College wants debate on drinking age against MADD

[Graeme Dice]

So? If you throw a keg party there, they expel you. Simple and clean.

This does raise the obvious question of why any any university would want to expel students for drinking, or for any other legal behaviour. They are dealing with adults after all.

So? There's no reason why a school can't adopt a "no binge drinking" policy for their students even if they can legally drink.

Have you seen any definition for binge drinking that is even remotely based on a medical analysis of the effects of alcohol? Most simply say that binge drinking is anything more than X drinks, where X is the same number (usually 5) no matter whether the person is a 90 lb. chinese female or a 250 lb. scandinavian male. Such a definition is clearly worthless.

[Illuminatus Primus]

So? If you throw a keg party there, they expel you. Simple and clean.

Agreed. But what if they don't know that you live there? Student's school paperwork is, as I said, often filed with their parents' home as an address, the name on the house's deed is the owner renting to the kids, and only one of them might have their name on the actual lease agreement. What about common living arrangements. I hate people having parties in my apartment, but if they're assholes, what can I do about it if I'm with my girlfriend at her apartment or visiting home. My name is on the lease. Am I to be expelled? And I was randomly assigned my roommates.

Why not?

Uh, because it costs money? And how will you recruit these snitches? Like they do drug offenders? Offer deals to students caught binge drinking or underage drinking? That rules-out a no-tolerance policy you were talking about. This proposal would VASTLY increase the budget of the student conduct office - a tiny sub-office to the student affairs department. During a recession? Another thing is that students have been held under law to be entitled to some basic hearing and ability to contest accusations. Being paid and based off one-time hearsay would make that very difficult to enforce.

You don't need the police. You're expelling them, not laying criminal charges. Expulsions are a matter of internal school policy, not criminal law.

And students are held to have some legal rights against the school's accusations and disciplinary procedures. There's a whole quasi-legal process at my school (though with obviously lower standards of procedure and evidence - requiring probable cause instead of beyond a reasonable doubt, and more inquisitorial than adversarial). Schools have been successfully sued or ruled against in court for unfairly disciplining students. The law matters, here, which is what I'm stressing. Most - almost all - off campus disciplinary infractions are "investigated" by having students arrested for unlawful activities reported to student affairs. Beyond that, they have almost know knowledge or ability to enforce their rules beyond the campus grounds.

Nonsense. Just put out a small $500 bounty for reporting keg parties. If there's a blanket rule against anyone enrolled at the university throwing such a party, then it's a simple matter to expel the students who throw such parties. Why would it cost a fortune to operate such a system?

$500 per keg party? Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea how many keg parties (much less generic "binge drinking" events or incidents) occur on an average weekend - much less gameday - night in a city with a 50,000 student university? This could cost 20,000 dollars in a single night, and at the risk of a student hiring a lawyer and contesting the university's legal obligations in a court. A total disaster.

Furthermore, a lot more people live in a college down than just actively-enrolled students. There's typically a satellite community college. There are graduates. There are people in their 20s working.

So? There's no reason why a school can't adopt a "no binge drinking" policy for their students even if they can legally drink.

My point is how are we going to regulate those who overdrink or do shot after shot at a bar? You've only discussed private keg parties.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Totally irrelevant to an argument about whether people are mature enough to be relied upon to drink responsibly at the age of 18.

Fair. But you contested his logic as being legalistic in nature. In this discussion, legalistic logic is the only one that matters for implementing the policy desired.

Well, students get plenty drunk from beer, so the absurdly widespread availability of beer is bound to be a problem even if liquor is harder to get. As for "the culture", right now people have in-your-face keg parties, right on campus and in frat houses, all the time.

You're right, and its really excessive and absurd that this is tolerated. However, there is regional variation. Fraternity events with drinking are highly regulated and must be registered, and every semester one or two are suspended for years for violating restrictions. The Board of Trustees is ruling on making binge drinking and the possession of "common use" alcohol containers (mostly kegs, I imagine) against the student conduct code. Kegs are unheard of on campus here, no one tries (though of course the consumption of raw hard liquor grows considerably because its easier to conceal and store and easier to get drunk off of).

At the very least, they would have to go underground. People would have to move these keg parties far away, invite people more quietly, not run them at frat houses where they would be afraid of being kicked out of the university, etc.

Agreed. These steps have already been taken here.

And yes, I know it won't happen. We have a fucking drunkard in the White House, for fuck's sake. I'm just saying that if the will existed, it could be done. I'm tired of people acting as if every college student on campus is the next Al Capone.

Well if your goal is to eliminate the culture, your ideas won't stop it. But stronger policies, like that at UF, can at least make it less visible and easy. Of course, even with all the new rules and stronger enforcement, UF somehow still got named No. 1 Party School. The rigor of that poll I leave to your own analysis. But a heavy hand can't change the fact most Americans do agree with Skimmer's go-to-war, get-a-beer logic and find it quaint and part of the culture that freshmen are binge drinkers.

