Over 21

Logical Fallacy · 18-08-2011 12:10PM

Drew Yellow Tuba wrote: »

Wrong...

It's not wrong, once it's submitted as a House Rule when they are applying for a license they can have any age limit they wish.

They are also required to show a copy of the House Rules at the front door, along with the prices of all products that they sell but how many places do you see doing that?

OldGoat · 18-08-2011 12:12PM

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

And have all you whippersnappers with your crap singing and beer spilling?!?

Make it over 50's I say, you young people are loud, and abprutorous!

I left it at 35 so that there would be some youngsters around to open doors for me, fetch my pint from the bar, run to the shops for my tobacco, provide eye candy...:)

Master and commander · 18-08-2011 12:16PM

i guess its becasue they don't want grubby teenagers who just turned 18 coming in and getting ****faced and casuing a ruccus puking all over the place to the detriment of the rest of the more mature customers.

You'll understand when you a little older i suppose.

Yes they can do it. It a privately owned premesis, they can refuse you if they damn well want to.

stargazer 68 · 18-08-2011 12:20PM

Master and commander wrote: »

You'll understand when you a little older i suppose.

Guess you havent read the whole thread!!

:D

listermint · 18-08-2011 12:23PM

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Because women stop being hot once they hit 25?

No No, But why are you limiting my ass wrangling, They're all hot.

Adyx · 18-08-2011 12:28PM

Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003.

(4) If—

(a) the holder of a licence or other authorisation which permits the sale of intoxicating liquor adopts a policy of refusing to supply intoxicating liquor to any person below a specified age which exceeds 18 years,

(b) a notice setting out the policy is displayed in a conspicuous place in or on the exterior of the premises, and

(c) the policy is implemented in good faith,

a refusal to serve intoxicating liquor to such a person shall not constitute discrimination on the age ground.

Hannibal Smith · 18-08-2011 12:52PM

KylieWyley wrote: »

it's a private premises dude. right of admission is reserved. they can refuse you if they wish.

It's a public house

darklighter · 18-08-2011 01:12PM

"the policy is implemented in good faith" is where they can be caught out.

In MY experience, most places with an age policy only apply it to males and generally let girls under that age limit (& under 18 which is a total different story) in without checking ID.

If you really want to make life difficult for an establishment, video who there letting in for a couple of nights and then object when there licence is up for renewal.

TBH, it would be an awful lot of hassle and you wudnt get much luck out of a judge as the licensee would just say it wont happen again

leggo · 18-08-2011 01:20PM

darklighter wrote: »

"the policy is implemented in good faith" is where they can be caught out.

In MY experience, most places with an age policy only apply it to males and generally let girls under that age limit (& under 18 which is a total different story) in without checking ID.

If you really want to make life difficult for an establishment, video who there letting in for a couple of nights and then object when there licence is up for renewal.

TBH, it would be an awful lot of hassle and you wudnt get much luck out of a judge as the licensee would just say it wont happen again

Never mind the fact that it's illegal to film someone without their permission.

darklighter · 18-08-2011 01:24PM

Not true.

You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.

I've been on TV a number of times without my permission been asked.

df1985 · 18-08-2011 01:26PM

Loads of places in Dublin are over 21's, few places over 23's.

leggo · 18-08-2011 01:40PM

darklighter wrote: »

Not true.

You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.

I've been on TV a number of times without my permission been asked.

You think it's admissible in court, or in any kind of official capacity, to film bouncers doing their job?

There's a difference in having your face in the background of a piece on SixOne or in a sports event to sticking a camera in someone's face while they're in their place of work with the intent of making a potentially damaging claim. If you think otherwise your research of this law needs to involve more than just thinking "Well they got away with it there so I'm sure if I do (something comparable but completely different) then it HAS TO BE legal..."

Wile E. Coyote · 18-08-2011 01:52PM

darklighter wrote: »

If you really want to make life difficult for an establishment, video who there letting in for a couple of nights and then object when there licence is up for renewal.

