Bars' Scanning of ID Violates BC Privacy Laws 198
AnonymousIslander writes "The Information and Privacy Commissioner for the Province of British Columbia has ruled that electronic scanning of driver's licenses (and similar forms of ID) as a condition of entering a bar or nightclub is a violation of BC's Personal Information Privacy Act. The decision (PDF), while dealing with one specific club, will still have ramifications across the entire province. It is not known if the nightclub in question will attempt to appeal the decision in court. A similar decision was reached last year in Alberta.
The system in question is known as BarWatch, and has been the target of criticism by many for a number of years. Despite this, a number of bars/nightclubs and restaurants in communities across Canada have installed similar systems, and just days before this decision came down there were calls for the expansion of BarWatch in Victoria to cover restaurants and other establishments serving the post-bar crowds." Similar systems are in use across the US, as we have discussed.
Liability (Score:5, Insightful)
Between a rock and a hard place? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bars personally really don't give a shit about the client's ID. They are _forced_ to be uber diligant about this by the government, because, if God forbid, they let an 18 year old get a beer they face anything between losing their license and jail time. Governments also consistently ruled that if someone gives the barman a fake ID and they fall for it, it's still the barman's fault and not the fakers. So obviously they have to implement fascist mechanisms of ID checking, otherwise they'd be forced out of business by the government.
Now the same government goes around and says their ID checking is too strict (while obviously not alleviating any of the burdens which it imposed on bars on checking IDs in the first place). Hey government geniuses, if you'd like bar owners to not violate their client's privacy, maybe relaxing your age-proving rules would be a good place to start?
Leads to relaxation of underage drinking laws? (Score:4, Insightful)
Privacy indeed (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? You mean that keeping records of people intending to drink alcohol, the time, the location, who you might be going with, and hold onto that information for some unknown time, and share that information with unknown people or organizations.... you mean doing that could be considered a violation of an individual's privacy??
It still amazes me that people that live in countries that supposedly support an individual's rights allow themselves to be treated like branded cattle this way.
To the legislators that create such stuff, and to the people who support such legislation: Keep on waxing that slippery slope...
bar needs only one yes/no: is person = legal (Score:2, Insightful)
a bar needs one question answered:
is person older than legal drinking age. period.
they dont need name, age, address, hair color, who you arrived with, weight, etc.
Re:Liability (Score:4, Insightful)
So it has nothing to do with trying to enforce drinking ages. Instead it is just more "paper's please" government tracking of citizens.
I am sure that will make everyone there feel even better about being branded cattle...
What's the problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'll support this decision when the laws concerning kids change.
Here are two dangerous scenarios, both of which take place in an age-restricted venue.
#1) You go home with the cute girl. You don't worry about this person's age since the legal age of the venue is 18 (Quebec), 19 (rest of Canada), or 21 (USA). Well, turns out you were wrong, and now you're a branded sex offender for life. Your only recourse is to sue the bar to oblivion for not doing its job filtering out the kids, forcing the bar to start being more strict, including scanning IDs.
#2) You just got paid, feeling generous, go out to a bar, vibe is good and everyone is having a fun time. Your table of friends somehow merges with another table of strangers and everyone is getting along. So, you buy shots of vodka for everyone in celebration of such a great night. Only then, the police do a spot check on the bar, find out you bought alcohol for a minor, and get thrown in jail. Your only recourse is to sue the bar to oblivion for not doing its job filtering out the kids, forcing the bar to start being more strict, including scanning IDs.
When you're in an age restricted venue, that does not allow you to be innocent when you do something that somehow "violates" a minor that's also in the same venue. When the laws that facilitate this "guilt" change, then maybe I'll care a little more about the "privacy implications" of a bouncer being able to truly verify the age of an incoming customer.
Re:I wouldn't go in anyway (Score:1, Insightful)
Unfortunately, 99 out of 100 people either don't understand the whole privacy thingy at all, or don't care enough to actually "go and take their custom elsewhere". For the last 1%, businesses figure out its financially better off for them to lose one custom rather than change their business model. So go ahead, take your custom elsewhere, the problem is that you probably won't find anyone to actually take your custom to.
Re:Liability (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Between a rock and a hard place? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Privacy indeed (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, if I am running a bar I am scanning/Xeroxing the license. If you get charged with serving the underage, and you *don't* have a scan, you are dead in the water. You need proof that you had an ID that checked out. Period. If you don't want to provide an ID, there are plenty of places to get drunk aside from bars.
Brett
Re:Liability (Score:2, Insightful)
It's mostly to do with Asian and East Indian gangs, and it's only in certain, known bars where they hang out (bars that have "gone Asian", in local parlance). Before the mass immigration of the '90s, stuff like this was unknown here, and we existed in a naively happy bubble.
And this is not a troll, by the way. BC has changed a lot, and not for the better, even though it's "evil" to say so.
- posting anon to avoid the beating I'll get from PC people
Re:Liability (Score:3, Insightful)
>>>The ID scan is to identify persons known to police in a database and refuse them services
Illegal search by the government without warrant.
Keep the Idiots out. (Score:2, Insightful)
The system is designed to inform all bars who have the system that someone has been banned. The simplest way to do it is to use drivers license numbers as they are unique to each person. Now one may say that they should only track the license numbers of individuals who cause issue but just think about trying to get that number as you are throwing someone out. You also have to check to see if they are banned as they come in.
As for miss-use of the information, there are plenty of civil and criminal penalties to make that not worth the risk.
So how does a country club work, legally? (Score:4, Insightful)
Apparently I can't just walk into any ol' country club. I have to show my membership card. I get my membership card by applying. Part of the application process is showing some form of ID, another part is laying down a bunch of moneys, being in good standing, blabla.
How come that is legal, then?
As a result - and I know the answer is 'no', but I'm curious as to -why- it is 'no' - couldn't any ol' bar simply offer 'guest membership' by means of, say, a stamp / wrist band, where the 'membership process' includes showing some form of ID, costs the patron, say, $2 (which goes toward a complimentary membership drink), and the membership duration lasting the entirety of the patron's stay?
Re:So how does a country club work, legally? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently I can't just walk into any ol' country club. I have to show my membership card. I get my membership card by applying. Part of the application process is showing some form of ID, another part is laying down a bunch of moneys, being in good standing, blabla.
How come that is legal, then?
As a result - and I know the answer is 'no', but I'm curious as to -why- it is 'no' - couldn't any ol' bar simply offer 'guest membership' by means of, say, a stamp / wrist band, where the 'membership process' includes showing some form of ID, costs the patron, say, $2 (which goes toward a complimentary membership drink), and the membership duration lasting the entirety of the patron's stay?
Part of the answer is, we give country clubs far less grief than they're due, because many of their members are influential. And they still catch hell when they enforce membership rules that are very obviously racist, though that happens less often than you might think.
However, in this specific case, you're comparing apples and oranges - the situation in BC is not akin to a country club barring non-members. Once the law gets involved in a situation like this (which it did, since they were tying the scans to police databases), the system becomes subject to legal oversight. Cops, legislators and the like are bound by higher laws concerning basic rights for the people, which were very obviously being violated here.
Re:Liability (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Liability (Score:1, Insightful)
The linked article mentions nothing about crimes committed by ethnic groups in proportion to percentage of population. Of course you would expect the ethnic majority to commit most of the crimes.