[nickolay1]

As for the legal aspects, can they not simply require agreement to a contract which covers this as requisite for admission?

Wong's suggestion of expulsion for binge drinking is too lax. What could be better is the application of standards similar to those used for driving. During regular raids on fraternity houses and other such epicenters of drinking, any overtly intoxicated student would be required to submit to a BAC test. Those who fail and those who refuse would be summarily expelled from the institution. With the systematic implementation of such a system at colleges across the nation, those goddamned "best party school" ranking systems would evaporate within a single semester.

[Illuminatus Primus]

As for the legal aspects, can they not simply require agreement to a contract which covers this as requisite for admission?

Perhaps, I'm not a lawyer, but - honestly and sadly - it'd never happen because the first couple schools who did this would see a major drop in enrollment.

Wong's suggestion of expulsion for binge drinking is too lax. What could be better is the application of standards similar to those used for driving. During regular raids on fraternity houses and other such epicenters of drinking, any overtly intoxicated student would be required to submit to a BAC test.

You do realize fraternity houses are often located off-campus, and you cannot "raid" unless you use police. In which case you're limited to real legal limits on their power. Your driver's license says "operation of a motor vehicle constitutes consent to a sobriety test defined by law". How the fuck would this be possible using glorified mall cops (somehow hired and paid for by the university) on off-campus housing (a gross violation of your civil rights) against students. How would these theoretical Keystone Cops know you were a fucking student? Demand name? ID? Detain you? Don't you get why a fucking cop can do these things and no one else really can? What if they say "fuck yourself" and walk out. What if all of them do that but the owners? What if they sue you for breaking into a private residence?

Those who fail and those who refuse would be summarily expelled from the institution. With the systematic implementation of such a system at colleges across the nation, those goddamned "best party school" ranking systems would evaporate within a single semester.

Yeah, this could be so easily implemented without a Constitutional amendment. You're a fucking moron. How the fuck would you possibly grant such power to educational institutions (did it occur to you many are private???), mandate they execute it, somehow fund it, and force it through across the nation at the federal level? This has to be the least politically-legally education post I've read in this forum in a long fucking time.

[Mr Bean]

After all, if there's one thing we've learned, giving the Police broad powers to track down(underage) people drinking beer and root out their stores of booze works well!

Please nickolay1 your arguing for Prohibition but only on those between the ages of 0-20. It's not going to work, it's going to waste the cops time(Murders? Rapes? Armed Robbery? Heck Drunk Drivers? Nahh, we gotta spend weeks collecting evidence and building a case for getting warrants to raid Frats!)

The issue at hand is one of abuse of a legal substance, the correct method is not to attempt Prohibition style attacks, rather it is to treat it as an abuse problem, not a criminal matter.

[nickolay1]

Perhaps, I'm not a lawyer, but - honestly and sadly - it'd never happen because the first couple schools who did this would see a major drop in enrollment.

The only drop would be from those who attend college to party rather than to learn.

You do realize fraternity houses are often located off-campus, and you cannot "raid" unless you use police.
...
How the fuck would this be possible using glorified mall cops (somehow hired and paid for by the university) on off-campus housing (a gross violation of your civil rights) against students.

At my university, the fraternity houses are located within the boundaries of the campus, and presumably within the jurisdiction of the campus police (who are real cops). Obviously, such actions would be performed only for on-campus housing and fraternities.

How would these theoretical Keystone Cops know you were a fucking student? Demand name? ID? Detain you? Don't you get why a fucking cop can do these things and no one else really can? What if they say "fuck yourself" and walk out. What if all of them do that but the owners? What if they sue you for breaking into a private residence?

Such a policy need not apply to facilities outside of campus. Regarding identification, they would have probable cause to confirm ID in a setting where alcohol is being consumed and where underage individuals may be present. Determining student status once the name is known is subsequently easy.

Yeah, this could be so easily implemented without a Constitutional amendment. You're a fucking moron. How the fuck would you possibly grant such power to educational institutions (did it occur to you many are private???), mandate they execute it, somehow fund it, and force it through across the nation at the federal level? This has to be the least politically-legally education post I've read in this forum in a long fucking time.

What is so unconstitutional to conducting a raid after a tip from a snitch that underage drinking may be in progress? In any case, I never said that this was likely to happen under the current system.

Another way to improve the situation would be the liquidation and prohibition of any fraternities. Virtually all are nothing but drinking clubs with no legitimate justification for existence.

Please nickolay1 your arguing for Prohibition but only on those between the ages of 0-20. It's not going to work, it's going to waste the cops time(Murders? Rapes? Armed Robbery? Heck Drunk Drivers? Nahh, we gotta spend weeks collecting evidence and building a case for getting warrants to raid Frats!)

Assuming that these organizations continue to be allowed to operate, they could be given the choice to either consent to surprise visits from police or be shut down entirely. No warrants necessary.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The only drop would be from those who attend college to party rather than to learn.

