Lowering the Drinking Age

[otakuneko]

While I was out at dinner last night, the restaurant had 60 Minutes on the tv. The top story was about how a bunch of college presidents -- and one chief of police -- had petitioned congress to consider returning the drinking age from 21 to 18.

Here's a link to an online article about it: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/19/60minutes/main4813571.shtml

The basic reasoning behind it was that raising the drinking age in fact encourages underage drinking and drives it further underground into less supervised and manageable situations. MADD points out that raising the drinking age reduced highway deaths of 18-20 year olds. Supporters of lowering the age limit argue that while highway deaths have been reduced, deaths from other alcohol-related causes have increased.

The chief of police of Boulder, Colorado said that he'd rather have his cops getting drunks off the street than writing tickets to underage drinkers. He also implied that drinking among 18-20 year olds in his city hasn't really decreased, despite hundreds of tickets being written.


I'm inclined to agree that lowering the drinking age is a good idea. What say you all?

[Greenday]

Lowering the drinking age was meant to deter younger people from drinking? I had no idea. Seriously, the laws mean nothing. I don't know anyone that has said, "I'd really like to drink, but darn those laws, I'm just going to wait til I'm 21." It's pointless. We drink regardless. Personally, I feel having the higher age just makes it more of a taboo and so people do it even more just to be bad and break the law and be cool.

Greenday, who's 20 years old and has been drinking for a while anyway...

[AdminAssistant]

Exactly. Not being able to legally buy alcohol means these kids are drinking at house parties, frat parties, and, in my case, cast parties. Places where you are much more likely to binge drink. Once I was legal (and got over those few months of "Wooo...I can be whiskey all by myself!") my drinking calmed down a LOT. 1) I was paying for it myself - always. And that gets expensive. 2) The allure was gone.

Do I still drink? Yes. Do I occasionally get blasted? Yes. But not nearly as much or as often as I did when I was 19-21.

[Evandril]

I've always said that raising the drinking age was a *bad* idea...I saw quite a few people go from drinking beer at 18 (Which they could legally at the time), to drinking whatever would get them 'wasted' the fastest, after the laws changed (The people already drinking were able to keep drinking...but the next group who missed it...yeah)

I've been able to drink at home if I wanted to, basically since birth...and I've most likely been totally trashed from drinking under 10 times total in 38 years. That's including a couple years in college, and 15+ in the military as a mechanic.

[AFPheonix]

I figure if you're old enough to vote and take a bullet for your country, you're old enough to buy a beer.

That, and you can start drinking at an age when you can be with your parents and learn to drink responsibly.

[DesignFox]

I figure if you're old enough to vote and take a bullet for your country, you're old enough to buy a beer.


This is my philosophy.

Also, I think lowering the drinking age would take some of the novelty out of getting wasted your first few years at college. While I personally didn't touch the stuff until I was 20, I knew a lot of kids that went off to college, had the attitude of "Woooo party! No adults to stop me!" and went nuts. :rolleyes:

[Sylvia727]

I started drinking when I was 16-- in my mother's house, at family get togethers when most of the adults were drinking a glass of wine or a vodka cocktail. Now that I'm in college, I will indulge in a beer or a vodka mixer when with friends in a controlled environment. I have never had more than two servings of alcohol at a time. I am most definitely the exception to the rule. My mom wanted me to understand alcohol, and not glamorize it. As a result of her matter-of-fact attitude, I've never felt the urge to get wasted. Most of my classmates' parents don't know that they drink, and never told them about alcohol except that "you can't have it". As a result, everything they know about alcohol they learned from their peers, who are also underage.

The worst (non-abusive) behavior that a parent can exhibit to a teenager is hypocrisy. Teens are finalizing their knowledge of the real world and people's behavior, getting ready to leave the nest. Consistency and honesty are very important to them in this stage. ("That's not fair! Last week you said...") When a teenager perceives an authority figure to be acting hypocritically, they shut down, either from the message or from the adult entirely. The main argument in favor of lowering the age, "they're old enough to buy guns, vote in elections, get married, and die in battle, but not to drink alcohol," is important for more than its surface meaning. 18- to 20-year-olds feel resentment in this argument. In their minds, this law is inconsistent and therefore unjust. Which is why the majority, I would even say the vast majority, of 18- to 20-year-olds who drink feel morally justified in breaking the law. And since the law is wrong on this count, who's to say it isn't wrong on other counts?

