Should the drinking age be lowered to 18?

They just had the segment about this on "60 Minutes."

I say no, keep it at 21.
If kids can't drink responsibly with the drinking age at 21, they sure as hell won't if it was 18.

And I was that age, once.
I know how much pressure kids get to drink.

it's a reality. teenagers are worse drivers when they're sober, when they're drunk it's a tragedy waiting to happen.

We're discussing one issue. Then you bring up another. Nobody is suggesting that teens should drive drunk.

:sarcasm:

It's first-hand observation, of kids 16 or 17 years old in court for their 4th or 5th arrest for underage drinking.

It's seeing the news reports of those same kids getting plowed, and then taking "dirt naps" after driving, and far too often they take others with them.

Every year kids in colleges around Wisconsin do "intiations" with drinking whole 5ths of Jack Daniels. And then dying of alcohol poisoning.

Just go to Youtube.
You'll find practically "how-to" videos in how to drink as much as they can as fast as they can.

One must take into account a host of things that MADD does not look at.

Things have changed. Kids do no drink and drive at the same rate as they used to. There has been a lot of education (MADD did a very good job with this). Designated driver and all that whatnot.

So if you say increasing drinking age led to X drop in DUI deaths...then you can't say that due to other sociological factors. Like fewer young people leading to less drinking period (demographic factors).

I am not explaining this very well but the stats used to say increased drinking age led to fewer dead people is misleading at best.

MADD has become a self-sustaining thing. MADD exists because people have jobs with MADD and do not want to get other ones. Many people join MADD just because they like to boss others around. Or are just prohibitionists.

Anyway, an organization like MADD should exist, just not MADD.

Do you think that an 18 year old who is "responsible" enough to join the military isn't responsible enough to drink a beer?

If they're stupid enough to join the Army at 18, they're too stupid to be trusted with alcohol. For a whole lot of people, the Army doesn't seem like such a good idea at 21.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

1. Joining the military has absolutely nothing to do with responsibility.

2. Many servicemembers don't actually see the "military" until after a year more of schooling/training.

Don't use the enlistment age requirement to justify lowering the drinking age until you're willing to provide training for drinkers.

I would add that there probably wouldn't be any problem if 18 year olds drank "A" beer. "A" beer? Please.

Specifically, that a person is considered enough of an adult at age 18 to risk their lives, but enough of an adult to get some booze. It's hypocritical. And the idea that letting 18 year olds drink is inherently more dangerous than shipping them to Iraq is a lot of crap.

How many minors do you think have died in alcohol related incidents since 2003? Forget just auto accidents, include boating accidents, off-roading accidents, etc.

Load of crap?

http://www.snipeme.com/misc.php?loc=under21_casualties

Making that kind of behavior illegal never stopped anyone from engaging in it.

I'm sixteen, right? I can join the Army, the Air Force and the Navy... but I can't drink in pubs. When will the government, right, realize that young adults have a valued contribution to give to society?

A lot of people say that young adults are violent, right? But how would you feel if you were old enough to have... intercourse with the partner of your choice... and yet you could not drink in pubs?

There you go! That's the problem! What do you with an evening if you're a young adult and yet you can't go drinking in pubs?

1. go to a concert
2. go to a movie
3. take a walk in the moonlight with your sweetheart
4. make music with friends
5. attend a political meeting


Those are things I did when I was 16. Didn't try alcohol until I was 21, and frankly didn't like the taste of the stuff. Knew enough fools who got drunk and got into all kinds of trouble because of it. Never though a drunk was "cute", but I've met many a recovering alcoholic who I admire. To a person they say they wish they hadn't started drinking -- and all said they started drinking in their teens.

Now what I think is if the kids are united, we will never be divided!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1vyktgZmGc

About 1:30

But I am with you on the rest of it.

Young Ones, British ... it is intended to be ironic.

I posted a link to the video in the follow-up to the other reply.

* And in a 2002 analysis of 33 high-quality studies on the age-21 drinking law’s effects, University of Minnesota researcher Traci L. Toomey found that all but one study showed the higher age resulted in lower rates of alcohol consumption and traffic crashes. “It is the most well-studied alcohol control policy we have in this country,” says Toomey, an associate professor in the school of public health. “Usually we find no effect when we do policy studies. Here we have this policy effect that is very consistent – a big chunk of the studies showing this inverse relationship.”

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/01/health/he-drinking1

One of the most comprehensive studies on the minimum drinking age shows that laws aimed at preventing consumption of alcohol by those under 21 have significantly reduced drinking-related fatal car crashes.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080701083542.htm

look at statistics for vehicle accidents. They are already high for teens. Add drinking to the mix, and they will go even higher. I realize that the argument will be that kids will get booze anyway--but making it illegal for teens means that some won't drink and drive and a few lives will be saved.

