Thoughts On The College Drinking Age?

[Moby]

There's lot of talk about the subject now that some College leaders have suggested that we lower it to 18. There is something wrong with American society since we do binge on alcohol the way that we do.

In Germany and England I saw children in the pubs and beer gardens and I don't think they have as many deaths or injuries related to drinking as we do. That's my guess as I don't really know.

What are your thoughts on lowering or keeping the drinking age?

My opinion is make the penalties for breaking the law more harsh but start teaching youngsters to be more responsible in the home. I hate to think that a soldier can die in Iraq but isn't old enough to buy a beer here in the country that he/she is defending.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5959171.html

[Independent Harry]

Those kids have been drinking since they were 10 yaers old ,that's why. When you prohibit somehting from someone fro years and years, you build it up in their mind. If it was something they felt was commonplace and wasn't special, you wouldn't have the type of binge drinking going on.

[SeedyROM]

ehhh the binge drinking is fun till sunrise. Most learn thier lesson. College kids always find a legal buyer or a store that doesn't ask for ID. I think lowering the age will invite more drinkers to buy since many obey the laws and avoid getting into trouble, if they have a legal right then more will drink. The outcry from parents will grow if the age is lowered.

I find it ironic that several websites are posting about lowering the age limit and less than 10 days ago, I saw Pot on 3 forums including this one. Maybe its the Obama effect and researchers are posting articles to spur opinion? I think we'll see the USA lose the power status as we devolve into drugs and alcohol. But if Dems and Reps want to give away our jobs then they'll open the flood gates and allow the immigration of the brightest minds and those who want to party can party on.

[Hog Trash]

If the legal drinking age was lowered to 18, a restriction should be placed on their Identification if they are ever convicted of a drug or alcohol related offense, prohibiting them from future use or purchase of alcohol until they are 21. Anyone supplying them with alcohol should be subject to the same charges as contributing to a minor.

[disrupter]

I could give a flying fuck if the age is 18 or 21,

there are SO much more important, relevant things for this nation in peril to get busy with.

[SeedyROM]

The debate is simple, is the drinking age a privilage or a civil right? Some issues should remain a privialge once the person gets to a higher age. Look at the local news, on any given week, teens are caught drunk driving, causing accidents or racing in the streets. Todays kids have this indestructible, can't be whipped by adults attitude that teaches them to be more narcisitic than kids a decade ago. I see more irresponsible acts by teens today than when I was young.

Can teens and young adults accept such responsibility. The 21 thru 25 year old group do not handle alcohol any better than teens. They dirnk and drive because they flock to the parties and of course they have to make it home by curfew.

[Independent Harry]

ehhh the binge drinking is fun till sunrise. Most learn thier lesson. College kids always find a legal buyer or a store that doesn't ask for ID. I think lowering the age will invite more drinkers to buy since many obey the laws and avoid getting into trouble, if they have a legal right then more will drink. The outcry from parents will grow if the age is lowered.

I find it ironic that several websites are posting about lowering the age limit and less than 10 days ago, I saw Pot on 3 forums including this one. Maybe its the Obama effect and researchers are posting articles to spur opinion? I think we'll see the USA lose the power status as we devolve into drugs and alcohol. But if Dems and Reps want to give away our jobs then they'll open the flood gates and allow the immigration of the brightest minds and those who want to party can party on.

Interesting that you think drugs devolve a society. I have known of plenty of people that live intelligent lives, professors, scientists and others that smoke pot. They haven't devolved themselves.

Regardless, why does it work in Europe? Where kids drink alchohol. Why does it work in other places? American's seem to think that the American way is the only way. The problem isn't the drinking age, it's the culture that we create around it.

[Moby]

The problem isn't the drinking age, it's the culture that we create around it.
I can't argue with that statement in any way.

However, considering our culture around such things as sex and drugs is there any way that the government can help by manipulating the drinking age?

[Independent Harry]

I can't argue with that statement in any way.

However, considering our culture around such things as sex and drugs is there any way that the government can help by manipulating the drinking age?

no but I was trying to point out that the drinking age isn't going to make things worse or better. It just will make drinking legal for 18 year olds. in fact, i woudl be willing to bet that after a quick increase in binge drinking among 18 years olds + it will go down below what the numbers are now. Because once its legal, it looses some of the appeal to it, it once had. Doing something illegal and breaking the law. That was always something that gave us a rush as kids.

[SeedyROM]

Interesting that you think drugs devolve a society. I have known of plenty of people that live intelligent lives, professors, scientists and others that smoke pot. They haven't devolved themselves.