The fact that the MADD spokesperson didn't see a fundamental difference between 21-year-olds buying alcohol for 18-year-olds and 18-year-olds buying alcohol for 15-year-olds tells me that he simply does not understand teenagers. 18 is a magic number. You become an adult on that day. Denying alcohol to an 18-year-old is denying them one right out of all the rights they've just obtained. Denying alcohol to a 15-year-old, or a 17-year-old, is internally consistent with denying them all of the other rights of adulthood. They feel that it's harsh, but it's fair. I've even talked to high schoolers who feel justified in drinking at 14 because the law is unfair in denying to them at 18. Again, the authority figure exhibits hypocritical behavior, so the teen stops listening altogether.

I don't like the idea of alcohol licenses, most especially not if they're reserved for the 18- to 20-year-olds. If they're age restricted, it's just another hypocrisy, and if they're all-inclusive then it's an eroding of personal rights and responsibilities. The chief's metaphor is inaccurate; when I get behind the wheel, I take control of a half-ton mass of machinery that requires constant supervision and direction to avoid killing others on the highway. When I drink, I merely affect my own thoughts and judgements, and poison my own body. I also don't like that his cops have tried ticketing every underage person at a party where alcohol is served. It's not illegal to be around alcohol, merely to injest it. If you want to have a social life in college, and don't want to hang around with the pious weirdos, you have to be around alcohol. I don't drink at parties, because I don't feel safe there. But I still go, to be with my friends and have fun.

[MadMike]

I figure if you're old enough to vote and take a bullet for your country, you're old enough to buy a beer.


That's how I've always felt. Either you're an adult, or you aren't. Either you should be allowed to drink at 18, or the military should have to keep their damn hands off of you until you're 21.

As for the "novelty", I agree with this one as well. I probably drink more often now than I did before I was legal, but I'd drink a lot more at one shot when I illegal than I do now. These days, I'll normally have 2 or 3 beers when I'm relaxing at the end of the day, where back then it wasn't uncommon for me to down two six-packs in one shot, and back then I was about 50 lbs lighter than I am now.

[Giggle Goose]

Would it sound terrible that I first got drunk at a family party when I was 12?

It does to a lot of people, but I think I turned out ok. I was with people I trusted and learned about how to do it responsibly. I'm only 22, so you think I would be going crazy with the drinking but I only have a few drinks per week. Many people I knew whose parents thought drinking was evil and didn't allow their kids to do it at ALL got busted at high school parties, drove drunk, dropped out of college, etc., etc.

I'm not saying that all kids should get drunk as preteens, but maybe my parents were on to something...

[MadMike]

Would it sound terrible that I first got drunk at a family party when I was 12?


You only got me beat by 2 years. My dad would let me have small amounts since as long as I can remember, but one night he had some friends over, and one of them thought it would be funny to get me drunk. I tried to hide it, but since I was that young and had never been drunk before, I failed miserably.

He didn't get mad. He just seemed disappointed in me. I think I'd rather he had yelled at me. I actually felt bad about it. Looking back now, I think he was scared of my mom finding out.

Once I got to be about 16, it became "use your own judgement" as far as drinking, just as long as I didn't try to do something stupid like get behind the wheel of a car. He wasn't too worried about the cops, since we lived in a small town, and the closest cops were 45 minutes away.

[guywithashovel]

There have been many good things said in this thread. It is a fact that a high drinking age causes problems instead of fixing them. The same goes for pretty much all drug laws.

However, you cannot explain this to the right-wingers to save your life. They don't think we can have a functional society without the government micro-managing our social lives. And then they turn around and talk about how they want LESS government.

[Boozy]

I got drunk when I was 15 on a beer my dad gave me while on a family camping trip.

It was a lite beer.

And I only drank half.

It alarmed him that I was such a light weight. He made me swear on a stack of Bibles that I'd never drink on a date. He wanted me to keep my wits about me when I was around boys.

Oh, how far I've come...

*Goes to refill wine glass*

[Rapscallion]

I got drunk when I was 15 on a beer my dad gave me while on a family camping trip.

It was a lite beer.

And I only drank half.

Ironic considering your screen name.

Rapscallion

[DesignFox]

Ironic considering your screen name.

Rapscallion

:D Where's that laughing smiley at?

[Greenday]

Well, I only have 1 day 7 hours 5 minutes and 30 seconds until my drinking is no longer illegal.

[crazylegs]

Part of my job is to remove alcohol from those under the age of 18 while they are in a public place.

