On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 18:25:22 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> I try to appreciate the fact that they have an express line for the sake
> of customers who are only getting a few things and that the stores will
> dedicate a lane to the shoppers who they are making the least from in
> that transaction in order to keep them in the habit of shopping in their
> store. I would not normally go to an express line with more than the
> limit, but in this case there were line ups at the other checkouts and
> there were absolutely no customers at the express check-out. I am sure
> that the store manager would rather have her checking out someone with
> more than the arbitrary limit for that line rather than having her
> doing nothing.

If she had zero customers and all the other open lanes had lines, then
she either had no initiative or a manager who was a stickler for
numbers and she would have gotten into trouble if she checked you out.
Either way, the store lost. In any case, I would have been giving her
puppy eyes and hope she called me over vs taking the initiative -
because customers can be very snippy with the cashier and customer
with too many items that she called over to shorten a line elsewhere
when she didn't have customers.

--

sf

On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 03:23:02 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>
>> There were a couple times when a check out clerk was being incredibly
>> stupid, and I just walked out of the store and left the clerk with a
>> shopping cart of unbought items.
>
> Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
> belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
> standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
> got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
> ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
> years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
> sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
> buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
> them.
>
> -sw
>


you should have gone back the next day and done the same thing, with no
ID and see what happened.

> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> >
> > Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
> > belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
> > standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
> > got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
> > ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
> > years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
> > sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
> > buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
> > them.
> >
> > -sw
> >
>
Here, no matter your age they card for alcohol and cigarettes.
Doesn't matter if you're 21 or 91, they will ask for ID; no
ID, no sale.

> wrote in message
...
>> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> >
>> > Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>> > belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>> > standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>> > got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>> > ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>> > years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>> > sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>> > buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>> > them.
>> >
>> > -sw
>> >
>>
> Here, no matter your age they card for alcohol and cigarettes.
> Doesn't matter if you're 21 or 91, they will ask for ID; no
> ID, no sale.

I had a cashier at Target ask me for ID to buy a smoking cessation product a
five or so years ago. I never had that happen at any other store, so I was
very surprised. I don't shop at Target as a rule, and don't use the lozenges
anymore, so don't know if they still do it, or if that was a fluke or what,
but I thought it was pretty crazy.

Cheri

On 7/10/2016 9:48 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 20:51:39 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>
>> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 03:23:02 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>>>
>>>> There were a couple times when a check out clerk was being incredibly
>>>> stupid, and I just walked out of the store and left the clerk with a
>>>> shopping cart of unbought items.
>>>
>>> Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>>> belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>>> standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>>> got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>>> ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>>> years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>>> sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>>> buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>>> them.
>>
>> you should have gone back the next day and done the same thing, with no
>> ID and see what happened.
>
> I read later that that is their policy. The cash register is
> programmed so that the ID must be *scanned* through the card reader or
> else it won't ring up. I don't want my ID being scanned even if I did
> have one. Lots of info on the mag stripe and barcode stripe DL/ID
> (name, address, age, height weight, hair, eyes, lenses, etc...)
>
> I can understand states that require ID for every alcohol purchase (I
> think it was Missouri I ran across that). But when it's not mandatory
> and there is no chance of reasonable doubt, then employees should be
> empowered to make that decision themselves. Screw that mandatory card
> swiping for nefarious reasons under the guise of legal liability.
>
> -sw
>

But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> wrote:
> >
>
> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.

People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.



--

sf

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> > wrote:
>> >
>>
>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>
> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
>
>
>
> --
>
> sf

Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.

Cheri

On 7/11/2016 9:21 AM, Cheri wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>>
>>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>>
>> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> sf
>
> Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
>
> Cheri


The real issue is not background checks, but the government database
which is being illegally created.

On 7/11/2016 10:21 AM, Cheri wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>>
>>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>>
>> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> sf
>
> Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
>
> Cheri
That makes the NRA a criminal conspiracy!

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:23:25 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> wrote:

> On 7/11/2016 9:21 AM, Cheri wrote:
> >
> > "sf" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> >> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
> >>
> >> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> sf
> >
> > Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
> >
> > Cheri
>
>
> The real issue is not background checks, but the government database
> which is being illegally created.

