PDA

View Full Version : The legal drinking age in the USA


RonDo
08-19-2008, 11:01
Source (http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/08/18/college.drinking.age.ap/index.html)

(AP) -- College presidents from about 100 of the nation's best-known universities, including Duke, Dartmouth and Ohio State, are calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18, saying current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking on campus.

The movement called the Amethyst Initiative began quietly recruiting presidents more than a year ago to provoke national debate about the drinking age.

"This is a law that is routinely evaded," said John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College in Vermont who started the organization. "It is a law that the people at whom it is directed believe is unjust and unfair and discriminatory."

Other prominent schools in the group include Syracuse, Tufts, Colgate, Kenyon and Morehouse.

But even before the presidents begin the public phase of their efforts, which may include publishing newspaper ads in the coming weeks, they are already facing sharp criticism.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/mothers_against_drunk_driving) says lowering the drinking age would lead to more fatal car crashes. It accuses the presidents of misrepresenting science and looking for an easy way out of an inconvenient problem. MADD officials are even urging parents to think carefully about the safety of colleges whose presidents have signed on.

"It's very clear the 21-year-old drinking age will not be enforced at those campuses," said Laura Dean-Mooney, national president of MADD.
Both sides agree alcohol abuse by college students is a huge problem.

Research has found more than 40 percent of college students reported at least one symptom of alcohol abuse or dependence. One study has estimated more than 500,000 full-time students at four-year colleges suffer injuries each year related in some way to drinking, and about 1,700 die in such accidents.

A recent Associated Press analysis of federal records found that 157 college-age people, 18 to 23, drank themselves to death from 1999 through 2005.

Moana Jagasia, a Duke University sophomore from Singapore, where the drinking age is lower, said reducing the age in the U.S. could be helpful.
"There isn't that much difference in maturity between 21 and 18," she said. "If the age is younger, you're getting exposed to it at a younger age, and you don't freak out when you get to campus."

McCardell's group takes its name from ancient Greece, where the purple gemstone amethyst was widely believed to ward off drunkenness if used in drinking vessels and jewelry. He said college students will drink no matter what, but do so more dangerously when it's illegal.

The statement the presidents have signed avoids calling explicitly for a younger drinking age. Rather, it seeks "an informed and dispassionate debate" over the issue and the federal highway law that made 21 the de facto national drinking age by denying money to any state that bucks the trend.

But the statement makes clear the signers think the current law isn't working, citing a "culture of dangerous, clandestine binge-drinking," and noting that while adults under 21 can vote and enlist in the military, they "are told they are not mature enough to have a beer." Furthermore, "by choosing to use fake IDs, students make ethical compromises that erode respect for the law."

"I'm not sure where the dialogue will lead, but it's an important topic to American families and it deserves a straightforward dialogue," said William Troutt, president of Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee., who has signed the statement.

But some other college administrators sharply disagree that lowering the drinking age would help. University of Miami President Donna Shalala, who served as secretary of health and human services under President Clinton, declined to sign.

"I remember college campuses when we had 18-year-old drinking ages, and I honestly believe we've made some progress," Shalala said in a telephone interview. "To just shift it back down to the high schools makes no sense at all."

McCardell claims that his experiences as a president and a parent, as well as a historian studying Prohibition, have persuaded him the drinking age isn't working.

But critics say McCardell has badly misrepresented the research by suggesting that the decision to raise the drinking age from 18 to 21 may not have saved lives.

In fact, MADD CEO Chuck Hurley said, nearly all peer-reviewed studies looking at the change showed raising the drinking age reduced drunk-driving deaths. A survey of research from the U.S. and other countries by the Centers for Disease Control and others reached the same conclusion.
McCardell cites the work of Alexander Wagenaar, a University of Florida epidemiologist and expert on how changes in the drinking age affect safety. But Wagenaar himself sides with MADD in the debate.

The college presidents "see a problem of drinking on college campuses, and they don't want to deal with it," Wagenaar said in a telephone interview. "It's really unfortunate, but the science is very clear."

Another scholar who has extensively researched college binge-drinking also criticized the presidents' initiative.

"I understand why colleges are doing it, because it splits their students, and they like to treat them all alike rather than having to card some of them. It's a nuisance to them," said Henry Wechsler of the Harvard School of Public Health.

But, "I wish these college presidents sat around and tried to work out ways to deal with the problem on their campus rather than try to eliminate the problem by defining it out of existence," he said.

Duke faced accusations of ignoring the heavy drinking that formed the backdrop of 2006 rape allegations against three lacrosse players. The rape allegations proved to be a hoax, but the alcohol-fueled party was never disputed.