Lowering the age will do diddly squat, what is needed is a change towards the attitude towards alcohol. I'm not sure how it is in the States, but over here people drink to get drunk, rather than drink to enjoy the drink.

Until that happens you'll still get irresponsible drinkers and drunks.

[MadMike]

Lowering the age will do diddly squat, what is needed is a change towards the attitude towards alcohol. I'm not sure how it is in the States, but over here people drink to get drunk, rather than drink to enjoy the drink.


True.

There was girl in my Spanish class who spent a summer in one of the Spanish-speaking countries in South America. I forget which one, but that's not important.

She gave a short presentation about it at the beginning of the school year, and one thing she told us was that there is no drinking age there, and that it's not uncommon for kids to ride somewhere on their bikes and have a beer. Naturally, that drew all kinds of replies like "cool!" and "we could get drunk down there!" But she told us it wasn't like that. She said that people drink for the sole purpose of enjoying the drink, and that people rarely get drunk because doing so is regarded as shameful.

[Greenday]

Well, here's how the drinking age has affected me so far. I finished 4 beers and 2 shots in about an hour. Yea, I'm sure these crappy laws REALLY help keep us in line. It's going to be a couple hours before I can go to sleep with spinning.

[tropicsgoddess]

My father let me and my sisters (as teens) take small sips of alcohol so we can get the curiosity out of our systems. He always said that he would rather have us learn about alcohol and the dangers in a controlled environment where he can supervise us than for us to learn with our "dopey little friends". Which I don't blame him for since in the teen years you face a lot of peer pressure. If there was one thing my father emphasized to the 3 of us, was to never EVER take back a drink we put down or to take a drink from anyone other than the bartender because you never know who'll be shady enough to slip a mickey on you. In short, I think teaching more about drinking responsibly would help less with drinking related incidences and I'm all for lowering the drinking age. I honestly think it's a little messed up that at 18 you're old enough to serve your country, be considered an adult,buy and smoke cigarettes but you can't drink.

[tabbyblack13]

The two times that I got drunk was when I was underage and a part of the sorority I was in at the time. I drank beer at my brother's wedding one week after my 18th birthday (WI drinking law if your 18-20 and a parent buys the drink you can drink it, I think). I was supervised by my Mom and Dad at the time and I didn't get drunk.

I agree with the idea if you can vote and serve in the military you should be able to drink. I drink to enjoy, not to get drunk though getting buzzed to forget a stressful job does have its benefits. Mostly being that I can't be called out. ;)

[ditchdj]

Yeah but lowering the age will NOT happen in this day and age. Our government ONLY caters to lobbyists, NOT the people it's supposed to serve. This stupid law came from lobbyists from MADD and the insurance companies. Just like with seatbelts, they started targeting individual states. When they didnt get their way with all 50 of them they started hounding the federal government to get their way. When the feds finally caved in, the told all the states that if they don't pass the 21-age law their federal funding's gonna get cut off. Same thing with the seatbelt laws. That's the main reason why I won't vote D or R.

[MadMike]

When the feds finally caved in, the told all the states that if they don't pass the 21-age law their federal funding's gonna get cut off.

And that's another problem altogether. There are certain things that the states are supposed to be able to decide for themselves. If the feds are going to bully the states by threatening to withhold money every time the states don't do things the way the feds want them to, then why do we even have states?

[Greenday]

MadMike, this money that the government threatens to take away is money given to the states for a specific purprose and can only be used under certain conditions. If they don't meet those conditions, the state doesn't get the grant.

[Evandril]

But when the conditions can be changed at will...it is a straightjacket. Colorado tried to fight the 21+ to drink rule for a bit, but the lack of money to repair the roads hurt enough they caved in the end.

[Greenday]

The guidelines on a specific grant can't be changed as time goes on.

[Evandril]

Well, I know Colorado used to get money when the drinking age was 18 for beer, and 21 for harder alcohols. Then the feds decided they wanted the drinking age to be 21+ across the board...and we *stopped* getting money until we changed it. How legal it was, I do not know...but I *DO* know it was done.

[Greenday]

Maybe that specific grant ran out and when they reapplied for the new one, the terms were changed on them.

[Evandril]

Possible...but since the restriction on money to use for roads had nothing to DO with the roads...The difference would be sematic, the effect is identical, from my perspective.

[Flyndaran]

Maybe that specific grant ran out and when they reapplied for the new one, the terms were changed on them.

