<p>Apologize for the double post, but it has been too long for me to edit and I have something I wanted to add, in case anyone hadn’t said it already:</p>
<p>If someone is intoxicated to the point that he needs to be babysat, this situation should be reported to the RA. It is our responsibility to deal with these people, especially since a simple case of a funny drunk can quickly turn very unfunny when he or she has alcohol poisoning.</p>
<p>This thread has followed a course similar to many other threads on this topic. I think that people just have different views about drinking and whether it has any value. </p>
<p>But on the topic of whether a kid should avoid underage drinking because it is against the law, my comment is that there are a number of factors that cause people to lose respect for a particular law. First, if it is widely ignored. Second, if it is rarely enforced. Third, if many people think it is unreasonable. Fourth, if it seems arbitrary. Fifth, if violating the law doesn’t seem to violate any moral codes other than the obligation to obey laws. Sixth, if it over-reaches.</p>
<p>It seems to me that all of these, more or less, apply to under-age drinking for a lot of people. It also explains why many people will speed a few miles over the speed limit, but would never shoplift anything even if they could get away with it. Many of those same people wouldn’t speed 20 miles over the limit–and they wouldn’t approve of a 12-year-old drinking.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you really? The irony…can’t smell cocaine, heroin, or most of the other things people can indulge in that are actively harmful. Except maybe cigarettes. Remind me of the last time a kid was hauled off to the hospital for pot poisoning. :rolleyes: Our nation’s drug laws are truly insane.</p>
<p>Hunt-
Your post, while explaining well reasons for the disrespect for the drinking age, begs the question of what is the VALUE and IMPORTANCE of DRINKING BY THSE UNDER 25 ( the positive attitude).
If moderation were a guarantee, then maybe ok?
But even with moderation, why so necessary, important, positive? Or is it just “lack of negative” (which flies in face of research on risk of young brains in contact with any amount of alcohol, drugs)…</p>
<p>performersmom, I’m confused. There have been dozens of posts in this thread stating what the positive values of social drinking are. The simplest one is that people enjoy it. Your argument, I think, is not really that there is no value, but that in your opinion, the risks outweigh the benefits. Clearly, if you don’t value social drinking at all, then any risk at all outweighs the benefits.</p>
<p>As a thought experiment, what would your opinion be of a law prohibiting anybody under 25 from skydiving?</p>
<p>The risk to the “young brain” is not that great long run as most functions are already complete. What comes last is judgment and other things that are pretty obvious late teens lack. So maybe to the extent that drinking combined with lack of good sense is a bigger problem than the basic lack of sense when completely sober too there is more risky behaviot. But unless done way over typical levels this too shall pass. And the positives are as Hunt said. People have fun doing it. The vast majority survive.</p>
<p>[The</a> Teen Brain | Harvard Magazine Sep-Oct 2008](<a href=“http://harvardmagazine.com/2008/09/the-teen-brain.html]The”>http://harvardmagazine.com/2008/09/the-teen-brain.html)</p>
<p>^ right…and many do not survive…worth the risk?</p>
<p>I think I was the one who originally asked the benefits of young people drinking. The best answer received was because it is fun. The problem is that many teenagers fall into the trap that they don’t think they can have fun if drinking isn’t involved…and this leads to deaths far too often.</p>
<p>I don’t know, I just know too many families that have lost a loved one because of the direct result of alcohol. Most teenagers really don’t understand the risks IMO.</p>
<p>I would say ok to that—life goes on, enjoyment can be had without skydiving, drinking, and there are other methods of attaining enjoyment that are presumably not subject to the reasons (safety, health, whatever) why these activities would be banned.</p>
<p>I would say that if a young person is MORE likely to suffer the risks of engaging in a dangerous activity it really does justify banning it.</p>
<p>Cigarette smoking, skydiving, driving, owning a gun are all risky activities.</p>
<p>Driving has practical purpose, so we take that off the ok to ban list. But we do train, and require practice for those of a younger age, and require refreshers for those who let their licenses lapse. </p>
<p>Skydiving requires forethought, maturity in the experience (follow directions, do not freak out. make sure the provider of the service and equipment is legit- frontal brain activities), but an accident is not more or less damaging to the younger person. And it does not serve a practical purpose. But is it the only way to get a thrill, including many that are safer. Don’t most outfits make you sign a waiver? What is the age limit to that?</p>
<p>Playing soccer, field hockey, women’s lax, rugby should require a helmet, IMO, btw. Head and neck injuries are common; these traumas are more damaging than we realize.</p>
<p>Games, exercise, laughing, telling jokes, reading poetry, being in the company of good people, whatever…</p>
<p>Drinking helps people to relax, I get it. It reduces anxiety and inhibitions. Too bad that is needed. But endorphins from dancing and exercise would be healthier ways to promote this, with no risk to the young person’s brain, to the liver, no risk of addiction , or resulting risky behavior.</p>
<p>Young people simply do not have as much self-control or awareness of the LT consequences of their actions as those over 25. It has been scientifically proven that their pre-frontal cortex does not mature till after age 25. And that the addiction loops are more likely to be created in younger brains, as they are more plastic and sensitive to the environment.</p>
<p>Think about guns. They do serve a purpose for those who hunt. Beyond that why put one in the hands of a person under 25? And why not require a license with training and education and practice over the lifetime of that license?</p>
<p>I pray that everyone does have access to fun, relaxation and social connections without the use of alcohol or some substance. How do we teach that? Believe that? Live that?</p>
<p>What comes last is judgment and other things that are pretty obvious late teens lack. So maybe to the extent that drinking combined with lack of good sense is a bigger problem than the basic lack of sense when completely sober too there is more risky behaviot</p>
<p>Leading cause of death( from CDC) from ages 1-44 is unintentional injury. From 15-34 unintentional injury occurs almost three times more than the next leading cause ( homicide for those 15-24 & suicide for those 25-34)
I expect alcohol was involved in a few of those cases.</p>
<p>[NIAAA</a> Publications](<a href=“Brochures and Fact Sheets | National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)”>NIAAA Publications)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For skydiving? Yes. Usually the minimum age is the same as legal majority, 18.</p>
<p>I would favor a graduated drinking law, similar to current graduated driving laws. Indeed, some states used to have this, with “3.2” beer available to those under 21.
