Old Enough to Fight, Old Enough to Drink
We should empower young adults to make responsible choices, not choose for them.
One hundred college professors pushed a very hot button last week when they announced they signed a letter stating that they were pushing to lower the national drinking age from 21 to 18. The professors hail from mostly distinguished colleges — including Dartmouth and Duke — and are part of Amethyst Initiative — an offshoot of the nonprofit organization Choose Responsibly, which was started by former Middlebury College President John McCardell.
After the announcement, the media was flooded with editorials, letters to the editor, responses from other organizations, and, of course, rebuttals to the proposal. The drinking age has suddenly become the hottest issue in the press besides the election. There are valid points to be made for both sides of the argument.
In 1984, when the drinking age was raised in the United States, Congress enacted the National Minimum Drinking Age Act. This law basically held states hostage by saying 10% of their federal highway funds would be taken away if they did not enforce a legal drinking age of 21. There has been controversy ever since. The most basic argument against the raised drinking age — and for lowering it –is the most opined: If we can marry, drive, and go to war at 18, why can’t we legally drink?
Our government trusts an 18-year-old to defend our country against its enemies, but does not trust us to consume alcohol at the same age? Another argument for lowering the age is the one the college presidents are using as the backbone of their initiative: a raised drinking age causes binge drinking. As McCardell wrote in a 2004 New York Times editorial:
The 21-year-old drinking age is bad social policy and terrible law. It is astonishing that college students have thus far acquiesced in so egregious an abridgment of the age of majority. Unfortunately, this acquiescence has taken the form of binge drinking. … Our latter-day prohibitionists have driven drinking behind closed doors and underground. This is the hard lesson of prohibition that each generation must relearn. No college president will say that drinking has become less of a problem in the years since the age was raised. Would we expect a student who has been denied access to oil paint to graduate with an ability to paint a portrait in oil? Colleges should be given the chance to educate students, who in all other respects are adults, in the appropriate use of alcohol, within campus boundaries and out in the open.
Perhaps he has a point. When I was in college and the drinking age was 18, there was a pub on campus where students would gather and drink and listen to live music. When I went back to college later on and the drinking age was 21, drinking had become a surreptitious thing; students were hoarding alcohol and drinking as much as they could in as short period of time as possible in order to get drunk before getting caught. That’s not to say students weren’t binge drinking before the age change; just that they are doing it more often.
Maybe that’s not as much the fault of the drinking age laws as it is our views on alcohol in this country. Take a look at this chart showing the alcohol policies of other countries. Very few countries have similar age constraints. Americans tend to take a prohibitionist view on drinking. We preach alcohol abstinence, lecture about the evils of liquor, and let groups like MADD and D.A.R.E. indoctrinate our children into thinking that any alcohol at all is bad.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Michele Catalano lives, writes, and takes photographs on Long Island.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
61 Comments
1. Richard Cook:18-year olds are defending the country while in a matrix of leadership that is guiding, teaching and disciplining them. In short they have plenty of oversite. 18 year olds drinking are doing so in a culture that actively promotes drinking way too much and also a culture in which too many parents have abdicated responsibility for raising their own children.
Aug 26, 2008 - 2:56 am 2. cedarford:Catalano – We preach alcohol abstinence, lecture about the evils of liquor, and let groups like MADD and D.A.R.E. indoctrinate our children into thinking that any alcohol at all is bad.
Instead of teaching our kids how to drink responsibly, we are turning drinking into some kind of forbidden fruit for them. So at the first sign of freedom, like going away to college, these 18-year-olds who were never taught how to handle alcohol, only to avoid it, are drinking like they found some kind of magic potion.
Pretty darn good perspective, Catalano!
We took the “just say no!” insipidness applied to illegal drugs and expanded the “War” to alcohol. And that was combined with the Nanny State lawyers at Transportation threatening no highway funds to any State that did not change laws to bar drinking between 18-21, and bow to “zero tolerance” before age 21.
The rationale was that all the laws were “worth it” if just “one kid’s life is saved!!”
But human behavior does not just change at the snap of a safety nazi lawyer’s fingers, or a “ban everything to save the children! the children!” zealot.
It just drove drinking underground, created binge drinking in both ‘hood posses and with collegians. It boosted burglaries and teens are doing break-ins to find beer, wine, booze supplies or get stuff they can sell to get black market refreshments.
It is time that it be rethought.