Cue Twilight Zone music.

--

sf

On 7/11/2016 11:55 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:23:25 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>
>> The real issue is not background checks, but the government database
>> which is being illegally created.
>
> Databases are illegal? Somebody better tell the Government!
>
> I suppose they could keep paper files. Down with databases!
>
> -sw
>


In this case, yes.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:23:25 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> wrote:

>On 7/11/2016 9:21 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>>>
>>> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> sf
>>
>> Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
>>
>> Cheri
>
>
>The real issue is not background checks, but the government database
>which is being illegally created.

You can't be that clueless or maybe you think I am, to fall for that
line of horse pucky.
Janet US

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 21:38:51 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 03:23:02 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>
>> There were a couple times when a check out clerk was being incredibly
>> stupid, and I just walked out of the store and left the clerk with a
>> shopping cart of unbought items.
>
>Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>them.
>
>-sw

I buy a case of beer about once a year, mostly used for cooking, I'm
not much of a beer drinker, if I drink 6 cans a year it's a lot. When
I got to the register the young gal asked for ID. I was well over 65
at the time. She said everyone needs ID to purchase alcohol. I
looked her over real good and asked "How old are you?" She said
nineteen... so I said in my best raised voice so everyone nearby could
hear "You are too young to sell beer". She had to call a manager to
ring up my sale, meanwhile a line of about six-seven customers had to
wait. I wanted my 30 can case of Gennesse ale, was a good price so I
was willing to wait as long as it took. In NYS the only alcoholic
beverages sold at supermarkets is beer, the buyer and seller have to
be over 21... I could pass for a bit younger than my age but no way
can I pass for under 21... that gal coulda passed for 12, she had no
tits whatsoever, flat as a decking board! Ten minutes later I was at
the package store buying my case of Crystal Palace, no one asked for
ID.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 23:13:10 -0700, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>
> wrote in message
...
>>> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>>> > belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>>> > standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>>> > got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>>> > ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>>> > years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>>> > sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>>> > buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>>> > them.
>>> >
>>> > -sw
>>> >
>>>
>> Here, no matter your age they card for alcohol and cigarettes.
>> Doesn't matter if you're 21 or 91, they will ask for ID; no
>> ID, no sale.
>
>I had a cashier at Target ask me for ID to buy a smoking cessation product a
>five or so years ago. I never had that happen at any other store, so I was
>very surprised. I don't shop at Target as a rule, and don't use the lozenges
>anymore, so don't know if they still do it, or if that was a fluke or what,
>but I thought it was pretty crazy.
>
>Cheri

Some OTC meds can be made into hallucigenics. Most pharmacies here
limit me to one bottle of Mucinex and I have to show ID. However at
BJs I can buy a dozen bottles with no ID, weird how rules go.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 23:48:24 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 20:51:39 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>
>> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 03:23:02 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>>>
>>>> There were a couple times when a check out clerk was being incredibly
>>>> stupid, and I just walked out of the store and left the clerk with a
>>>> shopping cart of unbought items.
>>>
>>> Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>>> belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>>> standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>>> got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>>> ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>>> years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>>> sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>>> buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>>> them.
>>
>> you should have gone back the next day and done the same thing, with no
>> ID and see what happened.
>
>I read later that that is their policy. The cash register is
>programmed so that the ID must be *scanned* through the card reader or
>else it won't ring up. I don't want my ID being scanned even if I did
>have one. Lots of info on the mag stripe and barcode stripe DL/ID
>(name, address, age, height weight, hair, eyes, lenses, etc...)
>
>I can understand states that require ID for every alcohol purchase (I
>think it was Missouri I ran across that). But when it's not mandatory
>and there is no chance of reasonable doubt, then employees should be
>empowered to make that decision themselves. Screw that mandatory card
>swiping for nefarious reasons under the guise of legal liability.
>
>-sw

I hear tell in Texass you can buy booze so long as yoose got the cash
and can reach the bar... I guess yoose dwarfs gotta sit onna NYC phone
book. LOL

