18 versus 21

[Kuya]

What are we arguing about, again? That you should have every right to drink in my country when you're here?

Turn 21 and we'll talk.

Let's assume i were an American for a moment.

http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/3...board01cc7.jpg
Hypothetical situations are for naught!

Drinking alcohol below the age of 18 in my country? OH NO YOU DON'T! But pardon me for believing the law is dumb, i'll be sure to change my opinion for you right away.

[Khamsin]

I don't see why the drinking age law is even a big deal to responsible underage drinkers.

1) The responsible ones do it in private and never get caught because they're responsible. As such, the law isn't enforced on them.
2) The dumbasses get fucked up and do something stupid, which gets them caught. As such, the law is enforced on them.

I drank while underaged and never did anything stupid. Therefore, I could be used to argue for the 18 age limit. However, I'd still prefer 21+ because, if anything, having the law be 18 instead of 21 would have done nothing for me, and instead let some of the dumbasses who couldn't hold their liquor get off with some stupid shit during that time.

[Beckwin]

seems like people are unnecessarily thinking the drinking age has anything to do with drunk driving laws.

that's the only major danger to others as a result of alcohol, generally speaking. otherwise it's just a potential to hurt yourself and possibly be more likely to start a fight, but that's hard to arbitrarily say that at 21 you can handle it opposed to 18. There are 50+ year old people that can't handle alcohol without hurting themselves or others, but drunk driving is illegal no matter what the age is.

They are related. States that do not have a 21+ drinking age do not receive federal funding for transportation projects. Now, what's transportation funding have to do with the drinking age? I wonder...

You're confusing policy and well, making sense.

alcohol is a hazard to driving at any age. thus driving while intoxicated is universally illegal and carries strict punishments.

however unnecessarily restricting alcohol for adults that may or may not even drive and where the primary purpose of alcohol isn't to kill people behind the wheel.... doesn't make sense.

[archibaldcrane]

I was 18 when I took my first drink and yeah it was against the law. I didn't care. I was 18 and invincible.

I'm now 30 and realize my 18 year-old self was something of a fucking retard and wrong about more than one thing he was sure about.

That's great Correction - but the law DIDN'T WORK. You drank anyway - the law was ineffective at stopping your 18-year-old self from drinking. It works pretty well at keeping merchants from selling to people under 21, but it's a complete and utter abject failure at keeping 18-20 year olds from drinking.

[Kuya]

I don't see why the drinking age law is even a big deal to responsible underage drinkers.

1) The responsible ones do it in private and never get caught because they're responsible. As such, the law isn't enforced on them.
2) The dumbasses get fucked up and do something stupid, which gets them caught. As such, the law is enforced on them.

I drank while underaged and never did anything stupid. Therefore, I could be used to argue for the 18 age limit. However, I'd still prefer 21+ because, if anything, having the law be 18 instead of 21 would have done nothing for me, and instead let some of the dumbasses who couldn't hold their liquor get off with some stupid shit during that time.

What sort of stupid things are we talking about here, besides drunk driving?

And i'm curious, is there anyone here who agrees with the law, but did not drink until 21?

[Beckwin]

I don't see why the drinking age law is even a big deal to responsible underage drinkers.

1) The responsible ones do it in private and never get caught because they're responsible. As such, the law isn't enforced on them.
2) The dumbasses get fucked up and do something stupid, which gets them caught. As such, the law is enforced on them.

I drank while underaged and never did anything stupid. Therefore, I could be used to argue for the 18 age limit. However, I'd still prefer 21+ because, if anything, having the law be 18 instead of 21 would have done nothing for me, and instead let some of the dumbasses who couldn't hold their liquor get off with some stupid shit during that time.

Yeah because I was definitely doing something stupid for going to a house party (with a DD) and it got busted when two idiots showed up few hours later and started a fight out front.

(luckily in that case the responding cops didn't start handing out minor consumptions; they handled the fighters and just told everyone else to go home if they "shouldn't have been there")

[Correction]

What are we arguing about, again? That you should have every right to drink in my country when you're here?

Turn 21 and we'll talk.

Let's assume i were an American for a moment.

http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/3906 ... d01cc7.jpg
Hypothetical situations are for naught!

Drinking alcohol below the age of 18 in my country? OH NO YOU DON'T! But pardon me for believing the law is dumb, i'll be sure to change my opinion for you right away.