Aug 26, 2008 - 3:19 am 3. Chris:Rather than reward children for reaching a calendar mark why not offer incentive for public service?
Show military ID and drink. Even at age 17.
Active military service should prove “adult hood” better than a driver’s license.
Don’t want to serve in the military? Don’t drink. Who cares about you? You don’t care about your country.
If you are old enough to fight but aren’t willing to serve then no, you shouldn’t be allowed to drink. We don’t have a draft in this country any more. No draft, no draft beer.
Aug 26, 2008 - 3:48 am 4. moreland:If you’re old enough to die for your country, you’re certainly old enough to drink a few beers.
And, ad reductionem, the Nanny State MADD nuts’ argument becomes: “let’s all stay in our homes, and never go out, for fear of being run over – or getting stung by a bee, or stubbing our wittle toes (whine, whine).” We can’t make the world safe for everyone, no matter how much we legislate.
Aug 26, 2008 - 3:56 am 5. moreland:The MADD nuts are just another front of the attack on male society.
Aug 26, 2008 - 3:58 am 6. Andrew Ian Dodge:A similar debate is going on in the UK and the puritans are at it there too.
There is no reason to have a 21 year old drinking age. Its foolish and against natural justice. Decide when someone is an adult for everything and stick to it.
Aug 26, 2008 - 5:25 am 7. Brett:Incarcerating activist puritans who put vice wars on the political agenda of a purportedly free nation would be the best solution for all
Aug 26, 2008 - 5:42 am 8. Mark:The drinking age should absolutely be lowered to 18. It is typical of totalitarian humanists to control behavior with draconian laws that go against common sense.
Aug 26, 2008 - 5:44 am 9. SGT Ted:I drank on base at age 18 in the early 80’s, But, then again, my parents modeled mature drinking behavior and I was allowed a drink with dinner on special occasions once I hit 16 years of age.
Perhaps a tiered age system; 18 you can consume. 21 you can buy.
Aug 26, 2008 - 5:54 am 10. kg2v:Let’s do it right – either lower the drinking age to 18 (I’ve always wondered if there was some sort of discrimination lawsuit there – 2nd class citizen etc), or make all who have passed Basic Training “adults” in ALL matters – no matter what age. Show your Military ID, and you are not “under age” for ANYTHING
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:01 am 11. RAH:Why not change the age of majority to 21. Most 18 year olds are too immature. I am a parent of one and I see his friends, especially the girls are getting wild from the idea they are adults when they are not in reality.Parents are restrained from their ability to restrict when they are legally adults but do no act like adults. Any military person under 21 can be declared an adult by virtue of service.
Now I personally prefer the age to be lowered. I will educate my children into drinking and how to drink and enjoy it without the goal to get totally smashed. I have done that despite laws saying I can’t.
Wine at dinner is not abnormal.
Look at the brain development and the brain is still immature up to 25 or so. That is why young people act so stupid and irresponsible.
America though also attempts to infantize adults by taking away responsibility and consequences.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:07 am 12. SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):The legal age for alcohol consumption across the United States was raised in 1984 under the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, which blackmailed states into raising their drinking ages to 21, or lose federal highway funding. The pious idiots at MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) who helped to influence the passing of the legislation, and have morphed from a ‘concerned group’ to a neurotic bunch of Carrie Nations.
Restricting the drinking age to 21 and over an absolute failure. If ‘underage’ people want to drink, there’s no shortage of ways to get alcohol. Trust me.
First of all, the fallacy of reducing highway fatalities is horseshit. A good number of non-alcohol-related accidents among teenagers have increased due to driving inexperience, not alcohol. In reality, the alcohol-related accidents with 21-24 year olds, has increased.
Secondly, there are so many reasons why the law discriminates against (otherwise) legal 18 year olds.
At the age of 18 one can own property, run for public office, vote, marry without parental consent, be held accountable in the eyes of the law as an adult especially with regard to felonies, and last but certainly not least, serve in the armed forces to fight for this country. They’re good enough to pick up a rifle, drive a tank, fire artillery, and operate equipment worth millions of dollars while engaging the enemy on fields of battle, but according to the MADD-ass-kissing morons in the government, they can’t be trusted with alcohol.
That’s bullshit on stilts.
If the 18-20 year olds in this country decide to band together against this lunacy, it will change in a heartbeat. Get. Out. The. Vote.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:11 am 13. Drake:Bad idea. Think of the unintended consequences. Lowering the age to 18 makes it infinitely easier for the 13-17 crowd to get their hands on booze. Oldest guy/gal in the crowd makes the booze run for the rest. That’s what happened last time we tried this experiment in the 70s.