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> wrote:

>On 7/10/2016 9:48 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 20:51:39 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 03:23:02 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There were a couple times when a check out clerk was being incredibly
>>>>> stupid, and I just walked out of the store and left the clerk with a
>>>>> shopping cart of unbought items.
>>>>
>>>> Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>>>> belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>>>> standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>>>> got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>>>> ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>>>> years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>>>> sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>>>> buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>>>> them.
>>>
>>> you should have gone back the next day and done the same thing, with no
>>> ID and see what happened.
>>
>> I read later that that is their policy. The cash register is
>> programmed so that the ID must be *scanned* through the card reader or
>> else it won't ring up. I don't want my ID being scanned even if I did
>> have one. Lots of info on the mag stripe and barcode stripe DL/ID
>> (name, address, age, height weight, hair, eyes, lenses, etc...)
>>
>> I can understand states that require ID for every alcohol purchase (I
>> think it was Missouri I ran across that). But when it's not mandatory
>> and there is no chance of reasonable doubt, then employees should be
>> empowered to make that decision themselves. Screw that mandatory card
>> swiping for nefarious reasons under the guise of legal liability.
>>
>> -sw
>>
>
>But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.

I think people need to show ID and a HS diploma to vote.

On 7/10/2016 8:37 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2016-07-10 8:15 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> Most of the cashiers I come across are pleasant or all business,
>> but once in a while you get a hostile or distracted one. Those
>> are the ones who make things unpleasant. I'm sure they say the
>> same thing about customers.
>>
>
> I saw a woman get all upset about a cashier a couple weeks ago. She had
> her stuff on the conveyor, they rolled forward, the cashier looked at
> the woman and smiled. Another cashier came up behind him and took over
> for him. The woman got all huffy and asked her why he had looked at her
> and walked away. The replacement cashier said he was going on his break.
> It was pretty obvious that the was customer was suggesting that it was
> because she was black, but it was pretty obvious to me that he was just
> being relieved to go on break.
>
He likely could have mentioned to her he was going on break but hey,
since someone else was right there to ring up her purchases what's the
big deal? Imagined 'slights' are not a reason to get upset. Do some
people really expect those employees to stand there for hours on end
without a break? (rhetorical question)

Jill

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:34:37 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 7/10/2016 8:37 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2016-07-10 8:15 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>> Most of the cashiers I come across are pleasant or all business,
>>> but once in a while you get a hostile or distracted one. Those
>>> are the ones who make things unpleasant. I'm sure they say the
>>> same thing about customers.
>>>
>>
>> I saw a woman get all upset about a cashier a couple weeks ago. She had
>> her stuff on the conveyor, they rolled forward, the cashier looked at
>> the woman and smiled. Another cashier came up behind him and took over
>> for him. The woman got all huffy and asked her why he had looked at her
>> and walked away. The replacement cashier said he was going on his break.
>> It was pretty obvious that the was customer was suggesting that it was
>> because she was black, but it was pretty obvious to me that he was just
>> being relieved to go on break.
>>
>He likely could have mentioned to her he was going on break but hey,
>since someone else was right there to ring up her purchases what's the
>big deal? Imagined 'slights' are not a reason to get upset. Do some
>people really expect those employees to stand there for hours on end
>without a break? (rhetorical question)
>
>Jill

My local supermarket is undergoing renovations. It's annoying outside
and irritating inside when counters and displays move around. I am
sure it will be great when finished and in chatting with the manager
the other day (he's around a lot) I suggested the cashiers are getting
the worst of it with jack hammers a wall away and I hoped to goodness
they were getting double time - I don't think the suggestion went down
well.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 7/10/2016 11:51 PM, Taxed and Spent wrote:
> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 03:23:02 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>>
>>> There were a couple times when a check out clerk was being incredibly
>>> stupid, and I just walked out of the store and left the clerk with a
>>> shopping cart of unbought items.
>>
>> Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>> belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>> standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>> got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>> ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>> years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>> sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>> buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>> them.
>>
>> -sw
>>
>
>
> you should have gone back the next day and done the same thing, with no
> ID and see what happened.

