Age restrictions for a resturaunt

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[color=darkviolet]Ususally there are age restrictions on things like movies and video games which are meant to 'protect' children and give parents some guidelines of what they may or may not feel appropriate for their children to watch. But what if the age restriction was on a place where people go to eat?

I heard about this last night on the local news. There's this resturaunt that decided to put an age restriction on the diners who may want to go there. What's the age that you're allowed to eat there? Twenty-five.

The owners said it was because they wanted a more adult atomosphere, which in a way I can understand because sometimes kids can get noisy, but why 25? Why not 21? The owners said it was to avoid under age drinking at the bar and that's why not 21. But in the state of New York as well as most of the United States the drinking age [i]is[/i] 21 so why would someone be worried about underage driniking if you could prove that you're 21?

I'm kind of agrivated about this, but nobody can actualy do anything to make the resturaunt owners change their policy becaus ethey had clearly stated it in yesturday's paper that they would now only serve 25 and older. But still this is a typoe of age discrimination.

Now my question is what do you think about this? re there any places in your area that are restricted by age? And if so, does this discourage you from eatting there when you reach the required age? Or if some place (and not an adult video store, let's try and use a bit of common sense) suddenly decided to have such a policy, what would your reaction be?[/color]

[DeathBug]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=comic sans ms]Meh. Discrimination against youth is a completely legal practice, so as they're a private business, I have no problem with them doing so. They'll find out soon whether or not it was a wise decision based on business earnings. If tt wasn't, then they'll retract it, but the damage will be done. If it was, then who cares? It's not like there's a lack of restaraunts ayoung consumer can choose.[/color][/size][/font]

[Semjaza]

I don't see the big deal. Making it twenty-five lessens the issue of kids coming in claiming they're 21 trying to get drinks. I figure that any of these kids wouldn't be able to pass off as twenty-five, so they wouldn't even try.

I don't think it's a big deal. It's a private establishment and there's about a billion other places you can go with a 21 and older rule.

[Panda]

If people are upset they just won't frequent the establishment. There are many privately owned places with special rules such as these and they are still in business. Like the VFW, private club for military vets. You can only enter if you are a member or a guest of a member. Otherwise you can't go in. At least at the one here in my hometown.

There are so many teen dances that only allow 12 to 18 year olds in and I don't think that is age discrimination against older people. It is just that establishments rules.

[Hevn]

[COLOR=RoyalBlue][SIZE=1][B]Hate it when they don't believe you're 25 even if you have ID or something. I had a fight once with a movie security because he didn't believe I'm 18. My college ID doesn't say my age. Hell I kicked his *** until he let me in. Yeah, blah, blah, blah... off topic. ^_^x

Semjaza's right. There's probably thousands of restaurant cooler than theirs. As I said before, I hate discrimination in all its faces but hey, it's their strategy so let's just leave them alone. A place with no youth is lifeless. I reckon the food's not good too. Lol.

[COLOR=Purple]OFF TOPIC: I can finally got the chance to say your avi rocks Semjaza. It made me laugh so hard. :laugh: [/COLOR] [/B] [/SIZE] [/COLOR]

[Katana]

First off, I have never heard of a type of restaurant like that. I completely understand not wanting to have younger kids there, but what about your level of maturity? I'm only 12, and I'm really mature compared to most people in my age group/grade.
Many people want a family restaurant to go and eat with the family. There are plently of restaurants to go to if you don't want to bring kids, those being the really fancy, nice ones where they serve wine at $100 dollars a bottle. ...Just ignore that.
It's kinda not fair for the kids my age who are really mature and know when to stop acting like a four-year-old and be sensibe. If you ask me, that restaurnat's probably not going to do too well if they only allow people 25 and up in it.

[Doukeshi]

Meh, legal drinking at 21...bah I say! Lower your drinking age to 18 then you wouldn't have a problem. Nah, I guess is they want a more adult atmosphere then go ahead and put the serving age at 25. If younger people are that bothered they're going to have to wait to go in aren't they.

