Question.

[Jericho]

Jericho makes a Philo thread! Holy crappers!

I do not have the endurance or stamina to debate with you philo kids, god bless ya. But I do enjoy reading. Lemme ask you this:

In America, why is 18 old enough to grab a gun and head to war, but it's illegal for the kid to have a beer?

[Face]

'cuz 'mercans be ig'nant, yo

[Mustard]

18 is also old enough to vote, and smoke cigs too.

There is no good reason for this Jeribear. It should be 18 across the board.

But think about this... at 16 its ok to operate what basically amounts to a guidable RPG on wheels.

Like I said. 18 across the board.

[WET HOT MESS]

I guess this goes back to the bunch of Protestants who started it all for us. It's bad to drink...sinful perhaps, but if you're out defending your country, that's honorable.

[STDSkillz]

During my freshman year of college, I had a roommate from London. I remember him pointing out the absurdity that kids in America can be old enough to die for their country, but not old enough to drink a beer. I tend to agree with him.

As for the rule itself, I believe it mostly stems from American attitude. Another thing which I disagree with.

[Kerjack]

There is no good reason for this Jeribear. It should be 24 across the board.
.

[Jericho]

24?? You wacky mountain boy!

[Mustard]

Kerjack is a communist! Get him!!!

[Trident]

Maybe that's why young Americans I meet in London and other places are smashed after a couple of beers whilst we're just warming up.

Much like you age of consent being 18, that's just wrong. Ask Marcus.

[vasili denisov]

There is the fact that there is a very strong prohibitionist, anti-drug anti-alcohol streak in the United States. You had a prolonged period where no alcohol could legally be consumed; at no recent point has the United States ever considered disbanding or drastically cutting its military, though it did so early on in the republic, but not for pacifist reasons.

Another is that drinking age is, informally, a state issue, with only recently revenue being withheld from states that serve alcohol to those under twenty one, while military recruiting has always been in federal hands. With the overturning of the Volstead act, alcohol purchase became a state issue, with individual states free to make their own restrictions. The argument for the revenue withholding is that those under twenty one who drink and drive do so on the nation's highways, which are built by federal money, so it's partly federal responsibility to reduce deaths in this area.

There is a practicality to the enforcement of the drinking age and the recruiting age here as well. Counties might believe that drinking among those under twenty one leads to greater occurrences of crimes such as vandalism, theft, etc, which they'd rather not prosecutee; the federal government, on the other hand, wants as many warm healthy bodies available as possible for recruiting.

If I had to act as devil's advocate (pun intended) for keeping the drinking age higher than military enlistment, it would be that the state values rational, clear thinking from all citizens, that this can be considered a universal virtue. This intellectual clarity is most likely clouded among the youngest and least experienced, so special conditions must be established to maintain it as much as possible, through mandatory education (later, partly subsidised education) and restrictions on substances that impede this clarity.

The military does not impede such clarity, but may in fact encourage it through discipline and rigor. The man who volunteers for the army will not necessarily serve in war, for the United States has peaceful borders and has been very reluctant to enter wars (using its own army, at least). Though we might say military service itself may distort this young person's mind - does a person who holds a gun not want to shoot it? does someone who has never seen war not often have a great desire to experience it? - only alcohol provides exclusively this distortion, the utility of distance from the real and no other, is sought out specifically and only for this utility.

[UNC]

Jericho, did you clear making this thread with Arch?

[heelsguy]

Jericho makes a Philo thread! Holy crappers!

I do not have the endurance or stamina to debate with you philo kids, god bless ya. But I do enjoy reading. Lemme ask you this:

In America, why is 18 old enough to grab a gun and head to war, but it's illegal for the kid to have a beer?


maybe because before you can get a gun and shoot someone, you are first put through boot camp and have discipline instilled into you and trained on how and when to use that weapon...whereas any stupid 18 yr old could walk in and buy a 6-pack of beer, drink it, drive home and kill a family of 5 returning from a soccer match.

[Archangel]

maybe because before you can get a gun and shoot someone, you are first put through boot camp and have discipline instilled into you and trained on how and when to use that weapon...whereas any stupid 18 yr old could walk in and buy a 6-pack of beer, drink it, drive home and kill a family of 5 returning from a soccer match.

But you can drive a 4,000lb vehicle with a top speed of 130mph at 16. That makes sense.

You can also buy a gun at 18 at a gun show with no training whatsoever.

Puritan roots must be the gayest thing in the world. Sex is bad, drinking is bad, but killing people, that's a-OK. Bullshit. Am I ever glad that we kicked those fools out of Europe in time. Probably for being annoying at parties.