We’ll end up with a lot more dead kids on the road and more 18 to 21 year olds with criminal records for buying the booze.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:15 am 14. B Dubya:Where were you guys when I went in the Navy in 1970? I had been in for 2 years before I could legally buy a beer.
There is one question that may support limiting the legal age to later than 18 years. Is there not an issue regarding the way juvenile humans metabolize alcohol as opposed to the way that a fully physically mature adult does? Note that the issue is not mental maturity, but a function of physical maturity.
The idea that MADD is just another Carey Nation front is disturbing. Talk about the ultimate in nannyhood…
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:16 am 15. HardHeadedWoman:I don’t think it would make a dimes worth of difference one way or another. Binge drinking–teenage or older–has been around since mankind discovered alcohol and other mind altering substances. I don’t think education makes a difference either. Some just will never learn and some only learn by their mistakes. I think it’s an unsolvable problem.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:24 am 16. SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):Drake,
Tell that half-assed theory to an 18 year old Soldier.
Get a grip. The proposed change isn’t a blank check for 13-17 year olds. You probably don’t think 21 year olds should have the right, either. Want to raise the age to 30, just to make sure?
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:25 am 17. Larry J:As a vet, I have no problem with those who are actually serving in the military being allowed to drink (and accept the consequences of doing so). They’ve accepted adult responsibility by joining the military (especially in a time of war) and deserve to be treated as adults.
I don’t see the point in granting the same priviledge to others just because they’ve turned 18. Most college students are not accepting adult responsibility unless they’re paying their own way through school. It can even be argued that college is just a prolonged adolescence. Why grant them adult priviledges when they don’t act like adults?
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:26 am 18. carlitos:On the bright side, groups like MADD are exposed for what they are – prohibitionists. From MADD to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to the Marin Institute, all of these groups are against all alcohol all the time. They cloak their true motives in “reasonable” measures like lowering the alcohol/driving limit to .08 or “protecting the children” with the age 21 requirement. A little sunshine on these organizations could be a very good thing.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:32 am 19. Wacky Hermit:Yeah, Drake, all those 13 and 14 year old drunk drivers are such a problem!
Look, I don’t think it’s a good idea to drink and drive, and if I were Empress Of The Universe my kids would never drink at all, ever. But given how rampant the teen drinking problem currently is, what makes you think it *can* get worse? I don’t know of a single teen who hasn’t already been offered the choice to drink while the legal drinking age is 21, so arguing that lowering the drinking age to 18 would offer more of them the opportunity is, in my mind, bunk.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:34 am 20. RKV:By your logic Drake, we ought to do away with that pesky 5th Amendment limit on double jeopardy. Utilitarian arguments such as yours ignore basic facts so as to make their case. The real world is more complex than your simplistic approach allows. You are missing two facts 1) the idea of adulthood is a societal construct more than it is a biological one and 2) other societies (e.g. most European countries) get by with a lower age defining adulthood for purposes of drinking alcohol, and they don’t have the problems we do. On a moral level, I agree with those here who argue that if you can be called on to die for your country (and that’s what a draft does folks), then you can be trusted to have a beer. And that’s NOT a false equivalency – given the responsibility that must be borne.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:44 am 21. jenna:I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I’m of the opinion that the drinking age should coincide with all the other “freedoms” that adulthood brings, but also have seen more than enough of stupid, immature behavior on the part of those self-same “young adults” (I live in a college town and have college houses just four blocks from my house).
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:50 am 22. Rachel:I also know from my own youth that if one really wanted to, one could partake of all those “freedoms” pretty much whenever one wanted to if you used a bit of ingenuity and cunning. I’m not even half so sure that wasn’t the allure of them in the first place. As for being in the military — that pretty much gave you a free pass off base.
The arguement of “they’re old enough to fight, so they should be old enough to drink” grates however. Serving your country isn’t, and should not be, equated with the ability to get hammered. I’ve found that most people who use it aren’t so much pro lowering the drinking age as anti military; that has always been the baseline sentiment from any adult who has ever brought that arguement up with me at least.
This is an unneccessary argument. People seem to forget that these rules were made for a reason…high deaths on the road due to drunkeness. Not eeeeevil government blackmailing poor, widdle, defenseless states. It may have or may have not worked. But as an aunt of 11 kids, I want to keep the records on the books. I think it is safe.