Every study in the world shows that it results in responsible drinking. It cuts down on deaths and DWIs. It is a GOOD thing.

And, if your country sends you into war to die, you should get to drink beer. It's ok to kill and be killed but not ok to drink? What weird universe is this?

and done that. I didn't last long, and the age was again raised to 21. Traffic accidents soared, as did many other alchohol induced "issues".

It was a monumental failure. Leave it as is.

Drinking ages were only raised because the federal government conditioned state receipt of highway funds on the state's raising the drinking age.

in DUI deaths, with 18-20 year olds behind the wheel, and a dramatic increase in alchohol related crime and death overall, a success, then I guess we will have to agree to disagree about the definintion of the word.

if they can go fight and die for their country..........

even though the drinking age never stopped me when i was a little hippie punk.

and substantial jail time ie 3 months minimum for the second offense. A second or third offence could warrant conscription into the armed forces - not constitutional but I bet it would get people's attention.

they can drink in a bar


otherwise raise the age of enlistment to


21


sorry it's the truth

lost

I never bought that argument back during the Vietnam war. For the overwhelming majority who are 18 the last thing they want is to be put into the position to die for anyone, but it did make a handy argument for lowering the drinking age. How about if you actually ARE in the military that you can drink with a military ID?

what you are doing, or even caring.

I see you feel strongly about this.

I don't recall drinking more than a beer or 2 before I was 18, but I knew friends that had been drinking since 13!!! Going to school drunk! I don't think the age of consent has much effect... Just my 2 cents, adjusted for inflation.

Old enough to sign a contract and be held to it.

Old enough to vote.



Seems to me they ought to be able to buy a f**king beer if they want one.

That has always pissed me off hugely. If kids at 18 are too senseless to buy a beer and drink it responsibly then they probably should be protected from the military, lawyers, and politicians.

:shrug:


Laura

Also, your post implies they'd buy "A" beer. Not 6, 12, or 24. Fuck beer, what about a bottle of Jack Daniels or Wild Turkey?

I'm sorry, but signatories to contracts and voters don't plow into innocent motorists and pedestrians, not to mention public and private property like drunk 18 year olds do.

If there is such a problem with drunks and driving why not just outlaw booze completely? If anyone was serious about enforcing DUI laws it would be zero acceptance in the US like it is in other nations. This country is NOT ready to do that, and the insurance lobby is not up to the challenge of getting it passed. Period

Let's be real direct here, this is less about protecting those 18 and 19 year olds than it is about trying to reduce the number of people who are partaking of the demon rum.



Prohibition already failed once, let's not be trying a second version of it.



:puke:


Laura

THAT is my point. Locally we had two kids killed when a 40 something year old loser hit the family car broadside on a Sunday afternoon. He already HAD something like four or five DUI convictions yet he was still walking around free to ignore the laws and keep on driving and drinking. He went on to have yet another DUI arrest a few years later, and JUST like the times before, there was also a ticket issued for driving without a license.

If anybody was SERIOUS about stopping DUI from happening it would carry an automatic jail term and permanent ban from ever driving legally again.

If anyone was SERIOUS about stopping DUI there would be a whole more education about rehab and preventive counseling.

If anybody was SERIOUS about stopping DUI there would BE no more sales of booze.

I don't expect to ever see any of those things happen in this country because this is one issue that nobody really wants to touch. It exposes some pretty ugly self delusions we all hold about chemical use in this culture, including the big one that is we don't REALLY want to do anything to stop it.

I am probably one of the biggest proponents of legalization for for all of it because I have honestly started to think the rank hypocrisy is just too much to maintain. We let big pharma peddle pills to make you feel better, make you less happy, more happy, numb--whatever mood you need--just about everything you can think of. We got stuff to make you poop, make you NOT poop, and stuff to make your dick bigger, harder, and able to raise on demand. If you can think up a pill for it we will be happy to sell it to you--as long as a Doctor or your parents says it is ok.

THAT is the culture these kids are coming out of, and yet we sit here and debate what age they have to attain before we let them have access to booze--something that certain people can access freely and openly.

Do you see how maybe we need to look at the issue a little differently?


:shrug:


Laura

soared. I am not saying that a 20 something always makes the best decisions, but but hopefully those extra few years will see many of them gain some wisdom.

I was a medic in the Army working in the Emergency Room as an EMT. For every one adult I had to pull out of wrecked car because they were drinking and driving, I would pull out five that were underage. Their military careers, if not their lives, were pretty much over.

* And in a 2002 analysis of 33 high-quality studies on the age-21 drinking law’s effects, University of Minnesota researcher Traci L. Toomey found that all but one study showed the higher age resulted in lower rates of alcohol consumption and traffic crashes. “It is the most well-studied alcohol control policy we have in this country,” says Toomey, an associate professor in the school of public health. “Usually we find no effect when we do policy studies. Here we have this policy effect that is very consistent – a big chunk of the studies showing this inverse relationship.”

