Debate on lowering legal drinking age

College Confidential Community
81

<p>I'd venture to say that a significant portion of underage drinking comes from the sheer appeal of a forbidden fruit, breaking the law, and all that good stuff. Even in other countries that do have lower drinking ages, they don't see such egregious binge drinking because alcohol isn't treated as "You touch it, you die." Countries like France and Germany treat wine and beer as part of their cultures, and don't have much of a problem with domestic drinking.</p>

<p>There was an article posted here maybe a year ago about American students who go off to Canada for college. The first semester or so, sure, they're partying and drinking thanks to the lower drinking age. After a while, they settle down and treat alcohol as a special drink, or at least something not primarily used to get tanked.</p>

<p>Drunk driving in the U.S. was a major issue partly because states didn't have the same drinking ages, so of course younger people would drive over to another state and try and drive back while drunk. All states need to be on board with a common age, which in my opinion should be around 18. That's clearly the age of adulthood for most considerations, and the way our society is currently, is the best we can do for a while. Most of underage drinking problems are societal and social issues, which take more than legislation to fix. See banning slavery, Jim Crowe Laws, segregation, etc.</p>

82

<p>i'm going to bring it up again because it seems to have gotten lost:</p>

<p>THE DRINKING LICENSE</p>

<p>Rethinking</a> Alcohol Use By The Emerging Adult</p>

<p>In my opinion, this really answers everything. This argument has gotten so circular and repetitive it's absurd because the issue is that when you're arguing should the drinking age be 21 or 18 and not changing anything else, both sides are wrong.</p>

<p>Alcohol needs to be presented as something that can be enjoyed in moderation, and kids need to learn that, and the alcohol license allows kids to be weaned onto alcohol instead of the current system where we go from zero consumption to unlimited privilege.</p>

<p>I want to say that we should increase the penalty for drunk driving and buying for/serving to minors, but I don't know if that would actually help things.</p>

83

<p>Personally, I wouldn't go for the alcohol license. It's a good idea on paper, but it would just be more bureaucracy. I would just refrain from drinking at all if it required a license.</p>

84

<p>This is probably a very stupid question, I apologize ahead of time, but what is so appealing about alcohol?</p>

85

<p>idic, in the 1970's many states had drinking ages as low as 18. I don't know about all states, but in 1980 NJ raised the age to 19, a couple years later they raised it to 21. During that time I was in college in PA, the drinking age was already 21 there. </p>

<p>I don't know what the drinking age was before the 1970's - if it got lowered from 21 to 18 when the voting age was lowered, or if it was always 18. </p>

<p>I know what it's like to be frustrated by the drinking age. I lived in NJ when their drinking age changed from 18 to 19 on 1/1/80. My two best friends were 18 and were "grandfathered" to be legal, but I was still 17. So for a year and a half my friends were able to get into clubs and I couldn't! Did I like it? Of course not. Did it kill me, or even cause any real lasting problems in my life? No. And now I realize that it's not going to hurt anyone to wait until they're 21 to drink.</p>

86

<p>What is appealing for the young is that it is illegal when they begin to develop an interest in it. What is appealing for the old is that it tastes good and is healthful in moderation (one to two drinks per day). For many in both groups it makes them feel good.</p>

87

<p>Parents, how about educating your teens about drinking responsibly? While many argue that 18 is not mature, I certainly do not think 18 is mature enough to go to war and fight for our country, either. And if 18 is not mature enough, how about voting? This is indeed a very controversial subject. My main focus has always been to think about the parent's responsibility to teach their children; it should not be a gov't telling me what is my parental duty to begin with!</p>

88

<p>Quote: "And now I realize that it's not going to hurt anyone to wait until they're 21 to drink."</p>

<h2>~ Lafalum84</h2>

<p>I don't know if this hold true for everyone, but my disagreement with the National Minimum Drinking Age Act is primarily on principle rather than out of some great desire to drink.</p>

89

<p>No, a license for anything is a really stupid idea, open to abuse by all any any in power. This about 'firearms licenses' or 'edia licenses' or whatever along those lines. hell, my uncle needed a license to build a shed in his backyard! Any licensing or anything of that sort will only serve to give the government more power.</p>

90

<p>So we should just do away with firearms licenses, so anybody can get a license? Sure, that sounds like a wonderful thing. Put more guns on the black market or in the hands of those who, after psychological evaluation, are deemed mentally unstable.</p>

<p>I think the idea of a license for alcohol is a good thing, because it teaches kids how to drink, which clearly they don't know how to do. Sure it's open to abuse, anything is open to abuse. But at the moment, kids are dying in this country because of their abuse of alcohol. Kids in other countries aren't dying like they are in the United States, and that's because they were taught to drink responsibly. And don't hold your breath waiting for parents to teach their kids responsible drinking. Responsible drinking isn't a part of American culture, excess in all things is; and I'm sure there are many parents who will fess up or even glorify their Greek days.</p>