It's all about "executive creep" and the slow erosion of state's rights that started way back in the Civil War.
Remember when Bush refused to fund any organization that allowed abortions or birth control of any kind?

[Estil]

I think this issue comes down to one very simple question. Does anyone here know of anyone under 21 who's wanted to drink, and hasn't?

[Estil]

I figure if you're old enough to vote and take a bullet for your country, you're old enough to buy a beer.

That, and you can start drinking at an age when you can be with your parents and learn to drink responsibly.

Not to mention depending on where you go in the miliary, it's possible for 18-20 year olds to be trusted to handle NUCLEAR WEAPONS. But yet they can't be trusted with a beer. Go figure.

[IDrinkaRum]

I think this issue comes down to one very simple question. Does anyone here know of anyone under 21 who's wanted to drink, and hasn't?

That was me. I didn't really drink until I went away to college (I was 22) & I got to watch my then-boyfriend who was underage (20) at the time, drink in his dorm room until he was stupidly, stupidly, stupidly drunk. Then he'd go out driving in his Trans Am with his equally drunk, underaged friends until all hours of the night. One of the reasons why we're no longer together. But really, I don't drink to get drunk either. I get a buzz off of Mike's Hard Lemonade and also wine coolers. I don't drink beer as I hate the taste. And when Mr. Rum & I got out I might get an alcoholic drink, but usually it's either water or sweet tea.

[Flyndaran]

Not to mention depending on where you go in the miliary, it's possible for 18-20 year olds to be trusted to handle NUCLEAR WEAPONS. But yet they can't be trusted with a beer. Go figure.

Maybe that's because the military rarely gets to supercede federal law?
Maybe the idea of the military vetting some of the best of the best youths to work nukes is somehow different than giving a blanket allowance to all youths to drink.
I would be ok with raising the age to drink legally, but I know that wouldn't do any good in my american "underage drinking and driving is almost a rite of passage" culture.

[AFPheonix]

How much of that culture can we tack up to having the drinking age so high though?
Why shouldn't they go drink and drive when they're already drinking when they're not supposed to?
Drop the drinking age down so that they're old enough to be drinking with their parents so they can learn how to drink responsibly, and perhaps they'll behave more responsibly.

[protege]

I don't know about that. I work with someone who has landed their second DUI...and they're well over the legal age :rolleyes:

[AFPheonix]

There will always be irresponsible people no matter what age people are legally allowed to drink. However, instead of looking at single individuals, we'd be better to look at overall population trends.

[katie kaboom]

I've been thinking about this lately, and honestly, I think both the drinking age and the age to get a drivers license should be 20 year old. A lot of 16 year olds don't belong behind the wheel of a car anyway. So just make 20 the magic age for both.

[protege]

Yeah...and a lot of 20-year-olds don't belong behind the wheel either ;)

[katie kaboom]

Yeah...and a lot of 20-year-olds don't belong behind the wheel either ;)

Let's face it, a lot of people of ALL ages don't belong behind the wheel. But there still has to be a minimum driving age. I just think 16 is way too young to have that kind of responsibility.

[Evandril]

The problem with making the driving age 20...How many kids move out at 18? Can you imagine being away at college, and NOT being able to drive? Would have fun in the military as well...To drive a military vehicle, you need a civilian licence. Instead of raising the ages when people can be held responsible... why don't we just teach them to BE responsible, and that actions have concequences, instead of the happy, fuzzy, noone can fail attitude we've got now?

[Boozy]

Raising the driving age in urban areas might be fine, but it's out of the question in many parts of the country.

I couldn't work until I had a driver's licence, because there was no public transportation where I lived, nor was I within walking or biking distance of potential job sources. And I had to work for two years before starting college so I could afford to go. Raising ther driving age to 20 would have put my entire life on hold for four years.

They have some new driving restrictions for teenagers here in Ontario, now. I'm fuzzy on the details, but basically there's a curfew of some sort, and they aren't allowed more than one passenger (or something like that). I guess they're trying to avoid those car loads of rowdy teenagers cruising around at 2 am. That's an accident waiting to happen.

[MadMike]

and they aren't allowed more than one passenger (or something like that). I guess they're trying to avoid those car loads of rowdy teenagers cruising around at 2 am.

I can see the reasoning behind that one, but I also see a possible unintended consequence. By now allowing more than one passenger, you're forcing more inexperienced drivers to be on the road. And there's also the whole issue of wasting fuel by having all these cars with only one or two people in them.