Age of consent at 14/16; drinking age 16 for beer and wine, 18 for hard liquor; 18 and serious qualifications for driving and gun ownership, and 18 for everything else. That, to me, makes sense. Oh yeah, and we have no binge drinking deaths in colleges, either.
Being granted full citizenship and voting rights, as well as all duties, but not being allowed to have a beer is pretty much the dumbest law in Christendom. Especially since nothing erodes authority like passing laws which cannot be enforced - you keep kids from drinking and having sex, and they will do it nonetheless, just illegally. Get fake IDs, lie to people, all that. So breaking laws becomes second nature at a very young age.

Or how many kids do you know who don't fuck and drink at 17 or so just because it is forbidden?

Exactly. Not to mention that while the bar won't let you in unless you're 21, the drugs dealer on the block won't give a flying fuck.

[UNC]

what 18 year old isn't brow beaten about the dangers of drinking these days?

[heelsguy]

But you can drive a 4,000lb vehicle with a top speed of 130mph at 16. That makes sense.

You can also buy a gun at 18 at a gun show with no training whatsoever.

Puritan roots must be the gayest thing in the world. Sex is bad, drinking is bad, but killing people, that's a-OK. Bullshit. Am I ever glad that we kicked those fools out of Europe in time. Probably for being annoying at parties.

Age of consent at 14/16; drinking age 16 for beer and wine, 18 for hard liquor; 18 and serious qualifications for driving and gun ownership, and 18 for everything else. That, to me, makes sense. Oh yeah, and we have no binge drinking deaths in colleges, either.
Being granted full citizenship and voting rights, as well as all duties, but not being allowed to have a beer is pretty much the dumbest law in Christendom. Especially since nothing erodes authority like passing laws which cannot be enforced - you keep kids from drinking and having sex, and they will do it nonetheless, just illegally. Get fake IDs, lie to people, all that. So breaking laws becomes second nature at a very young age.

Or how many kids do you know who don't fuck and drink at 17 or so just because it is forbidden?

Exactly. Not to mention that while the bar won't let you in unless you're 21, the drugs dealer on the block won't give a flying fuck.

but you have to undergo training before you can drive a car and pass a vision and rules test. and here in NC you cannot drive after 8 pm the first year.. etc etc.

where can you buy a gun at 18? certainly not in my state. and here before you can get a permit you have to be 21 and the sherriff has to certify youy completed training

[Archangel]

I've seen American driving tests. Please. And maybe I was wrong on the gun thing, but I know some parents let their kids shoot; my dad had to invoke diplomatic immunity to buy me a beer on my 20th birthday.

[nothingman]

Vasili is correct about the pressure put on states to conform to the 21 yr old drinking age. When I was was 16 they changed the drinking age to 21, dammit. But we could cross the river and buy liquor in Louisiana, it was the last state to change their drinking age, and they fought it for years over the same arguements that everyone has here. Their federal funding was cut substantially and they caved finally just to exist. So yeah it's a state decision, that is forced/subsidized by the federal govt..

[heelsguy]

I've seen American driving tests. Please. And maybe I was wrong on the gun thing, but I know some parents let their kids shoot; my dad had to invoke diplomatic immunity to buy me a beer on my 20th birthday.


shooting with your dad us a time-honored tradition. when I was 11 I shot mistletoe from the top of a tall tree with a .22 rifle (pure luck).

my point is simply that training and certification makes the difference.

[Pox]

I do just as much stupid stuff when I'm drunk as I did when I was 15. If anything, I'm a bigger idiot now than I used to be.

[Morfin]

Maybe being old isn't so hot and I yearn for the days of yore, but... When I grew up, the drinking age was 18 and I cannot imagine going off to college and not being able to legally sit in a bar and drink myself into oblivion night after night after night.

With that being said, the main reason for why the Reagan administration forced the drinking age increase to 21 was due to the perceived problem of high school kids getting drunk and driving. It was not a judgment that kids 18-20 were not mature enough to handle it, it was a judgment that there were too many high school kids getting access to alcohol, especially from friends who were already 18 and still in high school.

I am in favor of either a drinking age of 18 -- because an adult is an adult and should be able to make his own decisions -- or 19 as a compromise to keep it out of high schools.

With that being said, the higher drinking age has led to increased problems and alcohol abuse, IMO. When I was in high school, because we had to drink (and we did, every weekend) surreptitiously, we 1) drank hard liquor to get drunk faster; and 2) mixed it very strong, again to get drunk faster. If you drink slowly, in a relaxed fashion, you slowly get drunk. When you chug drinks, it is easier to get non-functioning plastered, which is where you get kids passing out, vomiting, getting hospitalized.