[amibasuki]

[quote name='Katana']It's kinda not fair for the kids my age who are really mature and know when to stop acting like a four-year-old and be sensibe. [/quote][font=Arial][size=2]unfortunately, for every one of you, there are about five more who don't have enough sense to act right. from a business POV, I probably wouldn't take chances either.[/size][/font]

[font=Arial][size=2]I like the idea. not like I'd be able to eat there lol, but Zaxby's or Chik-Fil-A is plenty good enough for me, so I'm not particularly bothered by it. I wouldn't be surprised if the restaurant ended up doing well despite the age restriction. it being more 'exclusive' will ensure the people who want a quiet, kid-free evening that they'll get it, and make the people who can't go want to go all the more (as seen by those who don't like the 25 and over rule); guess where they're gonna be eating dinner on their 25th birthday? assuming the place has a good reputation, of course. just depends on how many more people they'd get to come as opposed to how many customers they'd be losing because of the new rule. [/size][/font]

[Charles]

[center][img]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:ZL4wWyvx6mEJ:www.leaguelineup.com/beasts/photos/frown.jpg[/img][/center]

I think this is an outrage; people should pool their efforts into something important, like picketing outside this establishment until the policy is changed. Those of us under twenty-five deserve a place to eat too.

[Brasil]

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']Ususally there are age restrictions on things like movies and video games which are meant to 'protect' children and give parents some guidelines of what they may or may not feel appropriate for their children to watch. But what if the age restriction was on a place where people go to eat?[color=black][/quote][/color][/color]
[color=darkviolet][color=#000000][/color][/color]
[color=darkviolet][color=#000000]I hardly think it's appropriate at all to be comparing or using the FCC or ESRB in a discussion about dining establishments establishing a few age restrictions. The key difference regards the fact that video games like Duke Nukem are electronic medium, very easily accessible to minors, meaning the parents must be informed and kept abreast of particular content issues, some of which are often risque or suggestive dialogue, and/or partial nudity, although this (nudity) is rare in the majority of consumer games.[/color][/color]

While one could certainly draw a comparison between games/films and bars in these terms, as one cannot argue against the fact that bars are places to go to meet women or men, and certainly, foul language and some suggestive attire will be seen.

[i]However[/i], while the content may be similar, the format is incredibly different. A 17-year-old simply cannot get into a nightclub as easily as he or she can buy the recent Mortal Kombat release, or Doom III when it is released on Xbox later this year. Electronic entertainment is a much more accessible medium of entertainment, and quite frankly, because it is so much more accessible to minors and those not of legal age, what bearing does it have at all on bars/nightclubs, which have things called [color=black]"bouncers," "ID checks," and generally, "security?"[/color]

[color=black]Also, it's not as if the gaming/film industry has been exactly pro-active in their ratings restrictions, heh. Only in the past 10 years or so (give or take 3) have they really started monitoring themselves, and that's only after some outraged politicans/mothers. So...if this bar wants to restrict their range of patrons, without any pressure from "political activists," more power to them. You don't like it, don't eat there, lol.[/color]
[color=black][/color]
[color=black]I was watching TV yesterday, and they had a special on Married...With Children, and some outraged mother in Wisconsin deemed it necessary to go on a crusade against the show for vulgarity. I was watching this ridiculous, self-righteous "I'm doing it for the children" midwest mother go after Married...With Children, and thought to myself, "She has no idea how the world works, does she?"[/color]