<p>Plus, even if parents do talk to their kids about responsible use, there's still the other kids at the party who haven't been taught responsible use. Group psychology says that a majority of those kids (who have received talks) will probably bend to peer pressure and drink just like everybody else. Parents are a long way away in college; kids are making their own decisions. High school, when parents have lots of control (at least, more than they do in college), is a MUCH better place to handle underage drinking.</p>

<p>Also, people are saying that high school administrators will have to deal with this: honestly, it's more the parents who will be living with the kids, correct? HS admins have the power to discipline, but the kid doesn't come to live in classroom 101, eat in the cafeteria, or take a shower in the gym after a night of binge drinking.</p>

91

<p>A license sounds like protection of the stupid from themselves. Just let nature take its course; if someone is truly stupid enough to drink themselves to death, who really wants them to be around? (excluding other binge drinkers or drunk drivers)</p>

<p>Popcornboy, I actually agree with you completely. The appeal of alcohol is the same as marijuana, cocaine, etc. The user 'feels good.' I have heard many adults (well over 21) tell me at first they thought it had a rather disgusting taste; it "grew" on them. The only difference between alcohol and marijuana is the one deemed socially acceptable by (the majority) of society. These drugs have always been harmful; short term and long term. Too many idiots out there to wake up to reality.</p>

92

<p>
[quote]
This is probably a very stupid question, I apologize ahead of time, but what is so appealing about alcohol?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It makes you feel good. It's fun.</p>

<p>It's perfectly fine for you not to want to drink but there is no logical reason why a person should not be able to do what they please with their own body as long as they don't put themselves in a position to harm others.</p>

<p>All of the arguments about how alcohol is bad for you, blah blah blah, are perfectly fine, then don't drink. But why should the government tell me what I can do with my own body?</p>

<p>Sure, a select few ruin it for everyone by making the terrible decision to drink and drive. But let's concentrate on getting them behind bars where they should be and let those who drink safely do so. The argument that banning alcohol reduces automobile deaths is ridiculous--banning cars would reduce automobile deaths too, though most people drive safely.</p>

93

<p>drinking is not the evil, nor is it the enemy, people! lowering drinking age also does not introduce a license to drink and drive and become ridiculously drunk to get hospitalized. it lets you to learn your tolerance to alcohol earlier so that you don't make any stupid mistakes and more importantly, learn to socialize over drinks-"the european way"-having a couple of glasses of wine over dinner or going to a pub to talk with your friend. there is no way you can compare alcohol to marijuana, since the types of "buzz" they give to you are completely different and marijuana is harmful to your lungs as well. drinking age definitely should be lowered to 18, but i'm guessing it won't be because of this reactionary-conservative-isolatory ideology of many, many americans.</p>

94

<p>
[quote]
You could have a "rationing" law. Perhaps they would be able to consume alcohol in designated, supervised areas, but not purchase it "to go".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is actually an intriguing idea. It would help prevent 18 to 20 year olds from buying alcohol for high schoolers. Combine it with a provisional license and required drinkers education for 18-20 year olds and limit them to beer and wine. Those who don't opt for the provisional license would be free to drink at 21.</p>

95

<p>This is mostly coming from my personal experience, but I definitely think the drinking age should be lowered to 18. </p>

<p>I took a trip to Australia this past January, where the drinking age is 18. I was 18 at the time and had never really gotten drunk before. Since I was on the vacation with my parents, I wasn't in a situation where I'd go out and get trashed. I just had a drink or three (and even more every once in a while) some nights between happy hour and bedtime. I think it was really important for me personally to find my limits around my family and not at a party or something. Partly because I didn't really want to get completely wasted in front of my parents and partly because they were there to cut me off. </p>

<p>If the drinking age were lower, people would be a lot more likely to learn their limits this way and not sneakily with a bunch of friends who probably don't know their limits either. Or, for those who want to follow the law, with a bunch of friends at a bar, parents probably not much in the picture.</p>

96

<p>Again, it's not like protecting people from their stupidity is a BAD thing. For one, protecting some people from stupidity protects everybody else from stupidity. People have a sheep mentality. They lead others into their stupidity and immaturity. We can't just waste these kids by saying well, you deserved to die. Johnny pressured you to drink all that booze and honestly, you should've just said no. In college people are still learning who they are; they're in a new environment, new friends, unsure of themselves, not as much wisdom as older folk.</p>

<p>If you were a parent, wouldn't you rather that your kids were taught to drink responsibily; rather than having somebody tell you oh, we didn't take that extra step, because who wants your kid around if they're just too STUPID to drink. There are other factors here besides stupidity.</p>

<p>People will not take responsibility unless there is some kind of shift that forces them to wake up. Just take a look at gasoline: all the sudden, everybody is going "green" and waking up to the fact that their lifestyle choices of giant SUVs and trucks probably weren't a good thing. But why are they realizing that? Only because gas prices shot through the roof. It takes pain to teach the American people tolerable consumption, apparently.</p>