Duke senior Wey Ruepten said university officials should accept the reality that students are going to drink and give them the responsibility that comes with alcohol.

"If you treat students like children, they're going to act like children," he said.

Duke President Richard Brodhead declined an interview request. But he wrote in a statement on the Amethyst Initiative's Web site that the 21-year-old drinking age "pushes drinking into hiding, heightening its risks." It also prevents school officials "from addressing drinking with students as an issue of responsible choice."

Hurley, of MADD, has a different take on the presidents.

"They're waving the white flag," he said.


18 vs 21

So, what are your thoughts on this issue?

Killer_Man_
08-19-2008, 12:06
No matter what people are going to drink, binge or not.... So I really don't care especially since I am already 21. :P

Bloodcinder
08-19-2008, 12:35
They are correct. Because most kids aren't legally able to drink until they just leave for college, it encourages this "we're out of the parents' house now, let's party!" attitude. Look at Europe, where the drinking age is very low. Sure, some people get into problems with binge drinking there, but it's not nearly the problem we have here. If drinking wasn't such an out-of-the-house perk people would be discouraged from viewing it in such a high light.

Killer_Man_
08-19-2008, 13:45
They are correct. Because most kids aren't legally able to drink until they just leave for college, it encourages this "we're out of the parents' house now, let's party!" attitude. Look at Europe, where the drinking age is very low. Sure, some people get into problems with binge drinking there, but it's not nearly the problem we have here. If drinking wasn't such an out-of-the-house perk people would be discouraged from viewing it in such a high light.

Either way, it doesn't matter cause kids will be kids and kids will drink legally or illegally because they can and they want to be -cool.-

I know in the state of WI, that if you are with a parent or guardian and they are present. The cops can not touch you because your parent/guardian was with you.

Arainach
08-19-2008, 13:47
MADD is full of shit. Just like reducing the legal BAC to .08 doesn't reduce drunken driving, it just punishes people who for the most part aren't even being affected by the small bit of alcohol in their system.

Prohibition didn't work with alcohol in the 20s, it didn't work with drugs in the 80s, and in fact, it just plain doesn't work. Lower it to 18. Punish people for what they do after consuming things, not for the act of consuming them themselves.

SpaceProg
08-19-2008, 14:32
Lower it to 18. For the reasons given. Plus it doesn't seem to be doing the other countries any harm. We're still the most crime-ridden western nation out there, be it 18 or 21.

Gio Takahashi
08-19-2008, 14:50
I can agree with lowering the age to 18, it makes no different whether 18 or 21, people will still drink.

Bodomi
08-19-2008, 15:18
Finland has it like it should be. 18
Although strong alcohol can only be bought when you're 20 or older. (And "strong alcohol" defined by Finnish law is anything over 22%)

RonDo
08-19-2008, 15:22
Finland has it like it should be. 18
Although strong alcohol can only be bought when you're 20 or older. (And "strong alcohol" defined by Finnish law is anything over 22%)

Interesting. Perhaps hard liqours should be left to 21 and typical alcohol be dropped to 18?

Most of the abused drinking I have seen in my time usually revolves around beer.

SpaceProg
08-19-2008, 15:32
Indeed... That may be a good compromise.

Killer_Man_
08-19-2008, 17:11
MADD is full of shit. Just like reducing the legal BAC to .08 doesn't reduce drunken driving, it just punishes people who for the most part aren't even being affected by the small bit of alcohol in their system.

Prohibition didn't work with alcohol in the 20s, it didn't work with drugs in the 80s, and in fact, it just plain doesn't work. Lower it to 18. Punish people for what they do after consuming things, not for the act of consuming them themselves.

The problem is, Ary, why should innocent people die because of some idiots. Actually to be honest, I do agree with you, you should punish those who do commit the crimes but really, the bar should be legally punished too.

That is why most bars, especially the one I go to that is near me. Most of the time they will ask how you are and all before you leave or if they suspect that you drunk. They will make you take a breathilizer/make you have some person drive you home in your car and then the driver gets picked up later.

It needs to be stricter at bars and other drinking places. I know for summerfest and other 'party' places that went on during the summer. They had a special buses that would take you there and back just for safety reasons.

But regardless, there have been times it was even unsafe for me to walk home, and either I just ask one of the people I know for a safe ride home or the tender will(The tenders there are all my older bro's friend) and I just tip them for it.

chefTENGU
08-19-2008, 18:06
Lowering the drinking age won't stop binge drinking; it'll only push it from college down to high school.

Although I agree, 21 seems an arbitrary choice.

The problem isn't at what age the kids are drinking, it's the attitude they have toward it. An attitude which must be shaped, in large part, by the kid's parents. In the end, it's only the values that the kids have that determine whether they're going to drink responsibly or stupidly.