With the 21 age limit, this is the type of drinking activity that you now see at colleges. No long do kids sit at the bars or stand at frat parties drinking beers. Instead, there is more beer bong, hard liquor where kids are looking for the quick drunk. (And, there is still the high school drinking problem. Kids are still able to get everything they want and then drink irresponsibly.)

The point being that, like Arch discusses, if kids are able to drink out in the open, especially beer, where the drinking is part of socializing, rather than being drunk is part of socializing, they will get used to alcohol and how to handle it, rather than alcohol being used in this dysfunctional "fast drunk" manner that it is now.

Arch speaks of the 13-14 yo drinking with the family. Similarly, an 18 age limit will bring the drinking out from the surreptitious "party" in the dorm room, to the public bar, where intake is monitored more by peers and bartenders -- not that they are policing much, but the mere fact that people are out in public will discourage reckless, stupid drinking games.

[heelsguy]

Mothers Against Drunk Driving was the reason the laws were changed. some influential people were killed by drunk drivers. stron thurmond's daughter for one.

if you want an example of the sea-change, take "Arthur" and the "Arthur 2- Life on the rocks" for example,

in 1981, it won best picture because of the hilarious way Dudley Moore played a drunk ( i still quote that movie to this day "you are the only woman.....at this table!!!") then in 1984 it was no longer as funny for some reason seeing a drunk.

[freegood]

Well if 18 is going to be the legal limit to drink, they might as well increase the driving age to 18 too.

Somethings gotta give, and a big proportion of auto wrecks occur with the young and/or the intoxicated.

I agree with Morfin that 21 as the age causes a lot of counter-repressive binge drinking at that age, so it's definitely not cut and dried.

[Trident]

Isn't there the other argument that drinking at an earlier age develops a greater awareness and tolerance to alcohol when it comes to a time when they need responsibility. Rather than forcing them to drink on the sly, allow them to enjoy the great social interaction from sitting around in a bar with their mates.

[Okie Medicvet]

The voting age used to be 21 until Vietnam, and the big argument was why can you die for your country but not vote at 18. So that was rectified. But in our sometimes puritannical country, we try to keep the drinking age at 21, and that was largely Reagan's part, because he withheld highway improvement funds for states that wouldn't raise the drinking age to 21, and blame the motherfucking members of MADD for keeping it at 21. The drinking age needs to be 18. If you can vote, die for your country, sign and participate in legal documents, get married, and go to prison as an adult, it is beyond stupid to not let someone drink at 18.

And they need to legalize pot too while we're at it.

What disgusts me is that there isn't enough of a grassroots movement to get this going on seriously. It is sustained and intense protests that will finally get these rights made available to every 18 yr old. I am 43 yrs old and have felt that way all my life, so what age you are doesn't have much to do about it, it's about simply what is right and fair.

[wonderllama]

18 is the age for everything here.
Licence & Drinking & Smoking etc.

Not sure what sort of signal that sends though, happy 18th, go get pissed and drive home. Having said that, you aren't allowed to have any alcohol in your system as the driver for 3 years after getting your licence.

Oh...and we don't use guns here, we use knives and they're available to anyone. ;oP

[freegood]

Isn't there the other argument that drinking at an earlier age develops a greater awareness and tolerance to alcohol when it comes to a time when they need responsibility.

There's been studies that prove alcohol harms brain development until their early twenties. I don't think increasing tolerance to a drug would be more compelling than that.

[Archangel]

There's been studies that prove alcohol harms brain development until their early twenties. I don't think increasing tolerance to a drug would be more compelling than that.
Studies by whom, the United Baptist/MADD Centre for Sin Studies?

Look at me, I started drinking early, and my brain's just fine. The gut's another matter, though.

What's really ridiculous in my eyes is the fact that not even adult supervision is tolerated - you can go watch an R-rated flick even if you're too young if your legal guardian (hell, most any adult) takes you to see it, but your father can't buy you a beer for your 20th birthday? That's pretty much the most retarded law on earth.

[hatepoppy]

say jerry, these are just completely separate issues. you can go to war at 18 bc they want you to go to war at 18. if you couldnt get into the army at 18, you'd have three years after high school to realize what a stupid fucking move it would be to join.

then there's the cunt lobby. fucking madd and it's propagandist cockfaggery speaks to the heart of flag waving diabetic middle america. by keeping the pressure on legislators to tighten drinking control, they dont give any ground at all towards reasonable policy.

[Archetype]

I guess this goes back to the bunch of Protestants who started it all for us. It's bad to drink...sinful perhaps, but if you're out defending your country, that's honorable.
I don't know if it quite goes back that far. Quakers toughed it out better in the US than a lot of places, pacifistic anti-war hippies that they was.