequences or what it really means, correct?
Well, if that’s so, they also can’t understand the risks or consequences or what smoking really means, either—how is this different?
Carol, a society which will not protect it’s children will not long survive.
You have already stated in this thread that
You also said
So if I am following your logic (?), a child cannot consent to being addicted to tobacco, so if I sell cigarettes to a minor, I’m forcing it on them, but the government shouldn’t be able to prevent me from selling it, or the child from buying it.
Seriously, WTF?
FWIW, once you hit the magical age of majority, whatever it may be, feel free to fuck up your life in any way you see fit, just so long as you don’t fuck up someone else’s while you’re at it. But until you hit that age, it is our responsibility as parents and as a society to protect you from your own stupid self. Don’t like it? Tough shit. If you survive to adulthood, you can do things differently.
(When I say “you” in the above, I am speaking in the general sense. I am not speaking of you personally, even though you haven’t given me any reasons to believe that you are an adult yourself.)
Thank you. 
Especially the “Getting back to the OP for a moment…” part. Gee dudes, you can start your own threads very very easily, you know. Please.
Unofficial. The OP said he’d decided that he’d had enough of the official policy of only checking certain persons and decided to check everyone. That could be a very expensive choice.