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/01/health/he-drink...

One of the most comprehensive studies on the minimum drinking age shows that laws aimed at preventing consumption of alcohol by those under 21 have significantly reduced drinking-related fatal car crashes.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/0807010835...

Just like the "studies". And who funded them? What was their agenda?

WHY lower the age? Keep it where it is. 60 minutes is nothing but a devils advocate putting this nonsense out. Look I was a pretty wild kid myself. Drinking on weekends when I was 15 and the age was 21 - hey I looked it back then. There were PLENTY of times when I think back and shake my head wondering how I ever lived thru those days. Some friends did not. Some friends still walk with limps or worse are still in wheel chairs because of crazy antics while using alcohol.
They DON"T need any help.

:popcorn:

I agree.

In fact, I'd like to see the driving age raised a bit more...20 or 21.

Seriously.

It scares the shit out of me that children...which is exactly what 16 year olds are...are given the keys to, and control of, deadly weapons on our streets. Most kids that age are STUPID. And they do stupid things. How do we sort out the responsible ones from the irresponsible ones? We can't.

anyway, one incident involving a neighbor's daughter makes me shudder in fear...soon after getting her license, the kid was out driving around with the family's non-English speaking housekeeper (that means the lady didn't even have a license). The girl stopped at a fast food place and got lunch. She realized that holding a Big Mac while driving would be too difficult, so she ordered the housekeeper to take the wheel (from the passenger's seat) while she (the driver) kept both hands on the Big Mac. Priorities, doncha know...

As expected, they ended up crashed in a ditch. The housekeeper suffered some very serious injuries...the daughter less so. The SUV was totaled.

I say raise the driving age. Kids who have jobs....take the bus. Ride a bicycle.

No pity from me...

THAT would encourage kids to stay in school.

when I was about to turn 19 they raised it to 21. These laws never once stopped me from drinking although I was technically underage.

i think i got to 'try' the hard stuff at least by 8. but the family isn't really big drinkers except my uncle. more beer and i never liked beer. i grew up to it being a flavor. not NEEDED. but i don't do bars but i have found drunk people REALLY annoying. so, my uncle gave me a shot to try at about 16 or so. drank it down. mmm, can i have another? but i am in wis. then again i am odd that i don't drink much. don't make it forbidden. but teach moderation.
in america. HA! who am i kidding. make the drinking age 40.

Everybody that wants to drink, drinks. Just like the stupid drug laws, everybody that wants to do drugs, does drugs.

responsibly.

But I take your point. It would be nice to have *some* kind of advantage, being female.

:D

The reality is many clubs already know this and restrict men under say 25 from entering while having no similar age limit for female patrons.

those 16-21 in Europe who have been drinking?

The drinking age in Mexico and most of Canada is 18. What is the incidence of traffic accidents regarding 18-21 year olds who have been drinking?

the distance to bars, the cultures of drinking, all make a direct comparison between the US and other countries difficult.

But I will add that, for a way to cut down on teenage accidents, the UK's Chief Medical Officer suggested cutting the allowable blood alcohol level for under 21s to effectively zero. He didn't seem to contemplate the idea of raising the drinking age from 18 to 21 - I'd say because (a) there'd be riots in the street (b) because he realised the problem was the combination of drinking and driving, not drinking and walking.

21 year olds buy alcohol for their friends that are underage. 18 year olds would buy it for kids even younger.
Being 18, I don't know many people my age that would drink responsibly if they had the legal right to do so. They obtain it from friends and are still idiots about it. If they could get it legally, it would just be worse.

I think there may be legitimate reasons for keeping the drinking age at 21, although I sure as hell wouldn't have agreed when I was 20.

Then again, other countries didn't declare war on their youth as America has done.

Actually explains quite a lot about the differences begtween the two countries.

Not the least of which is that the road toll from DUI is MUCH lower down under than it is in the states.

There was a huge increase in drunk driving deaths in the 15 to 16 age group when lowered to 18,
At 21, they cheat at 19 and 20. That is a more responsible age (in my opinion) than 15 to 16. When the age was raised back to 21, drink driving deaths (and those caused by them) returned to a more "normal" range.

So its still illegal for all high schoolers?

It's like those of you who used those words believe that 18-20 year olds are only going to drink ONE FUCKING BEER. Newsflash: 18-20 year olds don't drink alcohol for it's refreshment qualities, or it's replacement of electrolytes. They drink to GET FUCKED UP. TRASHED. HAMMERED. BLITZED. Newsflash Number Two: Just as many of them drink hard liquor as drink beer.