Killer_Man_
08-19-2008, 18:11
Well with DARE going about BOOZE IS BAD BLAH BLAH BLAH. It only creates negative views on it, thus being when they do get their first sip, they are like oh, it isn't so bad. *DRINKS A TON*

I think there has to be more positive education. My parents educated me about drinking when I was 16, basically they stated that booze can be a good thing but can be very bad. It's how you view it, how much you drink and etc.

chefTENGU
08-19-2008, 18:34
Right. There's nothing inherently wrong with the consumption of alcohol. For fuck's sake, right there in the Bible it says Jesus loved it so much he used Godpowers to miraculously create wine from water (which is why I can't understand how anyone could oppose drinking on the basis of christianity).

But just because something is good doesn't mean it's better in excess. Too much of ANY good thing is a problem, whether it be vitamin C, cheeseburgers, sex, alcohol, or whatever.

Arg. Goddammit, every problem I see seems to stem from people refusing to take responsibility (and that sort of thing really pisses me off). I need a drink.

Bloodcinder
08-19-2008, 20:11
Lowering the drinking age won't stop binge drinking; it'll only push it from college down to high school.
I think it would be better if the binge drinking happened in high school when the kids are still around home, not when they are away from their parents.

Seegtease
08-19-2008, 20:50
Technically, the federal drinking age IS 18. This change would require all the states to change their laws (or for federal to make it a law that it CAN'T be higher than 18, but I'm not sure they could get away with that).

Every state has the drinking age at 21, which I believe is because the Govt' will deny them funding for roads if they don't? Don't have a source.

Either way, I agree with what Ron said.

Arainach
08-19-2008, 23:18
Zeit, federal highway funds are tied to a requirement that states have a law mandating a 21+ drinking age. That's even more effective than a federal law.

Z
08-20-2008, 03:06
In Texas, (not sure about other places) you can drink at any age as long as a parent/guardian is in sight of you.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_legal_drinking_age_for_Texas

Killer_Man_
08-20-2008, 03:11
In Texas, (not sure about other places) you can drink at any age as long as a parent/guardian is in sight of you.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_legal_drinking_age_for_Texas

Long answer.

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/LRB/pubs/wb/95wb3.pdf

I can't find it but I know somewhere I've seen at the bar there is a state ordiance thing that is posted.

Which states that unless you are with your parent, guardian or SPOUSE(why spouse I don't know why.). You can legally drink.


http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/IntheNews/UnderageDrinking/1040075672.html


By the way, it seems Doyle wants to lower it to 19 because he's a father of two sons and would rather have them drink in a control setting.

chefTENGU
08-20-2008, 18:20
I think it would be better if the binge drinking happened in high school when the kids are still around home, not when they are away from their parents.
Not necessarily. It's probably more dangerous at that age, in my opinion.

High school kids are more likely to binge when authority figures such as parents are too far from home to do anything about it (i.e., throwing a party when mom and dad are out of town or going over to a friend's house where there will be little to no chance of parental intrusion).

Also, they're much less aware about what to do about someone who has had too much to drink. Kids who pass out are just left unattended, whereas kids at college have ready access to emergency services.

Seegtease
08-21-2008, 01:42
Zeit, federal highway funds are tied to a requirement that states have a law mandating a 21+ drinking age. That's even more effective than a federal law.

Isn't that what I said?

DentalPlan
08-30-2008, 22:59
Technically, the federal drinking age IS 18. This change would require all the states to change their laws (or for federal to make it a law that it CAN'T be higher than 18, but I'm not sure they could get away with that).

Every state has the drinking age at 21, which I believe is because the Govt' will deny them funding for roads if they don't? Don't have a source.

Either way, I agree with what Ron said.

Its not any different then Recruiting stations in schools, if there is funding attached, its very unlikely the states will lower the drinking age.

Personally however I find it disgusting, I can join the army and die, but I can't drink.

If the Federal Government wants to be respected, then maybe they shouldn't undermine the 18-21 bracket. After all I am an "adult" (or will be in a month) so maybe I should be treated like one.

Drinking and driving is a choice, and people over 21 do it as well, so I think that argument is entirely invalid, they obviously aren't solving the problem they are just isolating Adults who may or may not do it.

Point in being, they should remove the transportation funding attached to the the law , and lower the drinking age in the states to 18.

Gio Takahashi
08-30-2008, 23:11
Drinking and Driving is as much of a choice as it is to shoot someone, so that's moot. It's still illegal and dangerous. It's kinda obvious that people over 21 does it. Drinking impairs your judgement, especially if you drink too much. Of course, anyone would do it, below or above 21.