Kids and people who whine about old enough to serve their counrty should drink are doing just that – whining, esp teens who want to get trashed as it’s some sort of proof of mature adulthood (rolls eyes as she thinks back to her younger days) I agree with Chris when he said this:
If you are old enough to fight but aren’t willing to serve then no, you shouldn’t be allowed to drink. We don’t have a draft in this country any more. No draft, no draft beer.
we have waaaay other things to worry about right now than drinking age. Colleges should worry more about their budgets and safety than lowering the drinking age (which will STILL give them problems). We have economic problems, and we’re in a tumultuous world. I don’t believe in putting off problems, but this concern is nonsense. Kids will drink, and kids will abuse the rules no matter what the rules are; i’m just not willing to add more fuel to a fire we’ve controlled well in my opinion.
ps – MADD had it’s power in the 1980’s. Y’all are a bit late.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:55 am 23. John:I am all for teaching our children how to responsibly consume alcohol. It is an effective argument for lowering the drinking age to 18 or 19. In Virginia, we can’t use the current drinking age as an excuse since we can serve alcohol to our children at home.
Here’s the cite; Code of Virginia § 4.1-200.7
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:56 am 24. Seldom Soused:“7. Any person who keeps and possesses lawfully acquired alcoholic beverages in his residence for his personal use or that of his family. However, such alcoholic beverages may be served or given to guests in such residence by such person, his family or servants when (i) such guests are 21 years of age or older or are accompanied by a parent, guardian, or spouse who is 21 years of age or older and (ii) such service or gift is in no way a shift or device to evade the provisions of this title.”
I went to college in the 1970s when the legal age was 18. There were two bars on campus, serving beer. No one got blotto on liquor in the dorms, ’cause that wasn’t the culture then. Since drinking was _allowed_ drinking wasn’t cool.
The grown ups also sponsored end of term fancy dinners where you brought your own bottle of wine and everybody smelled everybody elses’ cork — a chance for kids to be sophisticated. (I brought Texas Pride beer, and had people sniff the pull top.)
Drinking at 18 deflates the coolness of hard liquor binging, and allows kids to learn responsible drinking habits.
Drinking at 21 creates the binging culture and makes teaching kids responsible drinking impossible.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:56 am 25. Rachel:I meant “rules” on the books
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:58 am 26. Lynn:Just to shut up all you who use that tired old “if an 18 year old can serve in the military” argument to justify lowering the drinking age, I say we should up the age to serve in military to 21 (which is 3 years younger than the average WW II soldiers).
You all sound like a bunch of drug pushers. According to my calculations, that if all goes well in a American citizen’s life, they will have a lot more years ahead of them to drink their brains to mush, than the years behind when it is illegal. Personally the two extra years kids have in the outside world to witness the drunken idiot adults will do them good. The colleges probably just resent the extra time and money they have to spend to enforce the law. The legal drinking age of 21 did not harm my kids and let me have some extra worry free nights.
Aug 26, 2008 - 7:17 am 27. MarkD:Finally, why anyone would want to lower the drinking age to 18 when the DUI laws are so harsh and could in fact really hurt a young person’s future is beyond me.
There needs to be a single standard. If they are too young/stupid/immature to drink, ditto for voting and driving and owning a gun. I am comfortable with adulthood at 18.
Yes, I’m serious about getting 16 and 17 year olds off the road.
Aug 26, 2008 - 7:19 am 28. Drake:I see we have a lot of thirsty 18-21 year olds here. And yeah, I can see why a soldier would be angry about this situation. BUT–
I’m just sayin’, we’ve gone down this road before. Believe it or not, proponents used the same “Soldiers are old enough to fight and die, but they can’t drink” argument way back in 1973 too. Things didn’t work out well then, and I don’t think they’ll work out well now.
Wacky, it did get worse and it can get worse. Lower the drinking age and you’ll have a lot more 13-16 year old passengers in cars driven by 17-21 year old impaired drivers. That’s just the way it is.
And yes, studies have found that the earlier one begins drinking, the more likely it is they’ll develop drinking problems later. Dems the facts, folks.
Aug 26, 2008 - 7:19 am 29. Drake:RKV, that’s way over my head! You may be 100% correct in your reasoning but I’m still not convinced.
Why 18? I’d be much more inclined to support changing it to 20 nationally and giving that a trial run for a few years before considering 19. 18, never. That just dips too low into the high school crowd.
