Lower the U.S. drinking age?

[Black Lushus 0]

Adults aren't even responsible with this stuff and you think kids can handle it?

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

If drinking were *legal* for any age, I suspect binge drinking would go down dramatically.

 

Being a boorish drunk would no longer be acceptable behaviour for a young person, the way it is in Europe.

Once again, Eric, this isn't going to happen. They'll just be legal boorish drunks. Drinking till you puke is too ingrained in American culture to be promptly undone by lowering the drinking age. Just lower it anyway, though. I don't give a shit.

 

Is it even that much better overseas? Cyber Mark is like 17 and routinely comes on the board going ohjn m myj dfuycjinbg god i am skio fucking wastewfd riugfht noiws,. Maybe it's just France that has its shit together. I blame the British and Irish for us.

[EricMM 0]

Thoroughly possible.

 

Damn hooligans.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Especially the Irish.

 

Gambling is also kind of retarded for an age 21 limit. Especially with the inconsistency of the age limit, how it's 18 here or 21 there.. totally dumb.

[Kinetic 0]

Lower the age of consent, then lower the legal drinking age. We're doing this in the wrong order.

[Guest Vitamin X]

The age of consent varies from state to state, anyways. The drinking age is a federal matter.

 

Maybe, if anything, they could change it enough to make it so that it's left up to the states to decide on drinking ages.

[Kinetic 0]

I call for a national age of consent. Put it somewhere around the 9-10 area. The legal drinking would then be set at 12. Old enough to bleed, old enough to...drink. Beer.

 

 

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

The age of consent varies from state to state, anyways. The drinking age is a federal matter.

 

Maybe, if anything, they could change it enough to make it so that it's left up to the states to decide on drinking ages.

I thought drinking age was technically a state decision, but the Federal Highway Administration doesn't give you funding if it's below 21, so it's kind of a backdoor federal thing. I think this was MADD's doing. I know Wisconsin was 18 for beer and wine for some time. Hey, Illinois, take a stand and drop it to 19, even if it means losing funding for your highways. They couldn't possibly be falling apart more than they already are.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Correct. The federal government holds highway funding over the heads of states that aren't going along with the latest lobbying crusade. More than just with the drinking age, it's been used to undermine states' rights since the interstate system was created. I'll bet making America the next Britain with lots of coercion to install assloads of video cameras everywhere is next, in the name of public safety or cutting down on speeders (read: fattening coffers) or some shit like that.

[NoCalMike 0]

To me though, I just don't understand how 21 is deemed some magical age where people are suddenly responsible enough to drink. I had plenty of beer & liquor before I was 21 and it resulted in harmless fun with friends, while at the same time plenty of people over 21 were getting DUIs and into fights etc etc etc. The problem with a law like this that it is not judging people on their individual merits as a person. Like I said, I just break it down to being a legal adult. Once you are a legal adult you should have the same privelages and penalties as any other adult no matter their age.

[Red Baron 0]

Make it ninteen. I mean I have to deal with you guys driving in Canada hammed up all the time because it's legal at 18/19 here and 21 in the States.

[Gert T 0]

I am against it. I started drinking at 18, but I don't like the fact that 18 year olds could buy beer for 14 and 15 year olds like 21 year olds do for 18 year olds now. While 14 and 15 year still drink now, its harder for them to get the alcohol now than it would be if it were 18.

 

 

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

Obviously it's not hard enough! If kids want to get booze, they won't be easily deterred. The only way high schoolers are going to be like "let's get some beer...ah, forget it, not worth the effort" is if they're stoned, and that's another issue entirely.

[The Niggardly King 0]

Yeah, it really isn't that hard to get booze at 14/15. An example of this would be kids that were juniors/seniors having older brothers who would buy them the stuff, and then they would sell it to some kids during lunch in one of the bathrooms at my high school.

 

This shit happened daily. Seriously... if someone had an older brother by 6 or 7 years... then it wasn't that big of an issue.

[The Niggardly King 0]

And now we're not even getting into the kids who would have an alcoholic household and could sneak out 2 or 3 bottles of something or a case or two of some beer a month.

[Red Baron 0]

There is no problem with lowering the age to 18/19.

 

You guys are just freaking out for no reason.

[At Home 0]

I'm in favor of keeping it at 21.

[cbacon 0]

Well the question is, has anyone really had that hard a time getting alcohol/getting drunk before they were of legal age? Just like Marijuana, is there anyone you know that has actually really wanted to try it, but refused to merely because it was "illegal" ?

 

Exactly. Prohibition does not work.

 

I don't believe the state should not inhibit anyone's access to drugs or alcohol.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

There is no problem with lowering the age to 18/19.

 

You guys are just freaking out for no reason.

 

Well, it used to be 18 in the US. I'm pretty sure they raised it back up for _some_ reason or other.

