- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Lowering the Drinking Age; Amethyst Initiative | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 30 2009, 10:01 PM (767 Views) | |
| Locomotive Breath | Jan 30 2009, 10:01 PM Post #1 |
|
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/68122/ JANUARY 30, 2009 ON PJTV, I talk about lowering the drinking age with John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College, now of Choose Responsibility and the Amethyst Initiative. Free, with no registration required. Posted at by Glenn Reynolds at 9:09 pm Link to Video "You voted for me but you're too dumb to have a beer". Edited by Locomotive Breath, Jan 30 2009, 10:03 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Bill Anderson | Jan 31 2009, 01:14 PM Post #2 |
|
I agree. The notion that a 20-year-old drinking a beer is "underage drinking" is truly foolish. I do find it interesting that Brodhead supports this initiative, but had no problem demonizing the lacrosse players for "underage drinking." People who don't have a conscience seem to do these things. (Payback as well as anyone understands that point.)
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 31 2009, 01:30 PM Post #3 |
|
Deleted User
|
I feel this initiative is one of the best to come out of the Universities in a long time. Voting,going to war..being charged as an adult but not being able to drink a beer until one is 21 is an insult.... We've made it so difficult for a 20 yo to get a couple of beers, they instead turn to street drugs....I for one would rather have my son stop into the local K of C and have a draft than snort some coke. What about you?.... "Former Senator" Dole went way out of bounds when she mandated that states raise the drinking age or loose road money..something that was never really taken to court, because of the PC nature of it and MADD... If the 18 thru 25 yo crowd organized and voted they could lover the drinking age to 12.....Then what would Liz and her PC buddies do?.... |
|
|
| Deleted User | Jan 31 2009, 01:39 PM Post #4 |
|
Deleted User
|
Also something else the PC crowd (and probably MASDD) has pushed through the state legislaters is the "Underage Drinking" laws, where with only minimal "probable cause" people can be compelled to take a breathlizer and if any amount of alcohol is present be fined up to $1,000.00 in some localities. In a college town with 30 to 60 thougsand students , picking up 100 a night every Fri and Sat brings in $200,00.00 every week..Who needs speed traps anymore !!!! There is Zero Tolerance even a tiny amount of alcohol can get you a $1,000.00 fine..The kids may have just stepped out of church and taken communion but still have alcohol in them....Were not talking about someone driving, were talking about walking down the street, or standing on your own pourch or patio... What next? |
|
|
| Baldo | Jan 31 2009, 02:46 PM Post #5 |
|
I have no problem with an 18 year old having a beer. However I don't think this is the time or place to roll back drinking laws for a very good reason. We have an epidemic of alcohol and drug abuse and that should be addressed first. The drinking age has little or no effect on this epidemic. I believe the major intent of the Amethyst Initiative is to solve a liability issue for the Universities. We consume 2/3's of the world's illegal drugs and we are 4% of the world's population. We have a horrendous alcohol abuse problem with teenagers both in High School and College. Access to alcohol is not a problem we need to solve Most underage students (71.6 percent) obtain alcohol from other college students who are over the legal drinking age; however, between 1993 and 2001* there was a 34.5 percent increase in the number of underage students who reported acquiring alcohol from parents or relatives (16.8 percent vs. 22.6 percent) More importantly we face the consequences of this abuse. They are statistically relevant and more important damaging to our youth. Times are different that when we were young. Much different, estimates of binge drinking have risen dramatically for college students and regular binge drinking is as high as 40% of all college students. It even is down to 8th graders who in one survey admitted 18% participated in binge drinking within two weeks of the survey See Page 4-5 of this report. If you are interested in reading more here is the free download. http://www.casacolumbia.org/absolutenm/articlefiles/380-Wasting%20the%20Best%20and%20the%20Brightest.pdf Of course many never suffer ill effects, but the current research indicates that if you can keep a teenager from abusing drugs and alcohol until the age of 21 the chances of them turning into alcoholics and drug addicts in life are dramatically reduced. There is good data to support this and scientific evidence as well. The human mind reaches physical development stages of judgment around that age. When we can start to get a real handle on alcohol abuse among our youth I can see lowering the drinking age of 21 generally, but I think it would be out sequence to lower the drinking age first. Edited by Baldo, Jan 31 2009, 02:55 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| HSLAXMOM | Jan 31 2009, 10:08 PM Post #6 |
|