Aug 26, 2008 - 7:28 am 30. Jack H:In 1984 politicians wanted to appear to be doing something, so they came up with the perfect scheme. Pass an unjust, unconstitutional law that penalizes an entire class of citizens with no due process. Appease the Nanny-Staters. Here is the cleverest part of the whole scheme: by the time the under 21-year olds realize how unfair it is and get organized – the are 21.
Aug 26, 2008 - 7:30 am 31. Tuesday Morning Reading « Sua Sponte:The result has been no decrease in drinking, and cyncicism among young people, PARTICULARLY IN THE MILITARY (I was a Marine for 26 years).
On behalf of the young men and women who have won the war in Iraq for us, END THIS INJUSTICE.
[...] College professors are looking to lower the drinking age. [...]
Aug 26, 2008 - 7:38 am 32. kconner:I have 22 1/2 years in the military and am currently serving as Command Master Chief (E-9) at my command. I will tell you the number one problem we have to deal with is alcohol. Telling someone they can drink and then expect them to “just have a few beers” is like giving a soldier an automatic weapon and then expect them to fire one bullet at a time. A lot of our service members have to be taught how to do the right thing from the ground up when they enlist because in today’s society, they aren’t being taught at all.
Aug 26, 2008 - 8:05 am 33. Susan Katz Keating:So, uh, what does alcohol have to do with military service? Sorry, I don’t see the correlation here.
Aug 26, 2008 - 8:40 am 34. Fat Man:Now:
Drinking Age = 21
Voting Age = 18
Driving Age = 16
This is messed up and backwards. Here is the way it should be:
Drinking Age = 16
Aug 26, 2008 - 9:30 am 35. gus3:Voting Age = 21
Driving Age = 18
@Susan:
Are you trolling, or are you simply too lazy to actually read the comments?
Aug 26, 2008 - 9:35 am 36. btenney:For most of my life I was one of the people who drank and partied on a regular basis. I was a fun guy. I never killed or maimed anyone. That is strictly a matter of luck because I certainly didn’t take any precautions. I don’t drink now and have no desire to. Nor do I want to tell any one they shouldn’t drink. I’m now working on my third million, wish I knew where the other two went.
Aug 26, 2008 - 9:47 am 37. Concerned Citizen:On the other hand how many autos and homes have been bought or sold while under the influence. How many marriage proposals or divorces wouldn’t have happened if the parties had been of sound mind. Just askin.
We should empower ALL citizens to make responsible choices, not choose for them. This goes for all laws, not just blatantly stupid ones like the under 21 year drinking.
Aug 26, 2008 - 10:00 am 38. bear:The age for military service, and all other adult defining priveleges should be raised to 21. We say that 18 year olds aren’t responsible enough to drink, yet we authorize them to kill (in a conflict) is absurd. On one hand they can exercise discr3etion and on the other they can not? And to say they are supervised in the military makes it sound like war is a controlled exercise.
Why do they call it the fog of war anyway? I have a 19 year old and a 24 year old son…there isn’t much difference in their degree of ‘responsibility’.
Aug 26, 2008 - 10:33 am 39. bear:Drake, back in ‘73 you could have both a draft card and a drink…what state are you from?
Aug 26, 2008 - 10:44 am 40. bigmck:“Old enough to be in the military, old enough to drink.” — Makes sense to me. — If not in the miliary, it’s 21.
Aug 26, 2008 - 10:54 am 41. tanstaafl:As a student in France a zillion years ago, I noted getting or drinking alcohol at parties was no kind of big (or little) deal.
Said lack of importance was attributable to the lack of a “drinking age”, meaning that imbibing alcohol wasn’t tied to some verboten big deal idea of adulthood.
At parties, we danced, talked and had fun, and nobody needed to drink booze/get smashed.
In the USA these days, it sounds like “binge drinking” is off the charts.
Aug 26, 2008 - 11:06 am 42. R.W. Renn:The frontal lobe of the human brain reaches maturity in the early to mid-twenties. In light of this fact, giving license to 18 year-olds to consume alcohol is a formula for disaster.
Aug 26, 2008 - 11:16 am 43. Fat Jolly Penguin:Isn’t it funny how prohibition fails pretty much every time it’s tried?
Aug 26, 2008 - 11:27 am 44. steph:“The frontal lobe of the human brain reaches maturity in the early to mid-twenties. In light of this fact, giving license to 18 year-olds to consume alcohol is a formula for disaster.”