Probably the same thing. The rule was made by a lawyer behind a desk a
thousand miles away. Too risky if it was a test shopper.

On 7/11/2016 12:45 AM, wrote:
>> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>> Last year I was at Target and I had about $130 worth of stuff on the
>>> belt - electronics, clothes, some miscellaneous food. Then as I was
>>> standing in line I saw that cheap Andre Cold Duck on an end-cap and
>>> got a sudden nostalgic urge for a bottle. It was the last thing to
>>> ring up and she asked me for ID. Sorry - I have no ID. But I look 50
>>> years old, if that mattered. Nah, that didn't matter. They wouldn't
>>> sell it to me. I said, "You're shitting me, right?". I left without
>>> buying anything and they had to restock $130+ worth of stuff. ****
>>> them.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>>
>>
> Here, no matter your age they card for alcohol and cigarettes.
> Doesn't matter if you're 21 or 91, they will ask for ID; no
> ID, no sale.
>
It's the law here, too. However, at one local store, unless you look
like you're 12 (who can tell these days) they just key in 01/01/1930 to
authorize the purchase. *IF* I'd been with the government entity that
attempts to enforce those laws they'd fail.

Jill

On 7/11/2016 12:45 AM, wrote:
>> On 7/10/2016 7:38 PM, Sqwertz wrote:

>>>
>>
> Here, no matter your age they card for alcohol and cigarettes.
> Doesn't matter if you're 21 or 91, they will ask for ID; no
> ID, no sale.
>


Many stores do it. Most of us carry an ID when we go out so not a big
deal. PITA but it takes away the poor judgement of a minimum wage clerk
that made a bad call.

On 7/11/2016 12:21 PM, Cheri wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>>
>>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>>
>> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> sf
>
> Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
>
> Cheri

I doubt most criminals who are buying guns aren't buying them from
legitimate gun dealers.

Jill

On 2016-07-11 4:53 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:

>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>
> I think people need to show ID and a HS diploma to vote.
>


We have people here who think it is important not to have to uncover
their face in order to vote. Hell, we had one who insisted on having her
face covered while taking the oath of citizenship.

On 2016-07-11 5:34 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 7/10/2016 8:37 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
..
>> It was pretty obvious that the was customer was suggesting that it was
>> because she was black, but it was pretty obvious to me that he was just
>> being relieved to go on break.
>>
> He likely could have mentioned to her he was going on break but hey,
> since someone else was right there to ring up her purchases what's the
> big deal? Imagined 'slights' are not a reason to get upset. Do some
> people really expect those employees to stand there for hours on end
> without a break? (rhetorical question)

Everyone seems to be hung up on their right to be offended these days.
He was a young guy were was being relieved by a senior cashier. That
was pretty obvious to me. I suppose that she could have explained why
she was taking over...... but... why should she have to. The woman was
basically accusing the guy of walking away and not serving her because
she was black.

On 2016-07-11 5:43 PM, wrote:

> My local supermarket is undergoing renovations. It's annoying outside
> and irritating inside when counters and displays move around. I am
> sure it will be great when finished and in chatting with the manager
> the other day (he's around a lot) I suggested the cashiers are getting
> the worst of it with jack hammers a wall away and I hoped to goodness
> they were getting double time - I don't think the suggestion went down
> well.
>
> --

It could be worse. There is a small grocery store in Thorold where I get
most of my meat. There are three checkouts, and almost always all
running. They are right by the exit door. Seriously. There are two
together just a few feet from the door and the third is right at the
door. When we are in the deep freeze those cashiers are exposed to a
lot of cold air every time someone walks out.

On 2016-07-11 5:46 PM, jmcquown wrote:

>> Here, no matter your age they card for alcohol and cigarettes.
>> Doesn't matter if you're 21 or 91, they will ask for ID; no
>> ID, no sale.
>>
> It's the law here, too. However, at one local store, unless you look
> like you're 12 (who can tell these days) they just key in 01/01/1930 to
> authorize the purchase. *IF* I'd been with the government entity that
> attempts to enforce those laws they'd fail.


