T1B

http://www.reason.com/news/show/128493.html

Good article.

Maybe we could raise the voting age back to 21 instead.

the way it used to be in my state was at 18 you could learn how to drink with 3.2 beer and at 21 you could drink anything else.

3.2 beer used to be classified non-alcoholic- which it really wasn't, but it also tended to be significantly less than 3.2% alcohol content. you could get slightly buzzed,but you started puking before you'd get seriously drunk on it.

As someone who lost their Father to drunk driving I will try to keep my emotions out of this discussion.

I see this as a state's issue. Each state should be allowed to set what their voters think is an appropriate drinking age. The article points out that binge drinking would go down if more college frosh and sophs could legally drink. I think that is crap! The amount one chooses to drink has little to do with it being legal or not and damn near everything to do with peer pressure. College parties set the stage for over consumption what with their funnels, beer pong tables, and other drinking type games. Anyone who honestly thinks these things would go away if 18 year old students could drink legally is smoking or inhaling something illegal.

There are plenty of 41 year old bastards that get behind the wheel and kill people so I doubt that lowering it would lead to more fatalities.

BOTTOM LINE, JUST DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE!!!

Last week it was made known that a Carnegie Mellon University prof had been charged with 3 DUIs in an 8 day span:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08243/908268-298.stm

It used to be that a DUI charge necessitated a 36 hour jail stint in PA. Apparently the jails have been overcrowded, so they've instituted catch-and-release.

It does appear that fatalities decreased when drinking ages moved up to 21.

PSUFAN wrote:Last week it was made known that a Carnegie Mellon University prof had been charged with 3 DUIs in an 8 day span:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08243/908268-298.stm

It used to be that a DUI charge necessitated a 36 hour jail stint in PA. Apparently the jails have been overcrowded, so they've instituted catch-and-release.

It does appear that fatalities decreased when drinking ages moved up to 21.

That decrease also coincided with the last of the baby boom generation coming of age. The number of potential underage drinkers dipped dramatically during the late 80s. Also, the mid 80s marked a change in societal mores regarding drinking and driving anyway. Given the vast amount of underage drinking I saw and participated in circa 1985-1990, I can say without hesitation that the 21 drinking age did absolutely nothing to slow down college age drinking in my neck of the woods. If anything, we partied harder and more recklessly.

But hey, what the fuck do i care? I've been legal for the last 21 years.

Left Seater wrote:The article points out that binge drinking would go down if more college frosh and sophs could legally drink. I think that is crap! The amount one chooses to drink has little to do with it being legal or not and damn near everything to do with peer pressure. College parties set the stage for over consumption what with their funnels, beer pong tables, and other drinking type games. Anyone who honestly thinks these things would go away if 18 year old students could drink legally is smoking or inhaling something illegal.

They wouldn't go away, but they wouldn't be the sole outlet for young adults either.

And the stastical corelation between drinking age laws and lower fatalities doesn't demonstrate causation, and is covered in the article and the study cited within.

I am for limited access at 18.

Do not let 18 year olds buy at liquor stores or at bars that usually require a vehicle to get to. There should be school sactioned parties on campus which could be monitored for those who might decide to climb in a car after gettng fukked up.

When I joined the navy, young sailors had the option of going to the base club, getting hammered and then staggering back to their room. I did this many, many times. Today they are told that they can't drink and aren't exactly given alot of other options. So lots of young sailors end up going to parties off base and get drunk or stoned.

Seems like most of these kids that end up going to captain's mast (that's basically like court where the CO is judge jury and executioner)are there for either underage drinking or buying for their underage buddies. Or they are charged with drug use and processed out of the military.

So much of this could be avoided but our PC faggit assed military leaders rather continue spewing the new message of not falling into the drunken sailor stereotype.

i say lower it as long as you are an active military member

That would no doubt create a huge market for fake military ID's. Leave it up to the states as it should be and live with it.

peter dragon wrote:i say lower it as long as you are an active military member

Alcoholism.

Yeah, that's exactly what a modern, rapid reaction force needs.

Mr. Schwump wrote:That would no doubt create a huge market for fake military ID's. Leave it up to the states as it should be and live with it.

Yeah, I'm sure there wasn't a market for fake out-of-state id's when it was up to the states in the past.

