ewx: (no idea)
Richard Kettlewell ([personal profile] ewx) wrote2007-07-11 04:02 pm
Entry tags:

Because underage drinkers often shop in Robert Sayle

At lunchtime I got asked whether I was over 18 when buying a corkscrew. Is this normal?

[identity profile] pseudomonas.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 03:05 pm (UTC)(link)
Was it a corkscrew with a knife attached? (though I thought knives was 16)
ext_8103: (Default)

[identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 03:13 pm (UTC)(link)
It does, yes; that could be it.

[identity profile] vyvyan.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 06:20 pm (UTC)(link)
This reminds me that I was able to buy a penknife with a 3-inch blade when I was seven, unaccompanied in the shop. Heh.

[identity profile] scat0324.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 03:21 pm (UTC)(link)
It needn't be a knife, it could be "any other article [...] which is sharply pointed (http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=criminal+justice+act&Year=1988&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=2116646&ActiveTextDocId=2116825&filesize=5719)", and the minimum age was changed to 18 (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2006/60038--e.htm#43).

[identity profile] pseudomonas.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 03:25 pm (UTC)(link)
The any-other-article bit requires "made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person."

[identity profile] scat0324.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 03:29 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh yes, missed that. Was really looking for the 16->18 legislation and noticed that in passing.

[identity profile] cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 03:12 pm (UTC)(link)
Maybe the fact that you're obviously over 21 and that there's no reason to stop under 18s buying corkscrews cancelled out??

[identity profile] 1ngi.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 05:01 pm (UTC)(link)
Can't be that normal, youthful you may look but 18? ;-D
ext_8103: (Default)

[identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 05:48 pm (UTC)(link)
Not the first time I've been asked, lately...

[identity profile] crazyscot.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 05:33 pm (UTC)(link)
Surely the correct answer is to laugh, show some ID and say "you've just made my year" :-)
gerald_duck: (frontal)

[personal profile] gerald_duck 2007-07-11 05:48 pm (UTC)(link)
Out of interest, do you carry any ID with you routinely?

I don't.

[identity profile] crazyscot.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 06:00 pm (UTC)(link)
My driving license photocard has lived in my wallet for more years than I care to remember.
gerald_duck: (mallard)

[personal profile] gerald_duck 2007-07-11 06:17 pm (UTC)(link)
I thought that was invalid without the counterpart, certainly as a driving licence and maybe even as identification?

(Besides, I don't have a photographic licence yet.)

[identity profile] crazyscot.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 06:28 pm (UTC)(link)
De facto I consider it proof of ID, given that it has my name, address, DoB, photo and signature, and is issued by a government agency - and I would be extremely surprised if any old random shop or bar declined to accept it. (After all, it's not as if it bears wording along the lines of "not valid without counterpart".) It also satisfies the wording in my PPL requiring me to carry "a document containing a photo" for the purposes of ID whenever I'm exercising its privileges. (However, I don't carry my PPL around all that much, as it's a slightly-larger-than-A6 plastic wallet. It lives in my flight bag. But it's less hassle just to carry the photocard all the time and forget about it.)

It is, as you say, not a cast-iron proof of entitlement to drive without the counterpart, but that's not a concern. If the Old Bill want to see it I shall exercise my legal right to produce it within seven days at a police station of my choice; if they really want to find out at the roadside they can call in a PNC check. The only time I've ever needed the counterpart has been when hiring vehicles.
lnr: Halloween 2023 (Default)

[personal profile] lnr 2007-07-12 08:14 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah you need the other part for driving licence purposes, but most places consider it acceptable proof of ID on its own. And except for the most formal of indentification the provisional works fine too.

Have you not moved house since they came in?
gerald_duck: (village)

[personal profile] gerald_duck 2007-07-12 10:50 am (UTC)(link)
I got the keys to my current house on 1998-07-24. Yes, I know that makes me ancient…
ext_57795: (Default)

[identity profile] hmmm-tea.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 06:12 pm (UTC)(link)
On a related note (but possibly more understandable), Thorntons are apparently banning people under 18 from buying rum and raisin ice cream as it contains 0.7% alcohol which is above the legal minimum of 0.5%.

The fact you'd have to eat nearly a litre and a half of ice-cream to even manage a unit of alcohol is beside the point...

[identity profile] hoiho.livejournal.com 2007-07-12 12:56 am (UTC)(link)
The fact you'd have to eat nearly a litre and a half of ice-cream to even manage a unit of alcohol is beside the point

Ooh, I do like a challenge!

[identity profile] david jones (from livejournal.com) 2007-07-11 09:46 pm (UTC)(link)
I hope you refused to answer on the grounds that there was no legal requirement to prove your age when buying corkscrews.
ext_8103: (Default)

[identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 09:48 pm (UTC)(link)
I just said yes and they didn't ask for ID. I wanted a corkscrew, not a confrontation.

[identity profile] covertmusic.livejournal.com 2007-07-11 10:22 pm (UTC)(link)
I wanted a corkscrew, not a confrontation.


Quote of the thread (and sounds much more dodgy in isolation, which is always good...)