In Ontario they have to ask for ID for anyone buying tobacco or
cigarettes if they appear to be under 25, even though the legal drinking
age is 19.

On 2016-07-11 5:47 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> Many stores do it. Most of us carry an ID when we go out so not a big
> deal. PITA but it takes away the poor judgement of a minimum wage clerk
> that made a bad call.


Imagine the impact on servers who are paid a lower minimum wage because
they expect to be tipped, and dealing with people who aren't likely to
have a lot of tip money and who have just been given a reason not to tip.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:18:05 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> I suppose that she could have explained why
> she was taking over...... but... why should she have to.

Or he could have been her relief and she was coming back. Either way,
who cares?

--

sf

On 7/11/2016 3:45 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:18:05 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> I suppose that she could have explained why
>> she was taking over...... but... why should she have to.
>
> Or he could have been her relief and she was coming back. Either way,
> who cares?
>


Black supermarket customers matter.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:14:08 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2016-07-11 4:53 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>>
>> I think people need to show ID and a HS diploma to vote.
>>
>
>
>We have people here who think it is important not to have to uncover
>their face in order to vote. Hell, we had one who insisted on having her
>face covered while taking the oath of citizenship.

No, that is not exactly how it went, the judge knew exactly who she
was.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:21:13 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2016-07-11 5:43 PM, wrote:
>
>> My local supermarket is undergoing renovations. It's annoying outside
>> and irritating inside when counters and displays move around. I am
>> sure it will be great when finished and in chatting with the manager
>> the other day (he's around a lot) I suggested the cashiers are getting
>> the worst of it with jack hammers a wall away and I hoped to goodness
>> they were getting double time - I don't think the suggestion went down
>> well.
>>
>> --
>
>It could be worse. There is a small grocery store in Thorold where I get
>most of my meat. There are three checkouts, and almost always all
>running. They are right by the exit door. Seriously. There are two
>together just a few feet from the door and the third is right at the
>door. When we are in the deep freeze those cashiers are exposed to a
>lot of cold air every time someone walks out.

The cashiers at my stupidmarket suffer the same way, there are
certainly ways they could avoid it. If I see the manager strolling
around again I must ask him if the renos will make it better for them
in that way.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 2016-07-11 6:45 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:18:05 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> I suppose that she could have explained why
>> she was taking over...... but... why should she have to.
>
> Or he could have been her relief and she was coming back. Either way,
> who cares?
>


The black lady who demanded to know why he had looked at her and walked
away must have cared. It was pretty obvious to me that she was taking
over for the guy, and it was even more obvious that she was pulling a
race card.

jmcquown wrote:
> On 7/11/2016 12:21 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
>>>
>>> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> sf
>>
>> Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> I doubt most criminals who are buying guns aren't buying them from
> legitimate gun dealers.
>
> Jill

Really? How does that work?

On 7/11/2016 4:57 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:46:37 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> On 7/11/2016 12:45 AM, wrote:
>>
>>> Here, no matter your age they card for alcohol and cigarettes.
>>> Doesn't matter if you're 21 or 91, they will ask for ID; no
>>> ID, no sale.
>>>
>> It's the law here, too. However, at one local store, unless you look
>> like you're 12 (who can tell these days) they just key in 01/01/1930 to
>> authorize the purchase. *IF* I'd been with the government entity that
>> attempts to enforce those laws they'd fail.
>
> I don't think I was ever carded in South Carolina, so it must not be
> law.
>
> All states have a law that says you can't sell liquor to persons under
> 21. But how you determine that a person is 21 or not is usually up o
> the seller.
>
> Only a small handful of states have a law that you must card EVERYONE.
> And states that do have the law are very good at carding EVERYONE
> since they have sting operations where they cops send in 80-year olds
> and if they don't get carded by the clerk, the clerk and store gets
> busted.
>
> Really, isn't it discrimination to have to provide ID? That's what
> some of the politicians would have us believe.
>
> -sw
>


only if you are drinking to work up enough courage to go and vote.

On 7/11/2016 7:43 PM, Alex wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>>> Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>> I doubt most criminals who are buying guns aren't buying them from
>> legitimate gun dealers.
>>
>> Jill
>
> Really? How does that work?

