I've been refused entry from a pub for being indescribably goodlooking.
BAHAHAHA! That's gold
I worked for many years as a doorman/doorhost/crowd marshall/security/bouncer/whatever.
I don't think I ever knocked anyone back saying they had tatts. That is just asking for trouble/arguments
However, if they had tatts, missing teeth, ratty hair, torn jeans and anything that resembled biker wear I would definitely but *kindly* refuse entry on the torn jeans.
If a bloke walked up with the coolest looking ink sleeve and a crazily-tall purple mohawk and the rest of the demeanor and outfit said he would be a relaxed customer then sure, let the guy in. Most people fitting this description are pretty chilled.
It's all about seeing the whole package and making the judgement - and what sort of place the owners want it to be.
And if a bunch of cocky, muscle-bound young guys walk up, well-dressed(ish) but wearing an assortment of tight t-shirts bought from Cotton-On stating that they played for some non-existant US "varsity" team and most of them sporting the twatty fauxhawk (ending in a ****** little mullet) that David Beckam introduced in 2000 and then hastily abandoned waaaaay back in 2001 I would find any excuse not to let twats like them in - 9 times out of 10 they have a few drinks and then get agressive toward anything that looks at them - they are just too much work.
"Management reserving the right to refuse entry" is all that doormen have to prevent issues with arseholes and drunks - there doesn't even need to be a sign stating this because it's a private establishment and there is no law stating that a potential patron must be let in. The places I worked at had very few fights and issues and that was due to doormen being polite, friendly and courteous when patrons arrive, helping people whenever they required it and not letting any old tool in.
EDIT: Maxmcbain - those last seven words do not refer to you and your brother-in-law; I'm sure the doorman was being an idiot when he refused your brother-in-law entry