When 'voluntary' really means 'compulsory'

Some pubs in Aberdeen are introducing drug testing as a condition of entry. I don't have time right now to go into just how wrong I think that is (machine faults, prescription drugs, over-zealous Police etc.) but what has really angered me is this statement:

"The test is voluntary, but customers will be refused entry if they do not take part."

So what they're saying is that it is not voluntary at all, it is compulsory. Big brother would, undoubtedly, say "of course it's voluntary, you don't have to go into the pub if you don't want to take the test", but that's just playing semantics/pedantics. It is compulsory and an erosion of our civil liberties.

I can see what will happen; people will see the drug testing taking place and decide not to go into the pub. The Police will say "Oh look! Someone choosing not to go into the pub, they must be guilty, quick! Stop and search them!"

Something else will happen too, pubs will lose business. I don't take drugs, but there's no way I would go into any pub which wanted to test me. To insist on testing people is a presumtion of guilt, which goes against what this country's law is allegedly based upon, innocent until proven guilty.

How would the pubs like it if every customer demanded to test the strength/quality of their beer every single time they ordered a pint? After all, I've been in a few pubs where the beer tasted watered-down.