Several states are considering whether to lower the drinking age. The thinking is, if they're old enough to fight and die, they should be old enough to have a beer. Kentucky, Wisconsin, and South Carolina have introduced legislation to lower the drinking age for troops to 18. Four other states - Missouri, South Dakota, Minnesota, and most recently Vermont - would extend the privilege to the general population.
For those who worry about binge drinking, I would maintain that the main reason binge drinking occurs is because, first, young people have neither been allowed to drink nor have been educated to consume alcohol in moderation and, second, the forbidden fruit is always the most sought after.
The reason all 50 states have a uniform age of legal consumption at 21 is because the feds coerced the states (once more!) into passing that law on pain of withholding highway funds. It was simple blackmail in the first place.
In Canada, it varies between 18 and 19, depending on the province. Many countries in Europe have a minimum age limit of 16. Most countries worldwide are also 18. The US is almost alone in demanding a minimum age of 21 to drink.
Demanding abstinence until the age of 21 does not promote knowledge of how to drink responsibly. It is not realistic, either.
I say lower it.
Why not? Teens are going to drink anyway. I know when I was 17 I was drinking along with a large majority of kids at my school.
I've always been struck at the injustice represented by the adult rights conferred at 18, minus the right to drink. If you have the right to sign contracts, handle a weapon, and vote, then there is no rational reason to propose that the responsibilities of drinking are yet beyond you.
Anybody old enough to remember "low beer" and "High beer"?
"Sunday Beer" was the "blue cap special", designating the paltry 3.2 beer, sold on Sundays because of the "Catholic Blue Laws"
I was married at age 17 and could drink liquor. When I turned 18 I could only drink 3.2 beer. In other words, I was stamped with black ink when under age, and red ink at 18. Supposedly my husband was my guardian. ;)
Wow, that sparked some past memories and sentiments. It's as if America emerged from the fucking DARK AGES past the 1960s. The way wives were commonly treated is a big part of what I'm talking about. Everywhere a woman turned, it seemed in hindsight that either a man treated her like a child (if she was married) or a whore (if unmarried). No wonder militant feminism found such a foothold, and no wonder so many wives across America were closet drunks (per Simone Beauvoir? -- I can't remember the name of the feminist who conducted all those interviews).
We've come a long way, and we're in a good place, insofar as personal rights are concerned. But the franchise of liberty still needs to increase. Liberty wants to be free.
Keep it at 21, and be at least 21 to join the service , vote, drive a car, get married, have children and collect welfare.
j/k :)
I say
Submitted by KraZyKat on Fri, 2008-04-18 14:54.
Keep it at 21, and be at least 21 to join the service , vote, drive a car, get married, have children and collect welfare.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds reasonable to me. I say either that or it's eighteen for everything. This crap of mixing it up is nuts.
My grandson (19) got back from studying in Italy recently - he'd been to London & other parts of Europe during his time there - and he said he was stunned that nobody ever asked him for an ID or proof of age to drink. He's not a drinking kind of kid, but he did have a few beers while he was there. My butcher is from Germany, and he told me as soon as you are tall enough to reach the bar, you can drink - no questions asked. Appears to be the case all over the world - except puritanical America. My daughter said she was in a gas station recently that wouldn't sell cigs to anybody under the age of 25. I told her they all have signs that say they have to ask if you 'look like you're age 27", but she insisted that even with an ID, they refused to sell cigs to a guy who could prove he was 21.
America is such a puritanical goodie-two-shoes. About most everything, even sex. We also are about the only country in the world where you cannot buy codeine over the counter - no prescription, nothing to sign for. Our country has everybody so convinced this or that will create addicts it's absurd. England (all or most of Europe), Mexico, South & Central America, Canada, etc. do not have codeine addicts like we do - they are not haveing drug stores broken into like we do. And yet, in all those countries (at least) you can buy up to 2 bottles of 200 each bottle everytime you walk into a drug store. Granted, it takes 4 to equal one Tylenol #3 - but still. Canada also has about 14 other drugs you can get without a prescription (like most of the world, except the USA). My doctor told me a long time ago, they'd never legalize it here because there's too much money to be made in pain management (IF they even give you anything that actually WORKS). You can buy or rent suicide machines in other countries - but in America, even the terminally ill who are in extreme pain, are limited to what meds they will be allowed to take - because they may become 'addicts'. Just nonsense.
I'm pretty sure that 40 is a good age at which to allow the consumption of alcoholic beverages. We should change the law to that age standard. Anyone younger than 40, statistics show, is prone to fire a gun, wave a knife, or try to drive over a person in a bar parking lot after closing time. People under 40 can't be trusted, especially after having consumed a couple of beers. Yes, it is time to change the law. Only those 40 or older get to drink beer.