[kiwi]

I started drinking at 14 when the legal age was 18

my brother started drinking at 14 when the legal age was 21

all of our friends tried drinking and smoke around the same age and we were considered slow to start by people at school. Most of my class tried those things by 12.

I would rather have a drinking age of 18 and classes at school or church or SOMETHING about moderation, changing the culture of it being cool to be drunk is what needs to change, the laws dont really mean jack.

[Boozy]

And there's also the whole issue of wasting fuel by having all these cars with only one or two people in them.

That's exactly what I said when I heard about the new law.

Isn't the government supposed to be encouraging car pooling? And why exactly are two cars with two teens in each better than one car with four in it? To me, that's just two 16 year-old drivers on the road instead of one.

[crazylegs]

And why exactly are two cars with two teens in each better than one car with four in it? To me, that's just two 16 year-old drivers on the road instead of one.

I would suggest that a car with one passenger has far fewer distractions than a car with three passengers in it.

[Dreamstalker]

I don't like the idea of alcohol licenses, most especially not if they're reserved for the 18- to 20-year-olds.
Apparently here in MA there is a separate "alcohol" ID. Once very recently I needed to buy a small bottle of sake for cooking and was denied b/c my state ID didn't have the word "alcohol" on it (WTF I'm clearly over 21, look at the damn birthdate). I wound up hiking halfway into the next town to the liquor store where the owner is a friend of the family, he sold it to me on the basis of age alone.

[DesignFox]

Apparently here in MA there is a separate "alcohol" ID. Once very recently I needed to buy a small bottle of sake for cooking and was denied b/c my state ID didn't have the word "alcohol" on it (WTF I'm clearly over 21, look at the damn birthdate). <snip>

Yea, my county ID was like that. Good enough to prove who I am and let me on a plane with...not good enough to prove I'm of drinking age (even though it displayed my DOB). :rolleyes:

Screeeeewed up.

I have since gotten a photo license and a passport, so I don't have this issue, anymore. But sheesh.

[Dreamstalker]

A lot of these ID requirements are screwed up. To go off on a tangent, I was at the post office this morning and overheard a clerk telling someone that their state (government issued) ID was not a valid form of picture ID to get a passport.

I used to carry my passport for alcohol purchases, but stopped doing it when i got my state ID (carrying a passport around if you don't absolutely need to generally isn't a great idea anyway).

In NM and all other states I've been to my state ID is fine, all they need is proof of age. It was proposed here at some point that out-of-state ID would not be accepted to buy alcohol.

[Boozy]

I didn't think that licenses to buy alcohol existed outside of fundamentalist Islamic countries.

The more you know...

[katie kaboom]

I used to carry my passport for alcohol purchases, but stopped doing it when i got my state ID (carrying a passport around if you don't absolutely need to generally isn't a great idea anyway).

In NM and all other states I've been to my state ID is fine, all they need is proof of age. It was proposed here at some point that out-of-state ID would not be accepted to buy alcohol.

For me that is a hit or miss kind of thing. There is a liquor store i go to where I've had some people accept my out of state ID and others deny it. I get so pissed off when it gets denied, because it is a valid photo ID and i am well over the drinking age. Don't punish me because underage people like to make fake IDs, that's not MY problem.

Is it true that any liquor store HAS to accept a passport as proof of age or does it vary by state or what?:confused:

[Sylvia727]

My driver's license says "Under 21 until Month/Day/Year" in bold red font. Driver's licenses issued after 21 don't mention it at all. I'd never heard of a license to buy alcohol, only proof of age required.

[Greenday]

Same thing my NJ license was. Actually, until you are 21 in NJ, your license is vertical instead of horizontal, plus it says "21 until MM/DD/YYYY" Never heard of an alcohol license to buy alcohol for personal use. One to distribute.

[Slytovhand]

and they aren't allowed more than one passenger (or something like that). I guess they're trying to avoid those car loads of rowdy teenagers cruising around at 2 am. That's an accident waiting to happen. Less people to kill in an accident. And, less likely to get egged into doing something stupid. 3 passengers are more likely to incite recklessness than just one (herd mentality and the like).

Down here, there are limits on the power of a vehicle that you can drive on your P's... provisional license (at least in Victoria), based on power to weight ratio. Since I'm a bit past that stage, I'm not sure of the limits... And they just brought the same thing in for motorbikes as well.