Anybody who complains or feels so terribly threatened by an age-restriction on a bar, I say the same thing about them.
[color=black] [/color]
[color=darkviolet][color=black][QUOTE][/color]I'm kind of agrivated about this, but nobody can actualy do anything to make the resturaunt owners change their policy becaus ethey had clearly stated it in yesturday's paper that they would now only serve 25 and older. [b]But still this is a typoe of age discrimination[/b].[color=black][/QUOTE] [/color]
[color=#000000][/color]
[url="http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/age.html"]http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/age.html[/url]
[color=black][/color]
[/color][color=#000000]Nope. It's not age discrimination at all. Age discrimination deals specifically with [i]Employment[/i], not entrance into a nightclub. If it was age discrimination, then we would have heard some major uproar and revolution long before this.[/color]

This also reminds me of a recent case ruling I heard about on the radio. Apparently, a group of males sued a club/bar for sexual discrimination, simply because the females were given discounted drinks or something to that effect on Ladies' Night. The judge agree with the guys, deemed it sexual discrimination.

People are getting way, way too carried away with the whole "[insert quality of appearance here] discrimination" and "being politically correct 24/7" thing.

People who ***** and moan about this stuff get on my nerves, because what they're saying is so far from the truth that it's laughable.

[Okita]

While you might have some valid point Mr. Bean, ChibiHorsewoman's issue is with the restuarant not merely the bar/nightclub you keep refering to. The excuse of the restuarant owner was the legal age of drinking and the presence of the bar, thus expulsion becomes neccessary to anyone under the age of 25 to even dine in the area due to the presence of the bar. At a younger age, I've visited many restaurant/w bar simply to dine, noboby has told me to leave and go elsewhere simply becuase I'm underage.

This may not be age discrmination in your book but it certainly is an agrivationg situation. Say you and a bunch of friend went to this restaurant to eat, one of you is young (perhaps 21?) and thus you where force to go elsewhere by the manager's insistence that one of you didn't meet the age requirement to eat here, not nice is it?

ChibiHorsewoman has valid points, your rebuttle should also address the fact that they are banning people from eating in a restuarant.

This isn't a pub or nightclub we're talking about but a restaurant!

[Brasil]

