US states consider lowering drinking age

[strngrnrth]

American families come in two major types: extremely protective and extremely uninvolved. That’s true everywhere, but when there really is no social network the extremes have a more obvious effect. When I was growing up, drinking heavily at age 12 was not unusual, nor was experimenting with drugs at that age, and doing these things at ages under 10 was actually more common than people talked about. I tried beer at 5 and vodka at 10, and I liked them a lot. When kids like me played with the kids whose parents didn’t even drink in front of them, those kids were suddenly exposed to a substance they knew very little about. Well, kids like me didn’t get cars unless we earned them, but the more protected kids tended to get cars younger. Maybe they had jobs. It was considered safer than letting them walk all over town in the dark as I did. So when they tried to keep up with us, they drove drunk and didn’t know what they were doing. Most of them actually quit drinking heavily in their 20’s, whereas we continued to struggle for a long time, or for life. No drinking law would stop kid like me from drinking. It was a felony to give me alcohol when I started. A drinking law that could protect the other type of kids would be a realistic one that eased them into it slowly. That’s how they got used ot everything else in life, slowly, and that should be how they learn about alcohol, too.
I think the drinking age ought to be like this:
You can have a glass (under 4 oz.) of wine or other fermented drink (under 11%) with a substantial meal (more than fries, at least fries and a shake or something) at a restaurant if you are accompanied by a guardian when you are 12 and 13.
You can have, and buy, up to 12 oz. of any substance up to 11% alcohol, up to 24 oz. of anything up to 5.5%, during the daytime with a guardian present but must consume it in a residence or a restaurant during meals if you are 14-18.
You can buy anything up to 25% alcohol in quantities up to 12 oz. and up to 25 oz. of anything up to 12%, alone,a nd consume it indoors or in a beer garden, if you are 18-21. The driving limit is zero. You can work in a bar, brewery or distillery but may not own or manage one.
Over 21, the driving limit is 0.05% and you can buy all the alcohol you want as long as you consume it indoors or in a beer garden or someone’s yard. you may own a bar, brewery or distillery provided you pass a written test on the laws related to the business.

 

[gam197]

originally posted by johnnykins
I note that the arguments on not being able to have a drink but being fully able to be killed in combat was the argument during Vietnam that caused the states to lower the age.

originally posted** by Jim R-OCDS**
Here in Massachusetts, between 1972 and 1975, we lowered the drinking age from 21 down to 18. It was a disaster!

It was the war that caused states to examine and lower their age limit.

originally posted** by johnnykins**
I truly think the neo-Puritanical anti-alcohol rage

I don’t think the upping of the age to 21 in 1984 had much to do with neo-Puritanical rage or the Temperance Movement.

It was the newspaper articles from National Highway Traffic Safety and In 1980, Mothers Against Drunk Driving was founded and became powerful.

The college party atmosphere contributes to misuse of alcohol and the majority of these students are under age 21 and drink throughout these years. Parents can and I assume they teach their children responsible habits.

Since when is Europe a role model? They have abortion throughout, gay marriage in Spain, euthanasia in Holland, legalized drug and prostitution in most Scandinavian countries.

 

[johnnykins]

It was the war that caused states to examine and lower their age limit.

agreed

I don’t think the upping of the age to 21 in 1984 had much to do with neo-Puritanical rage or the Temperance Movement.
It was the newspaper articles from National Highway Traffic Safety and In 1980, Mothers Against Drunk Driving was founded and became powerful.

agreed. I never said it arose out of temperence movement and did not mean to imply it. I do believe there is an underlying neo-puritanical ethos to MADD (actually in the USA as a whole, too) and a number of such groups, which coupled with (1) the personal tragedies suffered by their members; (2) demagogues in Congress and state legislatures and (3) non-voting by the 18-21 set, led to the coercive use of the Spending power to raise the age.

The college party atmosphere contributes to misuse of alcohol and the majority of these students are under age 21 and drink throughout these years. Parents can and I assume they teach their children responsible habits.

Agreed So let’s lower the age.