[Dreamstalker]

That could be what the MA one is...although why a card? (unless you're selling booze on the street corner)

The RMV website is unclear (http://www.mass.gov/rmv/license/13liqID.htm) (to me anyway) on the distinction. As long as there's a birthdate that proves you're over 21 what's the fuss?

[DesignFox]

<snip> As long as there's a birthdate that proves you're over 21 what's the fuss?

I dunno. All I know is I had bought the county ID because my original driver's license didn't have a photo.

The original rule in NJ was that you had to have a photo license until you turned 21. The DMVs around here are such a royal pain in the ass that, since at the time it wasn't mandatory to have a photo, I just sent my renewal in the mail and got a non-photo license.

My father suggested I get a county ID because then I'd never have to worry about needing a photo ID to get on an airplane. Of course, when he got his county ID, you paid $3 and it never expired. By the time I got mine, I had to pay $10 and it expired within 5 years. :rolleyes:

Anyhow, what I didn't know at the time was that there are two types of county ID. One is pink and can strictly be used for identification purposes. Even though it has your birthdate listed, it cannot be used to make alcohol purchases (and it does state this in bold on the back and if you go out and try to obtain beer it WILL be rejected- even if you present both it AND your VALID freakin' driver's license /rant).

ANYWAY-
The other ID is yellow and can be used to buy alcohol. I assume it costs more to get, also.

Moot point now. The first time I was refused booze I simply left the establishment (and went across the street to the place that WOULD serve me), and thereafter carried my passport around. When my non-photo license expired, the new requirement for photo licenses was in full effect. And the useless waste of time and money that was my county ID has since expired and hit the shredder.

All in all, it makes no sense to have an ID that isn't good enough to prove you can have a beer- despite the fact that you can use it for ID for everything else. :rolleyes:

What were we talking about? (j/k)

I still think if you're old enough to kill or be killed for Uncle Sam, you're old enough to get yourself a damn beer.

[guywithashovel]

I got to thinking about this issue the other day, and while I am in favor of lowering the drinking age, I do have a couple of requests for the people that I think would help show many doubters that lowering the drinking age would be a good idea. And to be perfectly blunt, here is the request:

1. Show responsibility regarding your drinking habits. One time back when I was in high school, a classmate of mine got drunk during a school sporting event, and he was so inebriated that he had to have his friends carry him out of the bleachers. I have also heard many other stories about young people getting way too carried away with alcohol and placing themselves in scenarios such as this one. I believe many people see this and think, "Well, it's a good thing the drinking age is 21. These kids are too damned immature to be trusted with booze." Now, I'm sure the knee jerk reaction will be, "Well, they're just indulging themselves because they are doing something that is forbidden. If we permit it, it will no longer be forbidden, and thus they won't be as tempted to go over the deep end." That is a fair point, and I will concede to it to some degree. Nonetheless, I firmly believe that a showing of responsibility from the younger people would be highly beneficial towards obtaining a fairer drinking age.

2. It would probably help if you would respect the law as it currently is, and by that I mean refrain from drinking if you are under 21. Yes, I realize this does run counter to my first request (and remember, they are merely requests), but I do think that if people could show that they have respect for the laws of the land, then people might be more open to considering a more lenient law. Remember, because we have had a drinking age of 21 for so long, many people are in the mindset that those under said age are too young to handle alcohol responsibly. In fact, if a lower drinking age is ever suggested in conversation, many people react the same way they react when the legalization of marijuana is suggested. Both laws have been in place so long that many people don't think society can function under any other ruling. Perhaps if everyone showed a little respect for the present laws, then more people might see that a more lenient law can be handled.

And yes, I realize that I'm being quite idealistic here. But I think these are points that people should consider.

[Sylvia727]

I firmly believe that a showing of responsibility from the younger people would be highly beneficial towards obtaining a fairer drinking age.

Maybe. Probably. But we're talking about a nationwide cultural change. Any effective organization would have to be nationwide, or at least very widely spread. And really, the responsibility for a shift in cultural attitudes is dependent on everyone to change-- to stop glamorizing alcohol and drunkenness. One can't, metaphorically, hold the booze over the 18-year-old's head and chant "Nyah, nyah, nyah, you can't have this," and then act surprised when the 18-year-old thinks booze is where the party's at. If society wants them to act responsibly and not drink early, then they need to act responsibly and not taunt them with the wonderfulness of drinking.

if people could show that they have respect for the laws of the land, then people might be more open to considering a more lenient law.