Way to take the high road there, cowboy. I sure feel like addressing your remarks as an equal from now on...

I never asked you to change your views. I pointed out reasons why moving an arbitrary line from 21 to 18 are meaningless and would cause more harm than good.

That's great Correction - but the law DIDN'T WORK. You drank anyway - the law was ineffective at stopping your 18-year-old self from drinking. It works pretty well at keeping merchants from selling to people under 21, but it's a complete and utter abject failure at keeping 18-20 year olds from drinking.

I didn't care about that when I was 18. I care about that now that I'm 30 and have youngsters to look after. Why is that hard to understand? The law won't stop my 18 year old relatives from drinking but it sure as hell scares my 14-16 year old relatives.

[Kuya]

Yea Correction, because it was painfully obvious that you came in with the intentions of arguing like an equal instead of oh saying what?

Laws draw arbitrary lines all the time. Get used to it.

Fuck 'young adults.'

Apart from a selfish desire for self-gratification without fear of consequence?

You've certainly went out of your way to make arguing with you a pleasent endeavour.

[archibaldcrane]

The law won't stop my 18 year old relatives from drinking but it sure as hell scares my 14-16 year old relatives.

Noone is suggesting that 14-16 year olds should be able to buy alcohol.

When they reach adulthood, they will be surrounded by people who won't be afraid of the law, will emulate them, drink to excess, and be just like you were.

The law doesn't work, you, me, your 14-16 year old relatives in a few years, everyone in this thread, etc. etc. are living proof. It doesn't stop people from drinking - it doesn't work, and it restricts the freedoms of legal adults.

It's failed public policy that may contribute to the binge-drinking problem and is a questionable infringement on states' rights. It's just stupid.

[Correction]

It's failed public policy that may contribute to the binge-drinking problem and is a questionable infringement on states' rights.

Show evidence of this claim.

Kuya, I've shown evidence why I think lowering the drinking age is potentially very very bad for people I care about. Whenever you feel like coming at me with something other than personal attacks, unscientific anecdotes and selfish opinions I'll take you seriously. Otherwise you're just someone bitter about a time you could have been denied alcohol and weren't. I'm clarifying my stated opinions earlier in the thread. You aren't.

[evilbau]

The distinction is arbitrary so I'm going to go with keeping it at 21. I basically don't want to hear the supposed 'moral authorities' of America talk about how its going to destroy America because it wouldn't, it would be pretty much the same, except the alcohol companies will see a boost in sales.

The problem is the culture of binge drinking in America at any age. I like our current system of keeping it out of the hands of under 21s. TONS of people drink under 21 but no one gets caught except for idiots and obvious drunks.

[Ace-o-fire]

I say 19. Why you ask?

A lot of kids turn 18 in high school so; instead of having kids being able to buy a shit ton of beer for parties in high school with no repercussions.

19 is when most will be in college, when most can buy alcohol.

TL;DR 18 too young 19 just right.

[noblemountain]

drinking poison at any age, should carry with it any darwinian consequences that may happen. there shouldn't need to be a law to show people that doing something isn't good for you. sad fact is though...that we do need laws to show the idiotic majority that things are bad and if you do them, you'll be punished. (if we catch you) i drank a lot when i was young and dumb (13-18) and stopped when i turned 18 because i just saw how dumb it was. i realized that i didn't need something to alter my mind to make me have a good time and usually i did stupid shit when i was drunk. so i stopped. i haven't drank since then...also quit smoking pot and doing coke at the same time. i joined the army 3 months later and never thought twice about the stuff. saw quite a few of my buddies ruin their lives with drugs or alcohol and i'm very glad i stopped when i did. prohibition didn't stop people from drinking...legal limit of 21 doesn't stop kids from drinking...lower/raising won't matter so it's all a very moot point.

[archibaldcrane]

It's failed public policy that may contribute to the binge-drinking problem and is a questionable infringement on states' rights.

Show evidence of this claim.

If you can't have it when you want it, you binge on it when you can get it. You and I and everyone I went to college with are evidence of this. And I'm not alone on this opinion.

I've shown evidence why I think lowering the drinking age is potentially very very bad for people I care about.

It's completely laughable - completely - that you think that this law will prevent your teenage relatives from drinking when they become adults. I can't even fathom how your personal experience with alcohol as an 18-year old wouldn't make this blindingly obvious.