Since when is Europe a role model? They have abortion throughout, gay marriage in Spain, euthanasia in Holland, legalized drug and prostitution in most Scandinavian countries.

In some things - why not. In others - no. If they have policies that make sense and ours don’t, let’s learn. We need to use our judgment, not dismiss them arbitrarily.

 

[gam197]

originally posted** by gam197**
The college party atmosphere contributes to misuse of alcohol and the majority of these students are under age 21 and drink throughout these years. Parents can and I assume they teach their children responsible habits.

originally posted by johnnykins
Agreed So let’s lower the age.

Let’s not lower the age. They are already drinking at age 18 in colleges. If we lower it to age 18, everyone will be able to buy alcohol for their 14 and 16 year old friends.

Look at cigarettes for that example.

originally posted by gam197
Since when is Europe a role model? They have abortion throughout, gay marriage in Spain, euthanasia in Holland, legalized drug and prostitution in most Scandinavian countries.

originally posted by johnnykins
In some things - why not. In others - no. If they have policies that make sense and ours don’t, let’s learn.

They don’t have policies that make sense. When is the last time they invented anything? Europe is not a role model.

 

[johnnykins]

Let’s not lower the age. They are already drinking at age 18 in colleges. If we lower it to age 18, everyone will be able to buy alcohol for their 14 and 16 year old friends.

Look at cigarettes for that example.

Well, IMHO its foolish not to set the age at the general age of majority (18 most states) for at least the following reasons:

1. I agree there is already drinking - so we are giving the message it’s OK to break the law; breeding disrespect for the law and undermining the rule of law with a disparate and arbitrary enforcement of the law.
2. There is nothing particularly special about alcohol - other than an underlying Puritanical (often religious) opposition to alcohol - to carve it out from the rights of those who, for all other purposes, are considered adults. This is clearly related to the issue of joining the military - not to mention imposing the death penalty for certain crimes and a host of other issues.
3. Passing a law to address another issue - here your suggestion about 14 and 16 years olds - is absurd. Pass a law to address what you want addressed, not something else.
4. The criminal code is a very blunt and hard tool for something that is really a maturation issue - as is amply attested to by the general legality of alcohol. That is, criminality is the WRONG answer to the issue in general.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

gam197

It was the war that caused states to examine and lower their age limit.

Regardless of the reason for lowering the drinking age to 18, it still ended up being a bad decision, and it was moved back to 21 by an large majority.

Make it a ballot referendum here in Massachusetts, and it will be defeated in large numbers.

18 year old kids just aren’t mature enough to drink responsibly.
They weren’t back in the 70’s, and even less today.

Jim

 

[gam197]

originally by johnnykins

1. I agree there is already drinking - so we are giving the message it’s OK to break the law; breeding disrespect for the law and undermining the rule of law with a disparate and arbitrary enforcement of the law.

3… Passing a law to address another issue - here your suggestion about 14 and 16 years olds - is absurd. Pass a law to address what you want addressed, not something else.

Are you saying if the law was 18 that few would break it? I don’t believe that. No one is giving a message to break the law but that is just what college students and others do as there is little that can be done; the general public just tolerates it.

originally posted by johnnykins
2. There is nothing particularly special about alcohol - other than an underlying Puritanical (often religious) opposition to alcohol - to carve it out from the rights of those who, for all other purposes, are considered adults.

Bars would open for 18 year olds and it is special because they drive cars and possibly could kill their neighbor.

 

[lak611]

Many countries in Europe have much lower limits for DUI. From this article:

0.08 = UK, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta (same as the United States)
0.05 = Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain
0.04 = Lithuania
0.02 = Norway, Poland, Sweden
Zero tolerance = Estonia, Romania, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary

The penalties for drunk driving in Europe are also much more severe. For instance, this article gives Sweden’s penalties.

As mentioned, Sweden’s .02 blood-alcohol limit is four times lower
than limits in the U.S., so obviously much less alcohol may be
consumed prior to driving (legally) in Sweden. Moreover, penalties for
drunk driving in Sweden are severe. Sweden considers a .10
blood-alcohol limit “aggravated” drunk driving. Imprisonment (of up
two years) is the recommended punishment for driving with a .10
blood-alcohol limit. The result of Sweden’s tough drunk driving laws
has been a reduction in alcohol-related traffic fatalities.