I’d like to see states issue a “drinking license” that you get at age 18 if you take and pass an alcohol awareness course. Perhaps it would allow you to buy beer and wine, but not hard liquor.</p>
<p>Here are the top 12 preventable causes of the death in the U.S.:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Smoking</a>, High Blood Pressure and Being Overweight Top Three Preventable Causes of Death in the U.S. - April 28, 2009 -2009 Releases - Press Releases - Harvard School of Public Health](<a href=“http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/2009-releases/smoking-high-blood-pressure-overweight-preventable-causes-death-us.html]Smoking”>http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/2009-releases/smoking-high-blood-pressure-overweight-preventable-causes-death-us.html)</p>
<p>What is the argument against making it a criminal misdemeanor to engage in all of those activities, or not remediate all of those conditions?</p>
<p>Education = good
Criminal punishment = bad</p>
<p>"alcohol use averted a balance of 26,000 deaths from heart disease, stroke and diabetes, because moderate drinking reduces risk of these diseases. "</p>
<p>HUH? Even moderate drinking raises triglycerides and blood sugar (which causes diabetes, cardiovascular incidents, fatty liver/liver cancer) and breast cancer risk.</p>
<p>The health benefits induced effect by alcohol’s de-stressing can be obtained via exercise, yoga, dancing, playing games, having monogamous, protected sex, eating a nutritional anti-inflammatory diet…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Candy bars do this too.</p>
<p>We are in the camp that kids in college, if they are so inclined, will drink. We have stressed to our children to do so RESPONSIBLY. Do not drink and drive, do not binge drink, keep your drink with you, etc. Our oldest is done with college and still doesn’t drink, his choice. He DID, however, make money as the designated driver for a lot of his friends. He charged everyone $5 to be the designated bar driver. Worked for him and kept people safe. Our next two, I am sure our DD will partake in alcoholic beverages in college. Overall she is a responsible kids with long term goals and knows that being stupid in college will kill her chances of obtaining those goals. We will see what happens. Our youngest could go either way but I can see him kicking back with friends in the dorm to watch a football game on TV and have a couple beers, not an issue in my book really.</p>
<p>But the statistics are not correct then Bay, need to be re-grouped.</p>
<p>Funny that not eating fish (Omega 3s) killed more people than drinking. Yet there’s no mandatory Omerga 3-for-under-21-year-olds law or effective antismoking legislation. AFAIK, in NY, it’s legal for under 18s to smoke-just illegal for somebody to sell or give them cigarettes, yet smoking kills many times what alcohol does, and it’s illegal to drink under 21. I imagine that many see this as a hypocrisy.
Even if the other 26000 deaths are added to alcohol, making it kill more than a lack of fish, it is still less lethal than High Salt, High Cholesterol, obesity, and other causes that can be directly linked to fast food, yet it would be ridiculous to ban mcdonald’s to under-21s, let alone under 18s. Why should alcohol be so restricted when burgers and fries kill more?
I speak as a non-drinking freshman. I have my own reasons for not drinking but I think it’s ridiculous that my friends can be suspended from school for a few instances of being caught at a party with a beer.</p>
<p>performersmom,</p>
<p>The second sentence may take your concerns into account:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There isn´t enough government oversight which could keep everyone safe. It is a problem in the US, when something goes wrong, it must be because we don´t have the right rule in place to protect people. At some point, we need to take ownership for ourselves and our kids. It is our responsibility to teach our kids to act responsibly, so when they are 18 and are longer under our watch, they could make some sensible decisions on their own. The government can´t do it for us, the school can´t do it for us, and certainly taking away other people´s rights so you could make sure your kids wouldn´t be harmed (ever) is not the way to do it.</p>