[Kuya]

It's failed public policy that may contribute to the binge-drinking problem and is a questionable infringement on states' rights.

Show evidence of this claim.

Kuya, I've shown evidence why I think lowering the drinking age is potentially very very bad for people I care about. Whenever you feel like coming at me with something other than personal attacks, unscientific anecdotes and selfish opinions I'll take you seriously. Otherwise you're just someone bitter about a time you could have been denied alcohol and weren't. I'm clarifying my stated opinions earlier in the thread. You aren't.

Oh sure no problem, thanks for trowing the stone then hiding it behind your back. Not like your perjorative comments aimed at my same age group were enough to get me in a disagreeable mood with you or make me perceive you as needlessly aggresive in an argument. And the 3 things you posted say: High school kids are binge drinking, alcohol is marketed to those who are underage, and that upper speed limits increase accidents which is related to drinking. I said the law is arbitrary and has not shown to do what it intends to do, not even by a long shot, you, apperently, agree with this. Yet, the 3 things you posted not even remotely address what i was saying, that the laws do not do a thing, so i have no idea why you want me to address them.

I also still have no idea why you still wants the laws. You said because you feel they somehow do protect your younger relatives, and to go along with that, you used a slippery slope argument. And now i'm left wondering what you even expect me to adknowledge here.

[Correction]

I said the law is arbitrary and has not shown to do what it intends to do, not even by a long shot, you, apperently, agree with this. Yet, the 3 things you posted not even remotely address what i was saying, that the laws do not do a thing, so i have no idea why you want me to address them.

I also still have no idea why you still wants the laws. You said because you feel they somehow do protect your younger relatives, and to go along with that, you used a slippery slope argument. And now i'm left wondering what you even expect me to adknowledge here.

Yes, the law is arbitrary. But lowering the legal age to drink has a good chance of having a parallel effect to the repeal of the national speed limit. That's why I brought it up. Therefore, I don't want it changed to something equally abritrary and potentially much worse for my loved ones. If you're going to change the status quo, change it for the better, not worse.

Make sense yet?

[Khamsin]

I don't see why the drinking age law is even a big deal to responsible underage drinkers.

1) The responsible ones do it in private and never get caught because they're responsible. As such, the law isn't enforced on them.
2) The dumbasses get fucked up and do something stupid, which gets them caught. As such, the law is enforced on them.

I drank while underaged and never did anything stupid. Therefore, I could be used to argue for the 18 age limit. However, I'd still prefer 21+ because, if anything, having the law be 18 instead of 21 would have done nothing for me, and instead let some of the dumbasses who couldn't hold their liquor get off with some stupid shit during that time.

Yeah because I was definitely doing something stupid for going to a house party (with a DD) and it got busted when two idiots showed up few hours later and started a fight out front.

(luckily in that case the responding cops didn't start handing out minor consumptions; they handled the fighters and just told everyone else to go home if they "shouldn't have been there")

As you say, the fighters got busted. They were the irresponsible drinkers, and the law was enforced on them while it was not enforced on you. You may simply consider it luck the police didn't bust everyone there, but keep in mind that by going to a house party, you're trusting the host with inviting responsible people. I've drank with a group of friends before, and nobody got into a fight. I knew the people the host would be inviting. I avoided open house or frat parties simply because stupid people could (and did) show up to ruin it.

[Kuya]

Cerveza.

Yes, the law is arbitrary. But lowering the legal age to drink has a good chance of having a parallel effect to the repeal of the national speed limit. That's why I brought it up. Therefore, I don't want it changed to something equally abritrary and potentially much worse for my loved ones. If you're going to change the status quo, change it for the better, not worse.

Make sense yet?

I guess i'm just of the belief that if a law or a system offer very small positive effects that it should be just goten rid off. I get your point though. Oh well.

[archibaldcrane]

If you're going to change the status quo, change it for the better, not worse.

Make sense yet?

I'd argue that the status quo is that once you are an adult, you obtain the rights of every other adult. This law is a clear aberration to the status quo, of which there are very few.

[Alleya]

drinking poison at any age, should carry with it any darwinian consequences that may happen.

Yeah. I mean, fuck all the innocent people they take with them (if they actually die, drunks often survive accidents while innocents do not). That's obviously just a selection pressure to stay indoors.