The US should not worry about the drinking age. They need to enact stricter laws regarding drunk driving. That would reduce the problem of traffic deaths.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Many countries in Europe have much lower limits for DUI. From this article:

The penalties for drunk driving in Europe are also much more severe. For instance, this article gives Sweden’s penalties.

The US should not worry about the drinking age. They need to enact stricter laws regarding drunk driving. That would reduce the problem of traffic deaths.

European countries have a better public transportation system than we have in the US, and as a result, teens have less need of cars than in the US.

Jim

 

[lovesMary]

European countries have a better public transportation system than we have in the US, and as a result, teens have less need of cars than in the US.

Jim

That’s a very good point you make.

My opinion is that drinking at 18 should be allowed, since these people are legally adults in every other way. Part of the problem in American is our history of Puritism which is very anti-drinking. In Europe drinking is not as commonly viewed as a sin, but as a normal part of life. In American there are Puritanical forces that want to eliminate it totally, as was done in the 1920s. They view drinking as a social evil, even in moderation.

I think we should promote a healthier approach.

 

[lovesMary]

Many countries in Europe have much lower limits for DUI. From this article:

The penalties for drunk driving in Europe are also much more severe. For instance, this article gives Sweden’s penalties.

The US should not worry about the drinking age. They need to enact stricter laws regarding drunk driving. That would reduce the problem of traffic deaths.

This is very true. We need to really come down on people for this, this would discourage drinking and driving.

 

[skatepixie]

Having been to Europe, I think the American attitude toward drinking is really twisted. Drinking to get drunk is akin to going to the bathroom in the street to me.

I don’t think age has much to do with maturity in many cases, either. How you are raised to treat alcohol is what counts more, I think. I was raised that you drink in moderation, not to get drunk, and not to drive after drinking.

 

[AHapka]

Here in Massachusetts, between 1972 and 1975, we lowered the drinking age from 21 down to 18. It was a disaster!

That was also in a time where there was very little education. I think now the message is out much more then it was back then. People are also more considerate of things like desgnated drivers. When I went to bars in college, we always planned on who was taking us home.

If it’s drunk driving we need to address, let’s strengthen penalties for that. The high drinking age is of the same logic “well, let’s avoid cell phone use in cars by making cell phones illegal.”

Anyway, I agree the problem is parents who never teach their kids responsible use of alcohol. When my kids get older, I will certainly teach them proper use of alcohol. I’m sure when they are in their older teens I’ll allow them to have some wine with dinner so that they learn responsible drinking under my care. Then they won’t learn to drink for the first time at a party with no supervision.

One of my Sergeants at work even took his 18 year old son with him into nicer bars for dinner and a drink here and there, so that he learned how to drink responsibly under parental supervision.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

AHapka

That was also in a time where there was very little education.

Huh?

I’ve see more kids getting killed from over drinking at college parties these days, than back in the 70’s.

Jim

 

[jsk]

The federal government coercing the states to inrease their drinking ages under the threat of loss of federal money is a way of the federal government getting their way when they have no jurisdiction.

Personally, I was upset when my son joined the military and was not able to legally buy a drink. He was mature enough to maintain multi million dollar aircraft, and be accountable if he messed up…but not mature enough to have a drink.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The federal government coercing the states to inrease their drinking ages under the threat of loss of federal money is a way of the federal government getting their way when they have no jurisdiction.

Personally, I was upset when my son joined the military and was not able to legally buy a drink. He was mature enough to maintain multi million dollar aircraft, and be accountable if he messed up…but not mature enough to have a drink.

I joined the Marines back in 1970, when I was only 18 years old. When I came home on leave, I could not buy alcoholic beverages. However, on base I could.

When I think about how I and my fellow Marines drank and partied, I’m glad they don’t allow servicemen under 21 to drink off base.

Jim