Then you're actually being a huge help to the staff member. Rather than acting like an entitled brat who's just turned 18 and finds it an inconvenience to bring ID.

@@SenorJagWire At the ages 30 and above, you really shouldn't need ID. I think a lack of training among certain members of staff is the issue. Sure they work under great pressure, not to serve minors, however if beyond age 30, it's insulting and stupid to then claim that person could be 17. Remember while they are told think 25, it's 18 that is legal age, If a staff member can't determine age responsibly, then the rule should't exist as they can't be trusted to apply common sense and make rational decisions.

@James Palmer2 Your suggestion is full of common sense, this was how it used to be, except for the lie detectors. There is no credible reason to introduce such a policy change. It’s not like it prevents underage people from accessing these products, often they just get an adult to get them. I we can both agree this Challenge 25 policy should be abolished, sadly it’s getting a lot of support, despite it’s obvious problems.

@@rachel_adams9646I’d keep challenge-25 for knives. For tobacco (which you used to only need to be 16 to buy anyway) and alcohol, I’d operate on challenge 21 again. Ditto for this new policy on energy-drinks.