[Nightwing 0]

Well the question is, has anyone really had that hard a time getting alcohol/getting drunk before they were of legal age? Just like Marijuana, is there anyone you know that has actually really wanted to try it, but refused to merely because it was "illegal" ?

 

Exactly. Prohibition does not work.

 

I don't believe the state should not inhibit anyone's access to drugs or alcohol.

 

The phrase "Everything is good in moderation" comes to mind. If you don't inhibit peoples access to any drug, you're going to basically throw out any sort of actual prescription drug regulation, since you can't "inhibit anyone's access to drugs". That's just a poor, poor solution. Personally, I feel it just should have to pass FDA approval, which means pot gets a pass since it really isn't a manufactured drug.

 

The age should be 18. Raising it has done absolutely nothing to curb drinking in the slightest (And the "no man's land" argument actual holds water, in my opinion). Let's stop with the argument about "If I can go to war and die I should be able to drink", because you can; if you are in the military, base stores will sell you liquor as long as you are enlisted. The better argument is "If I can be tried as an adult, I shouldn't be getting written up as a Minor in Possession", which makes absolutely no sense.

 

I don't know if it would improve things drastically, but I do think that there are kids who are mature enough to be drinking, yet get screwed because they are a "Minor" for this one item. As a person still in college, I haven't seen anyone who is a bad drinker change significantly between the ages of 18 and 21, or at least change because they got older.

[At Home 0]

I think the age should stay 21 because the US is such a goddamned poor example of how to handle alcoholism. Lowering the age limit would be disastrous, and any good effects would take several generations to even begin to be realized.

[cbacon 0]

Obviously measures would need to be in place to ensure safe use of prescription drugs, but its access to such drugs that warrants discussion. In the context of alcohol, a 16 year old can buy booze in many european countries and all the evidence shows that they have less binge drinking and fewer alcohol related fatalities. This is because prohibition is a stupid idea that doesn't work, has never worked, for any substance, ever, and we should thoroughly reject the idea. Not to mention it relies on a police state.

[At Home 0]

The European and American drinking cultures are, I'd say, incomparable.

[The Niggardly King 0]

Yup and it all dates back to those Purtain fuckers who took this land.

[Guest Smues]

Well the question is, has anyone really had that hard a time getting alcohol/getting drunk before they were of legal age? Just like Marijuana, is there anyone you know that has actually really wanted to try it, but refused to merely because it was "illegal" ?

 

Exactly. Prohibition does not work.

 

I don't believe the state should not inhibit anyone's access to drugs or alcohol.

 

So 5 year old's should be allowed to purchase beer?

[cbacon 0]

Well the question is, has anyone really had that hard a time getting alcohol/getting drunk before they were of legal age? Just like Marijuana, is there anyone you know that has actually really wanted to try it, but refused to merely because it was "illegal" ?

 

Exactly. Prohibition does not work.

 

I don't believe the state should not inhibit anyone's access to drugs or alcohol.

 

So 5 year old's should be allowed to purchase beer?

 

I don't think its realistic for a 5 year old to want to drink beer. But let's take for example, a 12-year old. Some kids that young do drink and it's really sad if they're getting sloshed. But I'd rather they have to do it in full view of the community than out in the woods, especially if they're drinking dangerously. A bar will cut you off at some point.

[Guest Smues]

Well the question is, has anyone really had that hard a time getting alcohol/getting drunk before they were of legal age? Just like Marijuana, is there anyone you know that has actually really wanted to try it, but refused to merely because it was "illegal" ?

 

Exactly. Prohibition does not work.

 

I don't believe the state should not inhibit anyone's access to drugs or alcohol.

 

So 5 year old's should be allowed to purchase beer?

 

I don't think its realistic for a 5 year old to want to drink beer. But let's take for example, a 12-year old. Some kids that young do drink and it's really sad if they're getting sloshed. But I'd rather they have to do it in full view of the community than out in the woods, especially if they're drinking dangerously. A bar will cut you off at some point.

 

But let's say they see their dad drinking and want to do it themself. They should be allowed to?

[Maztinho 0]

Having lived in Brazil where there's a "legal" age that nobody really bothers to enforce unless they think they can get get something from it. I've seen mid-teenagers drunk out of their minds, while it wasn't the norm it can't be good for them. Isn't one of the main reasons against letting teens drink is that they are going through a second formative mental growth and adding alcohol to the equation just screws them over even more than the regular teen angst shit?

 

I don't think lowering the limit is going to cause some unholy outbreak of rampant alcoholism, but I don't see how it's going to stop the American culture of drinking until shitfaced. This action just seems to be the colleges trying to lessen their campus securities strain.

[Red Baron 0]

It has to do the growth of the liver. If alcohol gets introduced in the system at a young age with abuse, your liver takes a heavy beating.

[At Home 0]

Cbacon, are you just kidding or what? I mean, universal legalization is such a horribly irresponsible philosophy to subscribe to that I can't really take anyone seriously who proposes it.