[color=black][QUOTE=Okita]While you might have some valid point Mr. Bean, ChibiHorsewoman's issue is with the restuarant not merely the bar/nightclub you keep refering to.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]The excuse of the restuarant owner was the legal age of drinking and the presence of the bar, thus expulsion becomes neccessary to anyone under the age of 25 to even dine in the area due to the presence of the bar. At a younger age, I've visited many restaurant/w bar simply to dine, noboby has told me to leave and go elsewhere simply becuase I'm underage.[/quote] [/color]
[color=black][quote][color=magenta]I heard about this last night on the local news. There's this [b]resturaunt[/b] that decided to put an age restriction on the diners who may want to go there[...]Why not 21? The owners said it was to avoid under age drinking at the [b]bar[/b][/color] [/quote][/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]Let's examine this for one moment. If the restaurant in question did [i]not[/i] have a bar, then there would be no issue at all, as they would not deem it necessary to exclude those below a certain age. True? If this were the case (not having a bar in said restaurant), than surely, there would be no grief over this. True?[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]Now, keeping that in mind, the restaurant [i]does[/i] in fact have a bar, and the possibility of underage drinking and/or inappropriate behavior from a younger clientele has prompted the restaurant owners to enforce these admittance rules. Agreed? Now, because they have enforced these rules because of the bar itself, the issue is not with the restaurant at all, but more with the fact that the bar itself--rather, the patrons of said bar are engaging in questionable activities.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]The root of this issue is neither the restaurant nor the owner. The root of this issue is the customers' possible irresponsibility with alcohol, and I for one applaud the owner of the restaurant for making this decision. If his observations point to a particular age group that is creating a disturbance, then as a responsible businessman, he is taking the necessary precautions and thus, there is no issue, [i]because[/i] he is acting responsibly and looking out for the well-being of his business and at the same time, his establishment's patrons.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]Agreed?[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black][quote]This may not be age discrmination in your book but it certainly is an agrivationg situation. Say you and a bunch of friend went to this restaurant to eat, one of you is young (perhaps 21?) and thus you where force to go elsewhere by the manager's insistence that one of you didn't meet the age requirement to eat here, not nice is it?[/QUOTE] [/color]
[color=black]It's not age discrimination at all:[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[url="http://www.restaurant.org/legal/ask_archives.cfm"][color=black]http://www.restaurant.org/legal/ask_archives.cfm[/color][/url]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black][quote][b]Refusal of service[/b][/color]
[color=black][b]Q:[/b] What are the laws regarding a restaurant's right to refuse service?[/color]
[color=black][b]A:[/b] Management's right to refuse service to a customer depends on the basis for such a refusal. For example, under federal law, you cannot refuse service based on a customer's race, color, religion, national origin or disability. Depending on the state where the restaurant is located, some state or local laws also prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual preference, age, etc. Restaurants, however, do have the right to require customer dress codes and to refuse service because of inappropriate behavior or people who emit strong body odors.[/quote] [/color]
[color=black]While "prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual preference, age, etc" may catch your eye as an open and shut "the restaurant is at fault for doing this" case, look at the last sentence in that excerpt: "Restaurants, however, do have the right to require customer dress codes and to refuse service because of inappropriate behavior."[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]The "inappropriate behavior" it mentions can certainly mean underage drinking or a general inability on the part of the patron to control himself or herself when imbibing alcohol, thus making the owner's decision sound and valid, and while it may be aggravating, it is only aggravating when the customer cannot think of any other places to dine, my good fellow. It's not as if this restaurant is the only one in NYC, lol.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]Again, I bring up the mother from Wisconsin; if she doesn't like the show, change the channel, if someone doesn't like how a restaurant runs things, go to a different restaurant. No-one is forcing anyone to dine at this particular establishment, and contrary to some individual's beliefs, NYC--New York in general, is rather stacked when it comes to places to eat out.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black][quote]ChibiHorsewoman has valid points, your rebuttle should also address the fact that they are banning people from eating in a restuarant.[/quote] [/color]
[color=black]I touched upon nearly every one of her "valid points," as well. As for the fact that they are "banning" people, like many have said already, they are a private establishment, and are able to set their own guidelines, provided they do not violate Federal Law, which, I've just explained, that they are not.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black][quote]This isn't a pub or nightclub we're talking about but a restaurant![/QUOTE] [/color]
[color=black]And? It serves alcohol. Customers buy this alcohol. A pub is no different than a restaurant; people just think they're different because of their respective social stigma that goes with them. Nightclubs are no different, as well, except for a different clientele, which--and I think this is worth noting--is more or less the precise age group that this restaurant in question is restricting.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]Some of my friends here at Rutgers go clubbing each and every night, and they are utterly wasted in class the next day. Sunglasses, a hat, the whole thing. One friend in particular has related some rather...intense, heavily inebriated experiences.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]If someone wants to get smashed, they can go to a nightclub. I honestly don't see how anyone can have a problem with [i]this[/i] restaurant's new policies, given just how many places there are for younger people to get drunk off their *****, heh.[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[color=black]Am I missing some huge point here?[/color]

[Okita]

Firstly the presence of a bar is to serve alcohol, if the owner decides to put a age prerequiste above and beyond the law it is their choice, I have nothing to say about, I was merely pointing out that this is STILL a restaurant, which you have never mentioned in your own post.

What if a young couple with a child came into the restuarant? Would the child qualify as underage? certainly it would be unlikely that he would consume alcohol or heaven forbid: become drunk! Without detail I cannot say for sure, but it would certainly annoy me if I was the one being turned away. Many poeple come to a restaurant to dine, to enjoy the serivce and the food: not for the express purpose of drinking large quantity of alcohol, many of them might even be underage!

Secondly, I have already stated in my post that the above scenario is not an age discrimination issue, merely aggravating. Restuarant has the right as with pub and nightclub to refuse it's service to any individual based on reasonable circumstance as do any other legitimate bussiness. Youth, especially male youth pays a higher insurance rate on cars, this is not consider age discrimation, merely a response base on statistic, there is nothing legaly wrong with this or the above scenario.