Regardless, why does it work in Europe? Where kids drink alchohol. Why does it work in other places? American's seem to think that the American way is the only way. The problem isn't the drinking age, it's the culture that we create around it.

Me too, I know those who have done well but I know a few who went on to smoke pot for life and a couple who went on the stronger drugs. Mass studies show the effects on society are neutral to negative depending on who did the study. Look at the hippie generation of the 1960's and the culture surrounding it. Some got high and went to work, some layed around and became complacent. I don't think smoking pot makes a person dumber, but it doesn't help them either. The chemical effects last longer than a couple of hours.

I know people who lead productive lives and they good lives. But look at the effects on kids who do not know when enough is enough. Hard to educate them without experience, the experience may kill them or someone else. Same for alcohol as drugs.

Look at Europe, I think we have better lives, better careers and career choices and we can own more assets and pay less in taxes than Europe. I see our country giving away jobs overseas and importing immigrants to do jobs we cannot because the schools are poorly run.

If we repeal laws to relax the country don't you think our politicians are going to take away more civil liberties down the road?

[Independent Harry]

Me too, I know those who have done well but I know a few who went on to smoke pot for life and a couple who went on the stronger drugs. Mass studies show the effects on society are neutral to negative depending on who did the study. Look at the hippie generation of the 1960's and the culture surrounding it. Some got high and went to work, some layed around and became complacent. I don't think smoking pot makes a person dumber, but it doesn't help them either. The chemical effects last longer than a couple of hours.

I know people who lead productive lives and they good lives. But look at the effects on kids who do not know when enough is enough. Hard to educate them without experience, the experience may kill them or someone else. Same for alcohol as drugs.

Look at Europe, I think we have better lives, better careers and career choices and we can own more assets and pay less in taxes than Europe. I see our country giving away jobs overseas and importing immigrants to do jobs we cannot because the schools are poorly run.

If we repeal laws to relax the country don't you think our politicians are going to take away more civil liberties down the road?

No not at all. Part of the problem are the laws. Its the culture that is created around it. IF you look at ancient civilizations for thousands of years, psychoactive drugs were oftened used as part of their religious ceremonies. They were part of vision quests. these societies had their failings of course, but because there was a certain respect surrounding the drug and the way it was used. If often had a positive influence on a person's life.

Personally I wouldn't sit aruond and smoke pot and od drugs all day. Some people would. And that would have a negative to neutral impact as you pointed out, not a positive one. But think of it this way. Something like half of people in prison, are there for victimless crimes.

"Proponents of reform argue that removal of these laws would be a profit to the economy, citing figures in excess of $200 billion.[3] They also argue that fewer people in prison for these crimes would boost the workforce, as well as reduce the reliance on correctional facilities and allow police the opportunity to focus on the remaining crimes.

They also claim that laws against these crimes may have unintended consequences that are the reverse of that intended: for example, the War on Drugs puts the distribution of illegal drugs into the hands of criminals, and creates artificial scarcity, making their distribution highly profitable. At the same time, it fails to completely prevent the activities it was intended to prevent. The criminal underworlds often created by laws against consensual crimes mean that a subculture comes into existence for whom police are an enemy, who cannot rely on law, and who often adhere to a violent code of honor. These traits discourage respect for property, encourage violence and revenge, and depress the economy of the areas in which they operate[verification needed]."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victimless_crime_(political_philosophy)

The above is a pretty good explanation. Think of money we throw at the War on Drugs and incarceration. Imgaine if these things could have a sales tax like cigarettes. We could probably pay for the two recent wars in a decade if we stopped the money being spent on the war on drugs, the incarceration of victimless crimes and taxed the products.

[doctordog]

Raise it to 22, hell who cares, at least you would only have to worry about their driving while talking on cell phone and instead of talking and being intoxicated while on the phone.:D

[SeedyROM]

No not at all. Part of the problem are the laws. Its the culture that is created around it. IF you look at ancient civilizations for thousands of years, psychoactive drugs were oftened used as part of their religious ceremonies. They were part of vision quests. these societies had their failings of course, but because there was a certain respect surrounding the drug and the way it was used. If often had a positive influence on a person's life.

Personally I wouldn't sit aruond and smoke pot and od drugs all day. Some people would. And that would have a negative to neutral impact as you pointed out, not a positive one. But think of it this way. Something like half of people in prison, are there for victimless crimes.

