The response to the LCBO's plan to trial new security measures in some stores starting this spring has proven strong and divisive enough for the provincial government to step in and cancel the pilot just two days after it was announced.

While many residents deemed the move a great idea, others called it potentially classist, among other things, prompting Ontario's Finance Minister to say he was "directing the LCBO to cancel it immediately" on Wednesday afternoon.

The Crown corporation released a short statement soonafter, saying that it would no longer be moving forward with the concept.

Not even 24 hours before this was reversed?

— Irrelephant_Canuck (@IrrelephantC) February 14, 2024

The booze retailer shared Monday that it would be implementing "controlled entrances" at six stores in an effort to curb rampant and increasing theft, and would potentially roll the pilot out to more locations and/or make it permanent, depending on its efficacy.

The new entrances were to comprise of an exterior and an interior door, with a security guard checking (and scanning) customer identification in between — something that a few people said posed an issue for certain vulnerable groups.

Some on X mentioned that houseless individuals, as well as those from Indigenous communities, may not have the valid identification needed to enter stores with these new rules in place. "IDs are not as common as those with more privilege assume," one person stated.

Yeah you need ID to buy booze. Who could have guessed?

— 882fan (@882fan) February 14, 2024

Others took issue with the first stores selected for the pilot, which are located in Thunder Bay, Sioux Lookout and Kenora — locales that at least one person identified as "predominantly Indigenous communities that have been overrepresented in systemic harms and policing."

"Sounds like another form of 'carding,' which is a violation of charter rights," another added. "And given the locations chosen, no doubt racial profiling will be extensive."

The logic behind the selection of these stores, the LCBO said in its release on the subject, is "because their contained geography allows us to measure the effectiveness of the controlled entrances without the transference of theft to other stores."

It also made it clear that all persons who appear to be above the age of 17 would be required to present valid photo ID to get inside.

I live in Thunder Bay where 4 stores are doing this. Theft is a huge problem here, this is their way to curb it.

— Tom Auger (@tna0066) February 14, 2024

Then there were, of course, the general privacy concerns from those who worried about how their information woud be used, those regarding it as "government overreach" and those who had some more interesting theories about why this was happening now.

Scanning my id that has my personal information on it so that I can gain entry to a building to buy something is a shocking violation of fundamental human rights. This is an entry point for a CCP style system. It is stunning that there are people who agree with this.

— Steve of the North (@ManFromPense) February 14, 2024

In response to some of the complaints, people were quick to point out that customers are usually required to present their ID at the LCBO anyway in order to verify that they are of age.

(Cashiers at the Crown corporation reserve the right to deny service to anyone who is or appears to be intoxicated, who they have reason to suspect is shopping for a minor, who is underage and/or who "lacks proper identification to prove they are 19 or older.")

You need an ID to purchase alcohol...correct?

— Chrx H (@TomSawyer667) February 14, 2024

Many also seemed to see the development as something that should be the standard, as it already is at cannabis outlets, and noted how a similar scheme has worked to tackle theft and other criminal incidents at liquor stores in other provinces.

"It works well in Manitoba we don’t even notice it anymore, just the norm. You feel safe in the store and know the staff will be safe as well," one person wrote. "It took a worker getting very injured to have this implemented."

Still, the backlash was apparently enough to axe the project before it began.