Have another beast lite.....you're posts couldn't become any more stupid.

It's actually never really left the purvue of the State. It's just the Federal Government witholds money from states that don't comply with it's recommendation.

Money, is a big influence in decisions.


Sincerely,
Marcus Allen

Martyred wrote:

peter dragon wrote:i say lower it as long as you are an active military member

Alcoholism.

Yeah, that's exactly what a modern, rapid reaction force needs.

you've obviously never served. there for you are less of a citizen than those that have. your opinions dont matter



as for the fake military ID's. have you seen a recent ID from a military member.. its changed quite a bit. there are chips and all kinds of weird stuff embedded in the card.

peter dragon wrote:

Martyred wrote:

peter dragon wrote:i say lower it as long as you are an active military member

Alcoholism.

Yeah, that's exactly what a modern, rapid reaction force needs.

you've obviously never served. there for you are less of a citizen than those that have. your opinions dont matter



as for the fake military ID's. have you seen a recent ID from a military member.. its changed quite a bit. there are chips and all kinds of weird stuff embedded in the card.

I'm sure those chips & weird stuff will really help those servers who can only visually check the id.

When we're talking about fatalities - less is better. "Causation" and that sort of terminology seems to be less important if there are less people dying.

Diego in Seattle wrote:I'm sure those chips & weird stuff will really help those servers who can only visually check the id.

Have you been to a bar recently? Here in NY they have card readers that they swipe licenses through. Maybe they don't have those at the Chuck E Cheese that you frequent, but at bars that serve adults, they're becoming commonplace.

PSUFAN wrote:When we're talking about fatalities - less is better. "Causation" and that sort of terminology seems to be less important if there are less people dying.

That weird terminology means that banning alcohol has nothing to do with lower fatalities.

When was "banning alcohol" being discussed?

PSUFAN wrote:When was "banning alcohol" being discussed?

When dio's doctor realized that he had killed at least half his brain cells by the age of 22.

PSUFAN wrote:When was "banning alcohol" being discussed?

It's already banned if you are a politicaly incorrect age.

peter dragon wrote:

Martyred wrote:

peter dragon wrote:i say lower it as long as you are an active military member

Alcoholism.

Yeah, that's exactly what a modern, rapid reaction force needs.

you've obviously never served. there for you are less of a citizen than those that have. your opinions dont matter



as for the fake military ID's. have you seen a recent ID from a military member.. its changed quite a bit. there are chips and all kinds of weird stuff embedded in the card.

What about military attitudes whilst hiding behind a computer? They're incredibly easy to fake.

Nishlord wrote:

peter dragon wrote: you've obviously never served. there for you are less of a citizen than those that have. your opinions dont matter



as for the fake military ID's. have you seen a recent ID from a military member.. its changed quite a bit. there are chips and all kinds of weird stuff embedded in the card.

What about military attitudes whilst hiding behind a computer? They're incredibly easy to fake.

ha..

Diogenes wrote:http://www.reason.com/news/show/128493.html

Good article.

Maybe we could raise the voting age back to 21 instead.

I would guess both your mother and father were heavy and early drinkers. Especially during the time you were just a little fetus.

The inspiration for this thread wouldn't have anything to do with Palin's slut daughter getting photographed throwing back a few cocktails, would it?

Imus wrote:

Diogenes wrote:http://www.reason.com/news/show/128493.html

Good article.

Maybe we could raise the voting age back to 21 instead.

I would guess both your mother and father were heavy and early drinkers. Especially during the time you were just a little fetus.

You'd be guessing wrong, nappy-headed ho.

There are no sensible arguments to made in favor of an 21 year old drinking age.

How about, Kids are stupid until they get to age 25 or so and we need to protect ourselves from them and they need to be protected from them selves and it's up to us to do it or not or not bitch.

Imus wrote:

There are no sensible arguments to made in favor of an 21 year old drinking age.

How about, Kids are stupid until they get to age 25 or so

Much longer if they're still Democrats.

Besides, I'm all for raising the voting age.

Well ok. But your avatar still sucks ass like a 4th grader.

Imus wrote:Well ok. But your avatar still sucks ass like a 4th grader.

So does this shit troll.