<p>Let's just throw away the idea of provisional licenses. Then all the kids who are too stupid to figure out driving will just kill themselves, and we won't have to deal with them anymore. Of course, they'll hurt other people in their car crashes, because they don't know how to drive responsibly. Just as kids who drink too much will encourage others to drink, will do stupid things when they're drunk, will not look after other kids who may be getting alcohol poisoning when they're drunk, may rape other people while they're drunk, may go driving when they're drunk, and once again, slam into other people who are driving properly.</p>

97

<p>
[quote]
So we should just do away with firearms licenses, so anybody can get a license? Sure, that sounds like a wonderful thing. Put more guns on the black market or in the hands of those who, after psychological evaluation, are deemed mentally unstable.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually you don't need a firearms license to purchase firearms in most states (NY for handguns, New Jermany, MD, CA, a few other combloc states being the exception). In Alaska and Vt the people enjoy a lower crime rate than MA, MD, CA, NY, etc...Their age to buy a handgun is 18. More guns end up on the black market from police stocks than they do from FFL dealers. There is no psychological evaluation requirement to purchase a firearm in most states either. I believe that is a real dick idea. It gives a carte blance to the people in authority to deny firearms purchases arbitrarily. Who are the government to deem who is mentally unstable? Who is watching the watchers? Get my drift?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think the idea of a license for alcohol is a good thing, because it teaches kids how to drink, which clearly they don't know how to do.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah its brilliant. 40K accidents in America because the government does a tremendous job in making sure those with licenses are safe drivers.</p>

98

<p>
[QUOTE]
Actually you don't need a firearms license to purchase firearms in most states (NY for handguns, New Jermany, MD, CA, a few other combloc states being the exception). In Alaska and Vt the people enjoy a lower crime rate than MA, MD, CA, NY, etc...Their age to buy a handgun is 18. More guns end up on the black market from police stocks than they do from FFL dealers. There is no psychological evaluation requirement to purchase a firearm in most states either. I believe that is a real dick idea. It gives a carte blance to the people in authority to deny firearms purchases arbitrarily. Who are the government to deem who is mentally unstable? Who is watching the watchers? Get my drift?

[/QUOTE]

Ok, valid point. I clearly don't know enough about firearms laws.</p>

<p>However, Alaska (not sure about VT) is a very different area from MD, or CA, or NY. Alaska doesn't have big urban centers. Alaska doesn't exactly have the same level of organized crime. There are other factors contributing to firearm deaths in MD, CA, and NY other than the age requirement to buy a firearm.</p>

<p>I won't argue about psychological evaluations here, but I think that arguments could be made that in the right circumstances, it's not a "dick" idea.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
Yeah its brilliant. 40K accidents in America because the government does a tremendous job in making sure those with licenses are safe drivers.

[/QUOTE]

My driving test was five minutes long and ridiculously easy. I think that tests should be more stringent, and people should probably be retested every so often because I've seen a lot of people on the road who narrowly miss accidents and/or disobey traffic laws...but what would driving be like without any formal introduction to the system at all? (Not everybody gets taught by their parents, and not all parents really know how to drive.) </p>

<p>Besides...the "license" is a provisional thing issued to kids under the minimum age, until they reach 18, or 21.</p>

<p>Back on drinking...do you have a better idea on something that would work?</p>

99

<p>
[quote]
Quote:
Actually you don't need a firearms license to purchase firearms in most states (NY for handguns, New Jermany, MD, CA, a few other combloc states being the exception). In Alaska and Vt the people enjoy a lower crime rate than MA, MD, CA, NY, etc...Their age to buy a handgun is 18. More guns end up on the black market from police stocks than they do from FFL dealers. There is no psychological evaluation requirement to purchase a firearm in most states either. I believe that is a real dick idea. It gives a carte blance to the people in authority to deny firearms purchases arbitrarily. Who are the government to deem who is mentally unstable? Who is watching the watchers? Get my drift? </p>

<p>Ok, valid point. I clearly don't know enough about firearms laws.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Thats cool, you are among the majority. What really irks me are people that refuse to learn after being informed! The police especially...ah well, thats another topic.</p>

<p>
[quote]
My driving test was five minutes long and ridiculously easy. I think that tests should be more stringent, and people should probably be retested every so often because I've seen a lot of people on the road who narrowly miss accidents and/or disobey traffic laws...but what would driving be like without any formal introduction to the system at all? (Not everybody gets taught by their parents, and not all parents really know how to drive.)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, I am pretty aware of that hah. The thing is, mandatory testing, frequent testing, etc won't make any drivers safer. Its kinda like seeing a cop in your rearview. It automatically makes you the safest driver in the world. When he is gone... </p>

<p>
[quote]
Back on drinking...do you have a better idea on something that would work?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah. Get rid of the minimum age for consumption, and make the purchase age 18. (That is basically the same law as tobacco products these days). Its a step in the right direction. Ideally I'd like to see the purchase age abolished as well, but I am guessing that wouldn't fly too well :D</p>

100

<p>P.S., I edited my post just a weee bit.</p>

<p>Yeah that would definitely not fly haha.</p>