Personally I am indifferent about such a policy, however if every single restuarant meeting the prerequisite of the above scenario decides to do bussiness only to 25 years and older individuals then I would certainty find it a tad annoying.

As it is I would simply shrugg this as an isolated incident that doesn't concern me.

I work in a restaurant with a bar, I work IN the bar and service poeple both old and young. I am 20 years old with an alcohol license (the servicing of), I understand the owners perspective, but that does not mean I approve of his bussiness ethos.

If the situation was truely terrible and I've witness to it, I might just change my mind, as it is I simply pointed out a few things that I disagree with in you're comments.

[Red]

[color=#002E55]The thing is, it's a private business. The owner can do whatever they want, so who cares if they put an age restriction that's higher than drinking age? It's the owners business, and they can do whatever they want with it. They could even put a 60+ restriction on it.

The word discrimination is used far too much in society for the most silly things. There's a chain over here called All Bar One (which is a restaurant as well as a bar) and the age restriction is 21, despite the legal drinking age being 18. The reason? Too many kids coming into the place and trying to get drinks because they look 18.

People can get in a [i]lot[/i] of trouble for allowing someone underage to drink in their establishment - even to the point of getting a bar closed down, so why take the risk when you can still cater to the tastes of the majority of your customers?

Like Tony said, there are plenty of other places that you can go that don't have an age restriction so high on them. [/color]

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]I'd have to agree with most of what Red and Bean have said, it's the right of the management to allow or disallow people into their premises and you can't really do anything about it. What I don't get are why people are getting so riled up about this, it's just a restaurant that you have to be 25 to get into, I think this is a great idea at you'd have to be one mature looking teenager to get in.

I've seen first-hand the effects of underage drinking and I whole-heartedly agree with this move, if this is the only way the management found to keep young people from underage drinking then so be it. I mean people ***** and moan about underage drinking and now they're bitching and moaning about a place with an age restriction that would prevent that, I think such people have a little too much free time on their hands.

If the owner wants to try and create a more mature atmosphere to the restaurant then this seems a good way to do it. In the end it's the right of the management to do this and they're the only ones who can change it.[/SIZE]

[Richard Doherty]

That is one of the most interesting places I've heard for age restriction. Okay, I can get the "adult atmosphere" aspect of it but c'mon. If it were up to me I'd tell the kids to shut up. Good thing it isn't up to me. But 25? That's a bit much. I'm in Canada and we can drink at 19, but to have to wait until 25 before you can eat just to make sure there isn't underage drinking? Who cares. Underage drinking should be the least of peoples worries, especially when hundreds of kids are shooting and killing eachother everyday on the street, dieing from drugs, and they're worried about a little booze. Geez. I mean if I went down to McDonalds and was told that I can't order a cheese burger until I'm 18, that would drive me nuts. Age resrtictions are just a legal form of discrimination, and it's not fair. But then again, when it's a privately owned business, there's almost no way you're gonna change the policy. I'm Kent Brockman saying, that's my two cents. (Always wanted to do that).

[Genkai]

*doesn't read any of the replies*

Thing is, the restaurant probalby just wants to attract more customers. Of course, this might seem the reverse, since underage drinkers are a large market, but with the assurance that there will be no overpartying college kids and the assurance that the target audience will not be 19-year-olds, older customers might feel more comfortable going there.

Also ( this might have been mentioned), it makes perfect sense to have it at 25 as opposed to 21, since fake IDs are no rmally set to be college student age. This is mostly because they're easier to get and it's easier to look like a college student than someone jaded by the rat race. Because the age is 25, many fake IDs that are meant to make the person look 21 or 22 are comletely useless.