Baldo- I have a problem with the 21 yr old drinking law. I believe that, just as prohibition failed, the 21 yr old drinking age has failed. I believe that a lot of binge drinking is related to the 21 year old drinking age. They've got to down it quickly before going to other places. And, parents, college administrators and other [hopefully] mature individuals face severe personal liability consequences if they let "underage adults" drink. I would also like to point out that the lax team would not have been hosting a party with strippers if the drinking age was 18. They decided to have the party at the captain's house because the 18-21 yr old members of the team could not get into a strip club because of the drinking age. I agree that our kids are drinking too much and using too many illegal drugs. But just as prohibition put alcohol in the hands of gangsters, the 21 yr drinking age is encouraging young adults to break the law and to drink irresponsibly. Let's lower the drinking age, teach the kids to drink and behave responsibly and bring the parties back on campus where more mature adults can supervise. |
![]() |
|
| brittany | Jan 31 2009, 10:12 PM Post #7 |
|
If you can fight for your country at 18, you should be able to have a beer. Heck even if they just lowered it to 18 for beer. |
![]() |
|
| Bill Anderson | Jan 31 2009, 10:23 PM Post #8 |
|
The problem is that (1) the resources to stop "underage" drinking are huge, and in order to try to "stop" it, we have to turn the government into something tyrannical, and (2) the problem with drinking was not as bad when the drinking age was 18 as it is now. Look at the overall problems caused by the drug war. Yes, I do not recommend that people take drugs, but at the same time, we are giving way too much power to the State to stop people taking drugs. Look at the no-knock raids, the "collateral damage" (meaning the killing of innocents) and the murders, all associated with illegal drugs. In the 1920s we had Prohibition, and we know what happened there. Why do we repeat these errors again and again? Heck, this is the only time I am going to agree with Brodhead. A memorable moment....
|
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Feb 1 2009, 03:20 AM Post #9 |
|
Like I said I have no problem with letting a 18 year old drink if they are responsible. But I do care about the dramatic increase in binge drinking in teenagers. I live in California and the 21 year drinking age has always been 21. Yet we have seen the same dramatic trend in alcohol abuse. I don't know what it was like in states with 18 year drinking laws. Trying to take the social structure from twenty years ago and applying to today is a difficult task. I know getting blitz is more acceptable in early teenage years then it used to be. Prohibition was insane because to took the right to purchase away from adults. It was doomed to fail and was poorly enforced anyway as people just broke law and many made their own(My Grandfather!) What we consider the problem with prohibition was the rise in crime because it didn't stop drinking but created new lines of criminal distribution and caused a dramatic increase in graft & corruption with organized crime Some have studied drinking levels before and after prohibition, but these statistics are hard to prove because there weren't good records! duh! There were some good effects to prohibition like a decline in public drunkenness and some say suicide rated decline for a few years. But people tired of it and were happy to get rid of it. Whatever we are doing isn't working with our teenagers and I suspect it has more to do with the decline of the traditional family more than anything. |
![]() |
|
| LTC8K6 | Feb 1 2009, 04:07 AM Post #10 |
|
Assistant to The Devil Himself
|
In the military, it used to be 18 on post, even if it was 21 off post, but they changed it due to pressure from MADD, iirc. Never made any sense to trust a guy with so much, and put him through so much, and send him so far away, and then say he wasn't responsible enough to have a beer. |
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Feb 1 2009, 11:32 AM Post #11 |
|
I don't think its about trust, it is about the effects when you are intoxicated on teenagers. No one would ever allow a soldier to be armed drunk. Drinking on base is drinking within a structure where there are immediate consequences from a command channel. I approved of on base soldiers having a place to drink. I also know the problem of 18 year snuffies off base on a Friday night. They are two separate issues. |
![]() |
|
| Locomotive Breath | Feb 1 2009, 07:55 PM Post #12 |
|
I feel that any problems with the consumption of alcohol are cultural and cannot be solved by legal means. |
![]() |
|
| Bill Anderson | Feb 1 2009, 09:17 PM Post #13 |
|
Agreed. Just because something is not good does not mean it has to be illegal or should be illegal.
|
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Feb 1 2009, 11:46 PM Post #14 |
|
You want to know what the Columbia study says is a good preventive measure? Family dinners. I know it sounds a bit "old fashioned", but they found when families ate dinner together at night teens were less susceptible to alcohol and drug abuse. Call it a closer family, more concern, but they recommend eating together as a family at night seemed to be very important. |
![]() |
|
| Locomotive Breath | Feb 2 2009, 08:51 AM Post #15 |
|
Especially if you serve the 13-year-old a "glass of wine" which consists of a tablespoon of actual wine and the rest filled up with water. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2






7:36 PM Jul 10