You can't be serious. Got cash? Plenty of guns available.

"Brooklyn1" > wrote in message ]


> Some OTC meds can be made into hallucigenics. Most pharmacies here
> limit me to one bottle of Mucinex and I have to show ID. However at
> BJs I can buy a dozen bottles with no ID, weird how rules go.

Yes, they have the same thing here with some of the OTC, not Mucinex that
I'm aware of, but I've not bought more than one at a time, so dunno for
sure. I can tell you that the nicotine lozenges were very addictive and had
to break that habit after quitting smoking too.

Cheri

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 7/10/2016 8:37 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2016-07-10 8:15 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>> Most of the cashiers I come across are pleasant or all business,
>>> but once in a while you get a hostile or distracted one. Those
>>> are the ones who make things unpleasant. I'm sure they say the
>>> same thing about customers.
>>>
>>
>> I saw a woman get all upset about a cashier a couple weeks ago. She had
>> her stuff on the conveyor, they rolled forward, the cashier looked at
>> the woman and smiled. Another cashier came up behind him and took over
>> for him. The woman got all huffy and asked her why he had looked at her
>> and walked away. The replacement cashier said he was going on his break.
>> It was pretty obvious that the was customer was suggesting that it was
>> because she was black, but it was pretty obvious to me that he was just
>> being relieved to go on break.
>>
> He likely could have mentioned to her he was going on break but hey, since
> someone else was right there to ring up her purchases what's the big deal?
> Imagined 'slights' are not a reason to get upset. Do some people really
> expect those employees to stand there for hours on end without a break?
> (rhetorical question)
>
> Jill

Maybe I'm lucky, I do shop early so it might be that the day is just
starting for everyone, but I can't remember the last time I had a
rude/surly/huffy cashier. They all are quite pleasant in that regard, though
I have seen some impatient customers that treat the cashiers rudely. I give
big kudos to anyone who can deal with the public on a daily basis and still
smile.

Cheri

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:44:14 -0700, "Cheri" >
wrote:
>
> Maybe I'm lucky, I do shop early so it might be that the day is just
> starting for everyone, but I can't remember the last time I had a
> rude/surly/huffy cashier. They all are quite pleasant in that regard, though

I shop all times of day. I never see surly cashiers and I haven't
seen any customers from Hell either. I've heard stories from cashiers
who had worked in dicier areas, and those bad customers are usually
strung out on (abusing) something - alcohol, drugs, whatever.

> I have seen some impatient customers that treat the cashiers rudely. I give
> big kudos to anyone who can deal with the public on a daily basis and still
> smile.
>
That's why it's better for the super sensitive to shop during the
early shift. Only the A-holes are in a bad mood at that time of day.

--

sf

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:43:42 -0400, Alex > wrote:

> jmcquown wrote:
> > On 7/11/2016 12:21 PM, Cheri wrote:
> >>
> >> "sf" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 03:11:16 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> But people think you shouldn't have to provide ID to vote.
> >>>
> >>> People think we shouldn't have background checks for gun ownership.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> sf
> >>
> >> Yes, the criminals that abuse them do not want them.
> >>
> >> Cheri
> >
> > I doubt most criminals who are buying guns aren't buying them from
> > legitimate gun dealers.
> >
> > Jill
>
> Really? How does that work?

Oh, grow up.

--

sf

"Cheri" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Brooklyn1" > wrote in message ]
>
>
>> Some OTC meds can be made into hallucigenics. Most pharmacies here
>> limit me to one bottle of Mucinex and I have to show ID. However at
>> BJs I can buy a dozen bottles with no ID, weird how rules go.
>
> Yes, they have the same thing here with some of the OTC, not Mucinex that
> I'm aware of, but I've not bought more than one at a time, so dunno for
> sure. I can tell you that the nicotine lozenges were very addictive and
> had to break that habit after quitting smoking too.

Depends on the ingredients. There are many different kinds of Mucinex. If a
cold pill contains pseudoephedrine, then it can be used to make bad drugs.
If it contains phenylephrine, then it can't be used for that and some say it
isn't very effective for colds and stuffy noses.