Maybe...or maybe they'll think that this means the law is working. Respecting a bad law does not usually encourage change. People are usually content with the status quo and only work to fix problems. Prohibition (of alcohol, in the 1920s) springs to mind, here. Not an exact parallel, but speakeasies (illegal private bars) sprang up like mushrooms precisely because the population as a whole chose not to respect a bad law. Crime rose, disrespect for law enforcement rose, and things didn't settle back down until Prohibition was repealed. I'm a proponent of peaceful protest, and I don't advocate widespread private alcoholic parties for 18- to 20-year-olds -- but that's what's happening, and I don't think it's going away until the laws change or compromise.

There's a pop culture preconception that all 18- to 20-year-old drinkers are reckless drinkers, and I'm sure the stereotype is based on a valid portion of the population. But I've been attending college and living on a college campus for years, and I've never met anyone who's been admitted to the hospital for alcohol poisoning, or who's gotten into a drunken car accident. I've also never met anyone who was a booze virgin on their 21st birthday. On the other hand, I've known over-the-age adults who've vomited into the bushes and crawled home because they were too drunk to stand-- and these people supposedly have enough alcoholic experience to know better. Maybe I just hang out with abnormally responsible people. Could be.

[Greenday]

Maybe...or maybe they'll think that this means the law is working. Respecting a bad law does not usually encourage change. People are usually content with the status quo and only work to fix problems. Prohibition (of alcohol, in the 1920s) springs to mind, here. Not an exact parallel, but speakeasies (illegal private bars) sprang up like mushrooms precisely because the population as a whole chose not to respect a bad law. Crime rose, disrespect for law enforcement rose, and things didn't settle back down until Prohibition was repealed. I'm a proponent of peaceful protest, and I don't advocate widespread private alcoholic parties for 18- to 20-year-olds -- but that's what's happening, and I don't think it's going away until the laws change or compromise.

There's a pop culture preconception that all 18- to 20-year-old drinkers are reckless drinkers, and I'm sure the stereotype is based on a valid portion of the population. But I've been attending college and living on a college campus for years, and I've never met anyone who's been admitted to the hospital for alcohol poisoning, or who's gotten into a drunken car accident. I've also never met anyone who was a booze virgin on their 21st birthday. On the other hand, I've known over-the-age adults who've vomited into the bushes and crawled home because they were too drunk to stand-- and these people supposedly have enough alcoholic experience to know better. Maybe I just hang out with abnormally responsible people. Could be.

That's pretty much how I feel about this one. If we "be good" and "respect the current laws", then absolutely nothing will change. Lawmakers won't see that we are responsible. They'll just think that the dumb 21 age limit is correct and will not change it. It's not like people are violently protesting. If anything, by drinking underage, it's a form of peaceful protest. Adults are just as likely to drink in a harmful manner, so why punish just those under 21? Screw everyone over or no one.

[Evandril]

I cannot think of a single example where people looked over the status quo, saw everything was peaceful...and decided to change anything. Most people do NOT like change, and have to have a very good reason for wanting something to change...and if they are comfortable, and everything works...*shrugs* As the saying goes, 'if it's not broke, don't fix it', and that would get tossed in our faces if everyone 'behaved'. Before incidents like Rosa Parks and the like, the argument that segregation was more comfortable for *everyone* was fairly common.

[guywithashovel]

To some extent, I will concede some of the points about people seeing things as going well and not in need of change if people showed more respect for the laws.

However, I still think a stronger showing of responsibility on part of the under 21 crowd would be helpful here. I find it hard to believe that people aren't looking at the kids who get excessively wasted and cause horrible car accidents and other social mishaps and thinking, "Gee, it's a good thing the drinking age is 21. These kids clearly cannot handle booze."

Perhaps a little civil disobedience is in order. In fact, I think it probably is. But it needs to be done responsibly.

[ArenaBoy]

If I can buy cigarettes, vote, have sex, serve my country, buy pornography, and live on my own all at the magical age of 18, I think I should be able to drink at 18. Seriously, that at 18 one's able to live in an apartment or get a house, which is a big responsibility in itself, yet can't drink is illogical.

[Sylvia727]

However, I still think a stronger showing of responsibility on part of the under 21 crowd would be helpful here. I find it hard to believe that people aren't looking at the kids who get excessively wasted and cause horrible car accidents and other social mishaps and thinking, "Gee, it's a good thing the drinking age is 21. These kids clearly cannot handle booze."