Yet we give them the power to help pick the man who has his finger on the button.
I am for: Drinking age 14-16 driving age 16-18 and voting age 21 or earlier with military service.
Aug 26, 2008 - 12:41 pm 45. leah:Extend drinking privileges to those who serve or have served. The vast majorities of momma’s boys age 18 will never put on a uniform. Screw ‘em.
Aug 26, 2008 - 3:52 pm 46. cedarford:For those who never served in the military, just “serving” does not confer instant maturity and good judgment on a 18 year-old. Yes, we can impart discipline and keep them well-controlled in situations where officers and NCOs maintain oversight. But on their own time and away from military authority, they are little different than their non-military cohorts in terms of personal self-discipline and good judgment in terms of alcohol. Which is why alcohol abuse bedevils the militaries and is always a top discipline issue.
I support lowering the age, but inside and outside the military – in better controlled situations than we saw in the times before excesses by uncontrolled teens caused the Nanny State people seize power and to launch Prohibition on the 18-21 crowd.
To say that a great solution is to only let military people 18-21 drink completely misses this.
Aug 26, 2008 - 4:56 pm 47. Timmer:Old enough to serve, old enough to be served. I believe that and I don’t even drink anymore…and I’m a retired MSgt.
Let’s end the charade though. Either you’re an adult at 18 or you’re not. Raise the age for service and voting to 21 or lower the drinking age.
Aug 26, 2008 - 6:22 pm 48. Russian Bear:The title is right. The article is right.
A soldier, who may be killed tomorrow in action, does not have the right to drink a pint of beer? Tis is a mocking absurdity.
In Russia we get everything at the age of 18: drinking, marriage, voting, fighting.
In Russia we can built anything we want on the property we own. In Russia we have such a freedom of movement that we can even travel to Cuba.
Yeah, it comes out that we have more freedom in Russia than you, guys.
Aug 26, 2008 - 9:52 pm 49. constitution first:As someone fresh out of college I can without a doubt say I grew up so much between 18 and 21. There are great arguments on both sides of the issue in here. I really have an issue with age being used to decide when one can do something… Honestly, we all know someone who’s 35 and shouldn’t be driving, voting , drinking, who know’s what… I know the ACLU would have a field day with my theory.. but why not test into eligability for these issues…
I’m not trying to harkin back to the day’s where tests were used to discriminate. An individual right comes with individual responsibility. Where is the personal accountability with using an aged based system?
Aug 26, 2008 - 10:51 pm 50. pappy:make the age 18 for card carrying servicemen since they are the ones defending the country. let the peaceniks and kos crowd eat crap and wait.
Aug 27, 2008 - 8:42 am 51. Canadian beer is 5%:We have simlilar issues her in the land of Igloos as it is a provincial (State) governed law and we have 3 that are 18 yrs and the others are 19 yrs.
liek everywhere we have issues of underage drinking, I for one participated gleefully in the 80’s, as did you all in some manner or not.
but being a nanny to an adult is pathetic and has done little to curb the issue in the US. you have higher instances of binge drinking, and fatalities due to binge drinking than we do per capita.
the idea of serving your Country, voting for its leaders and getting married but not being able to have a legally legislated substance seems a tad pathetic, since you actually can do nothing to stop them in the end, ends up being futile.
all the BS stats that are thrown around are nothing but lies in order for a puritanical organization to gain memberships and funding and a means to control a population.
if you wanted to really stop drinking and driving why not just legislate that in-car breathalyzers be installed on all vehicles. that stops the problem no….never happen! not in a hundred years!
Aug 27, 2008 - 11:12 am 52. Joaquin Murrieta:University students ages 18 to 20 make up a small amount of young adults this age. University students should not be given a privilege position in this argument. Besides students drink because the local businesses in the towns hosting the universities generate capital by exploiting students.
Aug 27, 2008 - 11:46 am 53. Susan Katz Keating:Gus: Are YOU just trolling, or are you too apathetic to actually think about the comments you skim? I repeat: I don’t see any correlation between mil-service and drinking age.
Aug 27, 2008 - 11:47 am 54. SGT Ted:Just because a bunch of politicians passed a law back in the 70s doesn’t mean that it was wise or needed.