I've also seen the statement that they can die for their country, but aren't responsible enough to drink "a beer"? Responsibility was never the reason anyone joined the military. Furthermore, most servicemembers don't see the "real military", the one where you carry guns, drive tanks, shoot artillery in battle, or dodge airplanes on the flight decks of aircraft carriers until they've been trained so well that they do things in the heat of the moment without thinking. Those of you who use this argument should stop doing so until you're willing to train drinkers for a year or more.

Now, excuse me whilst I go have "a glass" of wine.

Newsflash: It's called responsible parenting.

Many colleges feel this way and don't care if you drink as long as you don't overdue it, go crazy, or do something dangerous. It's not as though the law stopped any 18 yos from getting alcohol other than just buying it for themselves.

Lower the drinking age, raise the driving age.

time for this society to grow the fuck up

As long as we keep making alcohol the forbidden substance it should not be

fight and die for their country, they should be able to drink.

but I am saying that if they are adult enough to be able to sign a contract conscripting themselves into the military, where they handle guns and fight in wars.... then they are adult enough to be able to drink. my opinion.

In Europe kids learn how to drink earlier on in their life and they seem to have a much smaller problem with drunk driving than we do in the US.

And seriously, I'm 20 and I can go kill Iraqis but I can't drink a beer? Are you kidding me? Most states would lower the drinking age to 18 but the federal government would cut off their highway funds.

And I guess nobody over the age of 21 drives under the influence, it's only teens that would dare do that.

If you can vote and have a gun thrown into your arms to go fight a war....you "should" be allowed to have a drink.

If you can carry a machine gun and go off to war, you should be able to have a friggin beer.

So their parents can help them for their drinking habits. At 21 you are more likely to adopt your peers' drinking habits, which probably aren't very good.

that's another discussion about our sorely inept Transportation Infrastructure; there should be more mass transit and regional taxis (even bush taxis for rural areas). taking such RH bait is a waste of everyone's time and a poor debating tactic to the heart of this issue.

and since no other highly viable argument has been contributed to the contrary without such poor argumentation tricks, the correct answer garnered currently from this topic is therefore, yes.

thanks for the discussion! :hi:

It creates a different framework than 21. There was underage drinking but I doubt it was worse than it is today in terms of the number of regular and binge drinkers.

What it did do is make legal, social drinking accessible to people who were out of high school. I remember there was an initial fascination with getting loaded but for most that wore off within a year.
I also remember some silly situations like 18-20 year olds who had responsible jobs, paid rent, and even had a baby but weren't considered mature enough to buy liquor.

The main reason cited for the age 21 law is drunk driving. When I was 18 the drunk driving laws were very different -- .10 was considered DUI and first offenses were generally modest fines. There was more drunk driving among the 18-21 set and more accidents but there was more DUI in all age groups because there hadn't been the MADD campaigns influencing public opinion. With our current DUI laws I see little reason to keep the drinking age at 21.

There's also that fact that our country is an outlier in returning to age 21 as the drinking age. The most common age of majority is 18, as it was in most of the U.S. for a brief period.

she backed allowing 18-year-olds to be served in bars (where the licensee could presumably keep an eye on them) but not to buy package liquor (much easier to hide in Dad's basement and serve to even younger kids).

edit: alas, she failed, so they just kept raising it a year at a time, making absolutely certain to stay one year ahead of me. :grr: :banghead: :nuke:

They would be less likely to drink and smoke when they're 25. Done with college, having a family, lost old friends, ready to settle down. I know 18 year olds do drink and raising the age limit isn't going to stop it. But it would help I think reduce alcoholism in the young. And I would raise the draft age to 25 but to join voluntarily would still be 18, but no combat till 21.

just like the cockfighting law.

If it was legal to drink at 18, then people wouldn't be afraid of zero tolerance laws. Keep them away from the liquor until they're old enough and responsible enough to not drink and drive. By then they've had enough experience with it that they will not be idiots with the liquor.

The MADD mothers can suck it!

Rather than using blanket bans and creating Prohibition conditions, a more sensible approach would be educating kids on responsible drinking, finding and treating those with signs of alcoholism, and raising them so they can drink sanely.

Banning alcohol until they find a way to get it illicitly just invites binge drinking in a situation where the only way to get home is by driving.

then he/she IMO should be allowed to drink at 18. Otherwise, it is 21. If someone will die for this country then he/she should be allowed to legally have a beer.

JMHO

I'm not sure what I ultimately think, I have really mixed feelings on this. 18 is a legal adult in most aspects - you can choose to fight and die in a war, but you can't have a drink. You can choose to get married, but no drinks at your wedding for you! But on the other hand, raising the age seems to have lowered the alchohol related accident rate for 18-20. So I don't really have an answer. From a fairness standpoint I think 18-20 should be allowed to drink, but from a safety standpoint it seems unwise. and in the end which should win out... I don't know.

Im being serious as well. That way these young adults would start drinking when they cant drive and under parental/adult supervision.