Your video evidence wouldn't prove a thing. You'd still need to provide the name and DOB for everyone who was let in the door on the night.

Big Nasty · 18-08-2011 01:54PM

It's perfectly legal to have a 21's / 25's policy once you have a sign on the door saying same.

It's normally used in places that want an older clientele and / or to use as a tool to blank undesireables.

Rob32 · 18-08-2011 02:05PM

I work in a pub and the reason for it is simply so they can refuse younger people if they dont like the look of them, its an easy legal excuse, although it is a public house the management reserve the right to refuse admission. Its the same reason dress codes and the mysterious regulars oly rules have come from. Its to ensure the dorrmen can give a legal justifed reason for refusal.

sock puppet · 18-08-2011 02:21PM

streings wrote: »

Can anyone explain why they are allowed refuse you for being too young, but not for being too old? Tis the same idea no?

Dunno about it being policy or anything but I've seen a few aul fellas get turned away from clubs with a young crowd.

GalwayKiefer · 18-08-2011 02:36PM

As long as the pub/club has a visible sign at the entrance that clearly states the minimum age for entry (be that 18/21/23/35) then they are entitled to enforce that rule. The notion of a "public house" to be a free-for-all for the "public" is rubbish, you have no entitlements to entry.

darklighter · 18-08-2011 02:39PM

leggo wrote: »

You think it's admissible in court, or in any kind of official capacity, to film bouncers doing their job?

There's a difference in having your face in the background of a piece on SixOne or in a sports event to sticking a camera in someone's face while they're in their place of work with the intent of making a potentially damaging claim. If you think otherwise your research of this law needs to involve more than just thinking "Well they got away with it there so I'm sure if I do (something comparable but completely different) then it HAS TO BE legal..."

I didnt say there wasnt a difference, I simply pointed out that a previous post was factually incorrect.

And to the best of my knowledge, it would be admissable in court. It's evidence of a law (the afore-mentioned intoxicating liquor act) being broken, no more, no less.

"Your video evidence wouldn't prove a thing. You'd still need to provide the name and DOB for everyone who was let in the door on the night."

No you wouldnt. If an establishment has a set advertised age policy, and you can provide the details of persons being admitted who dont comply with that, why would you need the details of everyone who's been admitted.

Now im not saying I'd advocate doing this but there are 1 or 2 places I would love to see it happening to.

I actually cant remember the last time I seen someone been stopped for been under an age limit. Most bouncers I know use the regulars or you've had too much tonight excuses to avoid any possible problems.

Since the regs surrounding licensing of security staff have come in, things have improved greatly

streings · 18-08-2011 03:43PM

veryangryman wrote: »

I really hope your under 18 for saying something so daft..

Older people generally have a head on shoulders so dont puke on seats or shag in the jacks etc.

Hmm maybe they should be barred on that count!

You didnt read my post properly..I completely understand why they would want to, but what i asked is why are they allowed? Legally why is refusing someone for being to young (but over 18) not the same as refusing someone for being too old?

Big Nasty · 18-08-2011 03:47PM

streings wrote: »

Legally why isnt refusing someone for being to young (but over 18) not the same as refusing someone for being too old?

Good question I guess!:pac:

Aoifey! · 18-08-2011 05:26PM

Ya know, I'd love to defend teenagers and say we aren't really that bad. But honestly, we really really are, and I love it

Caliden · 18-08-2011 05:50PM

I'm in stitches laughing at the people trying to justify 'public house', you can't be serious?

If a bouncer doesn't like you they can just state that it's of their opinion that you're too intoxicated. Perfectly legal.

x_Ellie_x · 18-08-2011 06:27PM

There's a place nearby that is over 23's only. I like going there. There's no teenagers and college students drinking too much, getting into fights and vomiting all over the place.

Over 21

Comments