*shrugs*

EDIT: Also, if restaurants didn't have the right to set age minimums, any old strip bay with hot wings could call itself a restaurant and reach a huge audience (this may seem to contradict my first point about older people not liking to be around young people when they're drinking, it doesn't apply to strip clubs where nobody seems to mind the others company......)

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]Capitalism is King. People can vote with their feet [or wallets]. If they feel that having an older clientele will improve the mood of their business, then by all means, they should do it. If or when it fails, and they find themselves losing money, then they have the option of abolishing this particular rule.

I think it is a pretty extreme move, especially as age is not a sound guarantee of conduct. However, it isn't like restaurants can have an interview with everyone who wishes to 'apply' to have dinner at their establishment, is it? I guess it is fair enough for them to choose this path.

If I was old enough to go there, it wouldn't affect my... patronage of these places. Mood is an important part of a restaurant...and they obviously want a more up-market establishment, rather than a family restaurant.[/size]

[Brasil]

[quote name='Okita']Firstly the presence of a bar is to serve alcohol, if the owner decides to put a age prerequiste above and beyond the law it is their choice, I have nothing to say about, I was merely pointing out that this is STILL a restaurant, which you have never mentioned in your own post.[/quote]
I did mention it, and if you would like, I can quote it. However, the difference between this place of dining and say, Chuck E Cheese's, is that alcohol can be acquired here. Actually, not to argue semantics here, or to pull a Bill Clinton, but how are we defining restaurant? Is it a place that serves both food and alcohol? A kid's eatery? Perhaps a diner down by the shore? Would McDonald's be considered a restaurant?

Maybe it's just me, but if a place has a bar, they're a bar. Sure, they may have a dining area and also seat people, but there is still alcohol on the premises, and thus the eatery in question should not be categorized in the same way, as the same type of business as McDonald's or your local Waterfront Marina ice cream parlor.

The fact of the matter is, this place has a bar; they should be treated as a bar, not as a family-friendly establishment that should just open its doors to everyone, lol.

[QUOTE]What if a young couple with a child came into the restuarant? Would the child qualify as underage? certainly it would be unlikely that he would consume alcohol or heaven forbid: become drunk! Without detail I cannot say for sure, but it would certainly annoy me if I was the one being turned away. Many poeple come to a restaurant to dine, to enjoy the serivce and the food: not for the express purpose of drinking large quantity of alcohol, many of them might even be underage![/QUOTE]
The "young couple with child" point doesn't fly, and here's why. My question regarding that is,

Does the child even closely resemble an older teenager who may pass for 21? Unless the child has medical issues, I highly doubt it.

[QUOTE]Secondly, I have already stated in my post that the above scenario is not an age discrimination issue, merely aggravating. Restuarant has the right as with pub and nightclub to refuse it's service to any individual based on reasonable circumstance as do any other legitimate bussiness. Youth, especially male youth pays a higher insurance rate on cars, this is not consider age discrimation, merely a response base on statistic, there is nothing legaly wrong with this or the above scenario.[/QUOTE]
And you will notice that I indeed touched upon the aggravation point:

[quote]The "inappropriate behavior" it mentions can certainly mean underage drinking or a general inability on the part of the patron to control himself or herself when imbibing alcohol, thus making the owner's decision sound and valid, and [b]while it may be aggravating, it is only aggravating when the customer cannot think of any other places to dine[/b], my good fellow. It's not as if this restaurant is the only one in NYC, lol.

[color=black]Again, I bring up the mother from Wisconsin; if she doesn't like the show, change the channel, if someone doesn't like how a restaurant runs things, go to a different restaurant. No-one is forcing anyone to dine at this particular establishment, and contrary to some individual's beliefs, NYC--New York in general, is rather stacked when it comes to places to eat out.[/quote][/color]

So further discussion over the aggravation is moot.

[QUOTE]Personally I am indifferent about such a policy, however if every single restuarant meeting the prerequisite of the above scenario decides to do bussiness only to 25 years and older individuals then I would certainty find it a tad annoying.[/QUOTE]
But what is the likelihood that this will sweep the nation? Pretty low, if you ask me.