I drank on base with my comrades, all under 21. Somehow, our brains developed normally and we’re not all in jail. Somehow. Gee I wonder what it was. Good thing the pols passed a law! Oh wait…
Also, the mean age in WW2 was so high because of the draft and volunteerism of older folks and guess what? The drinking age on bases back then was usually 18, as the old Army wasn’t full of puritans and a PC ridden officer corp more concerned with their precious evaluation reports than their troops having a bit of fun. How come no one is concerned with the unintended consequence in bnge drinking deaths caused by the current silly law?
Aug 27, 2008 - 1:29 pm 55. Jim:“Lowering the age to 18 makes it infinitely easier for the 13-17 crowd to get their hands on booze. Oldest guy/gal in the crowd makes the booze run for the rest. ”
Clueless comment. You make it sound like 18-year-olds socialize with 13-year-olds. On what planet?
“Kids and people who whine about old enough to serve their counrty should drink are doing just that – whining,”
Rachel, take your shaming language and jam it. No one is whining. Insisting on a right is not whining.
“But as an aunt of 11 kids,…”
You can’t possibly be trying to say that the lives of your 11 kids are worth more than other people’s rights, are you? You’re pretty selfish if you are, especially in this case, since we are talking about people that risk their lives to guarantee your rights.
“You all sound like a bunch of drug pushers.”
And you sound like a know-it-all, scoldy nun. Take your own advice, Lynn, and shut up.
“The legal drinking age of 21 did not harm my kids and let me have some extra worry free nights.”
The preference for security over freedom is the essence of fascism. No wonder Hitler’s biggest support base was housewives.
“teens who want to get trashed as it’s some sort of proof of mature adulthood ‘
Stop lying about other people’s intentions. You can’t possibly know what these people want. Are you the sort of person who think trying to tell
Aug 28, 2008 - 1:12 pm 56. Lynn:Jim: You want some cheese with that whine? Did little Jimmy have a problem with a scoldy nun in his past that he can’t shake off?
Alcohol IS a drug. Why would you push it on young people when you know that the DUI laws are so brutal and rigid these days?
A mother expressing worry for her children is not an invition for fascism or dreaming of a bunch of crazed MEN marching in lock step while saluting a freak like Hitler. For saying that, I say to you: Cram it Clown.
Aug 28, 2008 - 3:58 pm 57. Mark in Portland:Idiotic proposal. So, they’re upset by 18-20 year olds binge drinking on their campus’ (campi?) and their solution is to make it easier for 15-17 year olds to binge drink in high school? Talk about sloughing responsibility.
However, I am in favor of our 18-20 year old military service members to have the right to drink: on base, say at the NCO club or organized functions.
Aug 28, 2008 - 4:20 pm 58. Jose Garcia:I am in Iraq now (my third trip). It would just be great if we could drink beer now and then; we still aren’t allowed to drink here.
There are swimming pools, air conditioned quarters, laundry service, internet, cable tv, ice cream, and for some … more carnal delights…. but no beer. Sometimes you can almost forget you are in Iraq, until you are watching college ball at quarter to 5 in the morning and can’t pop the top on a cold one.
The brits on the other hand appreciate the good order and sense of well being that a couple of cold ones can bring. They effectively thumb their noses at this order.
Aug 28, 2008 - 6:48 pm 59. Northern Light:Actually, I have always been in favour of lowering the drinking age to 16. If kids were allowed to start drinking while they were still living with their parents, there would be a closer monitoring of their foolish binge drinking stage. If they do their stupid first-drunk mistakes while they are living with their parents they would be a lot safer and more likely to stop drinking irresponsibly earlier than they would be if they had their first serious drunks at a time when they are not under their parent’s watchful eyes.
There is another solution of course. I seriously believe that any person who is risking their lives for their country should be able to have a drink if they choose to. So why not keep the kids from joining the army until age 21? It might even lead to more maturity in the military.
Aug 29, 2008 - 9:25 am 60. jennyjen:I gotta say I don’t really have a side in this issue- I’m 28- I can drink as much as I want. But I will say this; at 18 I was drinkin, at 16 I was drinkin and at 14 I was drinkin- Why?? Because I was told I couldn’t. It’s pretty much the same argument against gun control- if you want to shoot someone, you will find a gun. In the same respects, if you want to drink- you will find whiskey.
Aug 29, 2008 - 1:38 pm 61. Kristine:The last time I was on a military base, they COULD drink alcohol at age 18. At least in the military clubs.
I suppose that could have changed.
This was in San Diego.
Sep 1, 2008 - 8:47 am