Seegtease
08-30-2008, 23:16
Personally however I find it disgusting, I can join the army and die, but I can't drink.
This logic was used to lower the voting age, I believe. Either that, or raise the military joining age, I can't remember.

In any case, I absolutely agree.

chefTENGU
08-30-2008, 23:55
It was lowering the voting age.

Mojo Nixon had a pretty funny aside in one of his songs about this sort of thing.

Another thing that's getting on my nerves is this national 21 drinking age...
Huh, what do you think about that? A BUNCH OF MALARKY!
Whatever malarky is man, it's a whole bunch of it!
You know, when Reagan finally gets the war he's looking for,
Do you think he's gonna be drafting 21-year-olds?
No man, they're gonna be drafting 18- and 19-year-olds!
But, you can't buy a beer, can't buy a beer.
You can get married and screw yourself up REAL good,
But you can't buy a beer.
You can charge $8 million on a mastercharge,
But you can't buy a beer.
You can vote for one fool or another,
But you can't buy a beer.

From "Burn Down the Malls." The rest of it gets kind of…insane.

DarkStar
08-31-2008, 01:05
In Alberta, Canada it is 18, in Saskatchewan, Canada its 19. People here start drinking as young as 12. It doesn't matter what the legal age is. Kids have older friends or older siblings or just get adults to get alcohol for them. They will drink anyway 21 is ridiculous.

Gio Takahashi
08-31-2008, 02:05
there's really no sense for drinking age to be 21 anymore, especially given most people can easily get drinks through connections now.

Killer_Man_
08-31-2008, 03:53
If I am not mistaken, I think a few European countries(Not sure where and will look up in articles) that they have problems with having a lower drinking age.

This isn't about connections but to deter people or at least the 'smart law abiding' citizens. I know for a fact that you can drink around your parents/guardian and no one can do anything about it. Not even at a bar. At least in WI.

Second, you can DRINK ON MILITARY BASE when you are 18... You just can't leave base.

chefTENGU
08-31-2008, 12:28
there's really no sense for drinking age to be 21 anymore, especially given most people can easily get drinks through connections now.
That's always been the case. Kids with the "right sort" of older siblings can get access to just about anything, from alcohol to cigarettes to porn to drugs.

My precalc teacher told us how proud he was of the fact that he managed to quit smoking pot before he entered ninth grade. He'd had easy access to it for years beforehand because all of his older siblings were stoners; he'd come home, see all the windows open, and know exactly what was going on inside.

Gio Takahashi
08-31-2008, 12:47
Yes, which is generally what makes smoking/drinking age moot, but I agree moreso with smoking age anyway.

SpaceProg
08-31-2008, 13:40
I know what will take care of everything! Prohibit the manufacture and sale of ALL Alcoholic Beverages!

It worked so well during Prohibition, after all!

chefTENGU
08-31-2008, 15:14
I think there is a point to these minimum age laws, though.

For one thing, consumption of alcohol is not the best thing for the body. Adults can detoxify their systems better than children can, and since they've already ceased growing its not going to have as much of an adverse effect.

Prohibition aside, there is a message behind enacting laws like these, whether the minimum age is set to 16, 18, 21, or whatever. The government is telling people, "Look, we're not saying that you shouldn't drink, but you really need to think about what it is you're doing with it."

In all cases, a minimum age law is next to meaningless, by itself, as everyone here has pointed out, but SOMETHING needs to be done. Alcohol is a powerful substance, and is quite lethal if abused (and no, I'm not demonizing alcohol in particular, there are plenty of lethal substances, such as caffeine, that will kill you just as dead if you let them; alcohol just tends to be more toxic than a lot of the others).

It's unrealistic to take alcohol out of the equation entirely; it's too deeply embedded within humanity. However, people should be expected to act responsibly with it, and to understand the fine line between enjoyment and abuse. That's someone only parents can teach to their children.

Seegtease
08-31-2008, 17:22
But minimum age laws should at least be consistent. If an 18 year old can handle everything else, some with much greater risks than alcohol (such as driving, which is only 16), there's no good reason to separate the ages.

chefTENGU
08-31-2008, 19:20
I agree, which is one of the reasons I think 21 as a minimum makes no sense.

What they're trying to do is limit who will be able to have access to alcohol and in theory spread it around to underage kids. As everyone else has stated, though, it doesn't much matter. If a 12-year-old knows someone who will give him booze, and wants to drink, then he will drink.

Concerned people should be doing more about reaching out to the kids themselves, not lobbying the government to push the minimum age ridiculously high.

reginacroft
09-02-2008, 13:50
I used to have an opinion on this, but I suddenly no longer care since I have 4 days :P