[QUOTE]As it is I would simply shrugg this as an isolated incident that doesn't concern me.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. And for the majority of people on OB, it doesn't concern them in the least, either, especially those treating it like a big deal or some threat to their way of life.

[QUOTE]I work in a restaurant with a bar, I work IN the bar and service poeple both old and young. I am 20 years old with an alcohol license (the servicing of), I understand the owners perspective, but that does not mean I approve of his bussiness ethos.[/QUOTE]
So, you understand where the owner is coming from, but in the future, if you own your own dining establishment and are presented with a similar predicament, would you execute an age restriction similar to this owner's?

And if you wouldn't, will you be prepared for the consequences that may ensue, if underage patrons leave your business while inebriated and cause significant damage to themselves and others around them? Would you be prepared for those consequences?

You are aware of the penalties, as you do work in the restaurant business?

[quote]If the situation was truely terrible and I've witness to it, I might just change my mind, as it is I simply pointed out a few things that I disagree with in you're comments.[/QUOTE]
So, then, if presented with a similar situation, you would follow roughly the same course of action as the owner in question?

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[QUOTE=Siren]
The "young couple with child" point doesn't fly, and here's why. My question regarding that is,

Does the child even closely resemble an older teenager who may pass for 21? Unless the child has medical issues, I highly doubt it.[/QUOTE]

[color=darkviolet]Actually, the young couiple with a child point is valid since as part of the news story about this restuarant was about a couple with an 8 year old who were turned away.

Never mind the fact that while an 8 year old may know what a fake I.D. is she won't be able to pass herself off as 21. Her parents probably wouldn't let her imbibe anything stronger than coca cola. But still....

They do have a carry-out service for people who are under 25 and want to try their BBQ (which is basically what the place is known for.) So they won't lose business that way. Also this 25 and under ban is helping other restuarants surrounding the area since when people are turned away they'll be told about other places who aren't age restrictive. So even if they do lose business others will profit from it.

I just think it's kind of funny in a way because I can't go into The Village Pig (the Restuarant) because I'm 23 and not 25 and my friend wouldn't be able to go there with her boyfriend since she's only 24.

Still, it's a privately owned business, and even though it is age discrimination nobody can do anything about it. Unless the owners actually do start to lose business because of this policy nothing's going to change. Still, it is nice to rant a bit, right?[/color]

[Brasil]

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']Actually, the young couiple with a child point is valid since as part of the news story about this restuarant was about a couple with an 8 year old who were turned away.[color=black][/quote][/color][/color]
[color=darkviolet][color=#000000][/color][/color]
[color=darkviolet][color=#000000]You know, I've searched various news sites (CNN, MSNBC, NY Times) and I haven't found anything about this. Could you provide a link to an online article, perhaps? After all, this is a fairly serious issue, and if it means so much in that it is impeding on personal freedoms, then surely one of the major news networks would have something about it somewhere, even a blurb on their website.[/color]

[color=black][QUOTE][/color]Never mind the fact that while an 8 year old may know what a fake I.D. is she won't be able to pass herself off as 21. Her parents probably wouldn't let her imbibe anything stronger than coca cola. But still....[color=black][/QUOTE] [/color]
[color=black]An 8-year-old...hmm...[/color]

[color=#000000]There is underage drinking going on here. We can safely assume that those drinking illegally are between the ages of 17 and 20. The behaviors of the inebriated underage drinkers are bad enough to warrant an age restriction on entering the restaurant, and we can all agree that children would not benefit from being exposed to said behaviors. In fact, exposing children to heavy drinking/smoking/etc does not prove beneficial in general, and from the description of this BBQ place, it certainly is not designed for children. Now, given this, and understanding the difficulty of excluding only the 17-24 year-olds, it is only logical to exclude all those under 25. It's easier, less time-consuming, and requires less manpower than specifically looking for that particular age range.[/color]