But that's exactly my point. Opponents are only looking at the kids who screw up and get wasted, and then using them as an excuse to maintain the laws, instead of looking at all the kids who are behaving themselves and drinking responsibly. Selective vision to further their own agendas and punish the underage drinkers who are behaving responsibly. Yes, some 18- to 20-year-olds screw up, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn it's more common in that age group than other age groups. In particular cases, there's no excuse for underage drinking and driving. But in general, looking at society as a whole, underage drinkers are not expected to be responsible. Their maturity is belittled and a right is denied to them. How can anyone act surprised when this encourages irresponsible behavior? If you want them to drink responsibly, then let them drink. Or at least stop glamorizing the boozehounds.

[Jester]

I'm 38, almost 39, and while I can drink pretty much whenever I want, I still beleive as I did when I was younger, that the drinking age should be the same as the legal age for being an adult, signing legally binding contracts, voting, smoking, joining the military, potentially DYING in the military, being tried as an adult for any crime, being put to death for a capital crime, and being allowed to marry without parental consent, being allowed to have an abortion without parental consent, being allowed to run for and be elected to many local political offices, etc., etc., etc. In this country, all of the above can be done at 18. But not drinking.

MADD can cite any statistics they want, but I have some very basic ones for them.

In the U.S., where drinking is semi-taboo and alcohol laws are strict and the drinking age is 21 and there are a lot of Puritanical laws on the books regarding booze, alcoholism and other alcohol-related problems are high.

In Europe, where the alcohol is considered part of life and children are allowed to drink and the laws are far looser, alcoholism and alcohol-related problems are far, far lower.

I'd also like to point out that they take drinking and driving VERY seriously in Europe, and they have far stiffer penalties for DUI's than the U.S., because they realize how dangerous operating impaired is. You would not find someone getting 3, 4, 5 DUI's before having their license revoked in Europe, but it is not tough to find in the U.S.

Does anyone really believe any of the above is just simple coincidence?

I am in favor of the drinking age being lowered to 18 not for myself, but for people like my nieces, who will hopefully not feel as pressured to drink young, and for college students who are beginning to take control of their lives as they strike out into the world. (And non-college students as well, of course.) We call them adults in everything but drinking. This is hypocritical. And frankly, the current drinking age just isn't working, nor is it doing the job it was advertised to do. The U.S. has a problem with underage drinking, binge drinking by both minors and college students, and DUIs.

Let's return to logic and reason, rather than hypocrisy. Rational thought and education, not puritanism and "just say no." Lives are NOT being saved. The Great MADD Experiment has failed.

My mom wanted me to understand alcohol, and not glamorize it. As a result of her matter-of-fact attitude, I've never felt the urge to get wasted.

Would it sound terrible that I first got drunk at a family party when I was 12?

I'm not saying that all kids should get drunk as preteens, but maybe my parents were on to something...

Educating the young about alcohol. Novel concept. See above comments regarding Europe vs. U.S.

...one thing she told us was that there is no drinking age there, and that it's not uncommon for kids to ride somewhere on their bikes and have a beer.

She said that people drink for the sole purpose of enjoying the drink, and that people rarely get drunk because doing so is regarded as shameful.

Add "South America vs. U.S." to above example.

I work with someone who has landed their second DUI...and they're well over the legal age.

Idiots come in all ages. Changing the drinking age will not change that. Idiots are idiots. Too bad idiocy is not illegal.

So just make 20 the magic age for both.

Um, no. Unless you are going to make the age of adulthood 20 as well. And frankly, I don't see that happening for a million different reasons. Yes, the age of adulthood in the U.S. was 21 a few decades ago, but that is not going to return any time soon. Nor should it.

The problem with making the driving age 20...How many kids move out at 18? Can you imagine being away at college, and NOT being able to drive?

I agree with you about the driving age, but I DO know what it's like to be at college and not able to drive. A lot of people do. It has nothing to do with age, it has to do with not having a car! I didn't have my first car until I was 20. See, my parents taught me a few things too. One of them being a very simple rule they told all of us kids: "You want a car? You buy it!" Taught us the value of a car and of money, not to mention the value of working for something, rather than having it handed to you.

Is it true that any liquor store HAS to accept a passport as proof of age or does it vary by state or what?:confused:

State laws vary. I can tell you that in both Florida and Arizona, passports are considered a definitive form of ID, acceptable for alcoholic purchases, among other things. My guess is that most (if not all) states are about the same.