"Proponents of reform argue that removal of these laws would be a profit to the economy, citing figures in excess of $200 billion.[3] They also argue that fewer people in prison for these crimes would boost the workforce, as well as reduce the reliance on correctional facilities and allow police the opportunity to focus on the remaining crimes.

They also claim that laws against these crimes may have unintended consequences that are the reverse of that intended: for example, the War on Drugs puts the distribution of illegal drugs into the hands of criminals, and creates artificial scarcity, making their distribution highly profitable. At the same time, it fails to completely prevent the activities it was intended to prevent. The criminal underworlds often created by laws against consensual crimes mean that a subculture comes into existence for whom police are an enemy, who cannot rely on law, and who often adhere to a violent code of honor. These traits discourage respect for property, encourage violence and revenge, and depress the economy of the areas in which they operate[verification needed]."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victimless_crime_(political_philosophy)

The above is a pretty good explanation. Think of money we throw at the War on Drugs and incarceration. Imgaine if these things could have a sales tax like cigarettes. We could probably pay for the two recent wars in a decade if we stopped the money being spent on the war on drugs, the incarceration of victimless crimes and taxed the products.

A saw a feature on PBS debating the issue. So called victimless crimes according to the study may also include non-drug related crimes, so they through some facts that do not apply to the theory. The PBS feature debunked the victimless crime figures.

Telling parents thier kids can use drugs is the biggest hurdle, after the 1960's drug population explosion, legalizing drugs will be almost impossible to sell.
Same for alcohol use. Guess who will pay for rehab, the public will expect the government? We might save money rehab costs vs. drug wars, but the social impact will be devastating.

If any drug were going to be legalized, pot would be the easiest to sell since it is not as addictive as many think. Most others are highly addictive or have dangerous and unpredictable side effects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victimless_crime
The term victimless crime refers to infractions of criminal law without any identifiable individual that has suffered damage in the infraction (a victim). Typically included are violations of laws concerning public decency, and include public drunkenness, illicit drug use, vagrancy and public nudity

[Binky]

The debate is simple, is the drinking age a privilage or a civil right? Some issues should remain a privialge once the person gets to a higher age. Look at the local news, on any given week, teens are caught drunk driving, causing accidents or racing in the streets. Todays kids have this indestructible, can't be whipped by adults attitude that teaches them to be more narcisitic than kids a decade ago. I see more irresponsible acts by teens today than when I was young.

Can teens and young adults accept such responsibility. The 21 thru 25 year old group do not handle alcohol any better than teens. They dirnk and drive because they flock to the parties and of course they have to make it home by curfew.


Well, I'm in Michigan and back in the mid 1970's I was a bartender at my father-in-laws bar. During that time, Michigan dropped the drinking age to 18. However, the kids went nuts and just couldn't handle the responsibility that comes with drinking. They would over drink and cause trouble with other folks that just wanted to have a drink or two and shoot a game of pool. The young ones got routier and routier. And the cops were kept even busier. Then a few years later, the state decided it wasn't a good thing to have 18 year old youngsters out there drinking, causing havoc, fighting and driving. So they reupped it to 21. Strange, what a few years in age difference can make. However, I'm not naive enough to know that sometimes, even 21 is too young.

[Independent Harry]

A saw a feature on PBS debating the issue. So called victimless crimes according to the study may also include non-drug related crimes, so they through some facts that do not apply to the theory. The PBS feature debunked the victimless crime figures.

Telling parents thier kids can use drugs is the biggest hurdle, after the 1960's drug population explosion, legalizing drugs will be almost impossible to sell.
Same for alcohol use. Guess who will pay for rehab, the public will expect the government? We might save money rehab costs vs. drug wars, but the social impact will be devastating.

If any drug were going to be legalized, pot would be the easiest to sell since it is not as addictive as many think. Most others are highly addictive or have dangerous and unpredictable side effects.

Regardless. the drug related crimes that are victimless account for one of the highest the alrgest percentage of the prison population. 17% state and 18% federal.

Rehab? I'm not talking about legalizing heroin, cocaine maybe. I'm simply talkinga bout leagalizing marijuana and hallucinogens. and maybe some uppers and downers :P

Hell, I don't know, if it does happen it should have a legal age limit like alchohol does. As for the rehab, we still pay for the rehab now. What would be different. Yyou would stil lsee a huge net savings plut a huge increase in tax revenue.

[Mr, gone]

Humans will ALWAYS look for a vice to escape reality. Reguardless of what age is legal - whether a right or privaledge is of no concern.

Prohabition was a perfect example of what happens when you attempt to deny people of their fix.