[color=black][QUOTE][/color]Still, it's a privately owned business, and even though it is age discrimination nobody can do anything about it. Unless the owners actually do start to lose business because of this policy nothing's going to change. Still, it is nice to rant a bit, right?[/color][color=black][/QUOTE][/color]

[color=black]We've already established that it's not age discrimination, and I think an actual excerpt from the article might help here:[/color]
[color=black] [/color]
[url="http://www.rochesterdandc.com/news/07319K536BU_news.shtml"]http://www.rochesterdandc.com/news/07319K536BU_news.shtml[/url]

[color=black][QUOTE][/color](July 31, 2004) ? VICTOR ? Most restaurants require at least shoes and a shirt. A few might even call for a jacket and tie.

But at the Village Pig, if you don't have 25 birthdays under your belt, you're not welcome inside.

Jim Andres, owner of the new barbecue eatery and bar at 75 Coville St., set the unusual age restriction to avoid the [b]undesirable behaviors of two subsets of customers: screaming or crying children and irresponsible younger drinkers[/b]. ?We simply don't want to deal with it.?

The policy is legal. Some patrons appreciate it while others don't think it is fair.

?I think it's great, and mind you, I have three kids,? said Jorge Torres, 59, of Victor, Ontario County, who was eating with fellow motorcycle riders at the Colville Street restaurant Thursday night. ?Adults need a place where they can talk, have a drink, have dinner.?

Staffers ? some of whom are younger than 25 ? say they have rarely encountered conflict with the occasional customers they have turned away.

?I've only had two people who got kind of snotty about it,? said ID checker Tim Maher. ?I tell them they can go up the hill to Mickey Finn's.?

Criticism of the policy doesn't bother Andres, who also owns the nearby restaurant and tavern.

?I'm less focused on who I'm losing and more focused on who I'm getting.?

Advertisements he has placed in regional newspapers not only state the age restriction, but also play up the restaurant's casual atmosphere (concrete floors, canned beer) and bullish attitude (tagline: ?You're not special here? ).

According to Rick Sampson, president of the New York State Restaurant Association, any establishment with a liquor license can set any age restriction it wants, as long as the exclusion is applied evenly and consistently.

Although Sampson is unaware of any restaurants in the state with a similar policy, he said it wouldn't surprise him if more followed suit.

?They don't want the problem of serving an illegal ? that's the biggest incentive,? he said.

Not every customer of the Village Pig, which opened May 24, gives the policy a glowing review.

?What's the point?? asked 29-year-old Alan Buckley of Farmington, Ontario County. ?By the time I was 22, I had two kids, two college degrees and four years in the military.?

One of his companions, Tammy Beer of Henrietta, called the age cut-off ?a decent idea.?

Would she have said that two weeks ago, when she was still a few days shy of 25?

?Probably not.?[/QUOTE][color=black]Let's see...the owner of The Village Pig also owns two nearby restaurants/taverns, out of the entire customer base, only two customers have expressed disappointment, the staff is comfortable with the age restriction, and the "undesirable behavior" I quoted when I pasted an excerpt from Refusal Of Service guidelines is [i]exactly[/i] the reasoning behind this owner's decision.[/color]

[color=black]There is nothing happening here that is against the law, except for underage drinking.[/color]

[color=black]The owner is operating fully with the Service requirements, and is breaking no laws in setting this age restriction.[/color]

[color=black]There is absolutely no issue here at all. There is no age discrimination; there is no violation of personal freedoms.[/color]

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]So, the problem at hand is underage drinking. Well deary me. Thats what I.Ds are for. And thats why people should be provided with holographically stamped and bar-coded I.D's. It makes sense, and forgery of those would be impossible.

Also, restaurants can have a no-service policy if the person at hand is inebriated, or rather, full to the gills. So, this difficulty is [or shouldn't be] anything major. Or even a difficulty.[/size]