Yeah, its not like vast reductions in revenue would accompany it, or anything. Even if we're assuming for the purposes of discussion that only math/science/eng matter, they use the lighter departments and other revenue streams to subsidize and invest in the core programs.

Brilliant! You killed the patient curing the disease.

At my university, the fraternity houses are located within the boundaries of the campus, and presumably within the jurisdiction of the campus police (who are real cops). Obviously, such actions would be performed only for on-campus housing and fraternities.

Which hardly changes the fact that simply standing around in eyesight of drinking does not constitute consent to a sobriety test. And how such a legal innovation would be enforced nation-wide.

Such a policy need not apply to facilities outside of campus. Regarding identification, they would have probable cause to confirm ID in a setting where alcohol is being consumed and where underage individuals may be present. Determining student status once the name is known is subsequently easy.

Having fun changing your goalposts? This would only effect jurisdictions where there was endemic on-campus incidents. It wouldn't do anything to prevent my school from being No. 1 Party School.

What is so unconstitutional to conducting a raid after a tip from a snitch that underage drinking may be in progress? In any case, I never said that this was likely to happen under the current system.

Nothing, apart from the fact it'd still be an enormous overextension of police and university resources while doing JACK SHIT about the off-campus problem and as my school shows, blowing all this money and time on the on-campus problem would just make you look stupid when it relocates.

Another way to improve the situation would be the liquidation and prohibition of any fraternities. Virtually all are nothing but drinking clubs with no legitimate justification for existence.

This is not going to happen. But at least you're changing your goalposts back to sanity from IMPLEMENT THIS NATIONWIDE OMG STOP ZE DRINKING.

Assuming that these organizations continue to be allowed to operate, they could be given the choice to either consent to surprise visits from police or be shut down entirely. No warrants necessary.

Because there's no drinking at colleges without Greek life, right?

[Darth Wong]

Totally irrelevant to an argument about whether people are mature enough to be relied upon to drink responsibly at the age of 18.

Fair. But you contested his logic as being legalistic in nature. In this discussion, legalistic logic is the only one that matters for implementing the policy desired.

If someone complains that someone else is being too legalistic, should it not seem obvious that he is not interested in more legalism? Why do I even have to spell this out? And legalism has nothing to do with my argument, which is about school policy and the fact that university administrators obviously don't give a damn. Schools can implement expulsion policies regardless of whether the kids have the legal right to drink.

You're right, and its really excessive and absurd that this is tolerated. However, there is regional variation. Fraternity events with drinking are highly regulated and must be registered, and every semester one or two are suspended for years for violating restrictions. The Board of Trustees is ruling on making binge drinking and the possession of "common use" alcohol containers (mostly kegs, I imagine) against the student conduct code. Kegs are unheard of on campus here, no one tries (though of course the consumption of raw hard liquor grows considerably because its easier to conceal and store and easier to get drunk off of).

Banning binge drinking regardless of age would be a very welcome development. The fact that people have the legal right to do something does not mean they can't be expelled for it. Frosh McDumbass has the legal right to do all kinds of things that might get him expelled.

And yes, I know it won't happen. We have a fucking drunkard in the White House, for fuck's sake. I'm just saying that if the will existed, it could be done. I'm tired of people acting as if every college student on campus is the next Al Capone.

Well if your goal is to eliminate the culture, your ideas won't stop it. But stronger policies, like that at UF, can at least make it less visible and easy. Of course, even with all the new rules and stronger enforcement, UF somehow still got named No. 1 Party School. The rigor of that poll I leave to your own analysis. But a heavy hand can't change the fact most Americans do agree with Skimmer's go-to-war, get-a-beer logic and find it quaint and part of the culture that freshmen are binge drinkers.

Correction: most students agree with it. Parents often have much different attitudes about it, and they're the ones paying the bills. How many people do you honestly think want to shell out forty thousand dollars so their kid can go on a year-long bender?

There is a lot of inertia to overcome and a lot of people with vested interests, which is why it won't happen, but if it were to be magically put into place, I think you'd find that this big uproar you're expecting wouldn't happen. As I said, these people are mostly spoiled brats living on Daddy's money. When I went to school, you always knew the people who were paying their own tuition; they actually came to school to learn, not to re-enact scenes from "Animal House".

[RogueIce]

This article indicates that some universities are already trying to police some off-campus behaivor.

Universities try to control students off campus
By DONNA GORDON BLANKINSHIP, Associated Press Writer
Fri Aug 22, 12:10 PM ET

SEATTLE - Ah, life in the university district. Cheap ethnic food. Vibrant street life. Fresh-faced students whizzing by on bicycles.

People who choose to live on the beautiful tree-lined streets surrounding the nation's institutions of higher learning often get a more vibrant experience than they expected — loud parties, rundown student boarding houses and trash generated by weekend melees.

A growing number of universities are starting to take a more proactive approach to monitoring off-campus behavior and neighbors say the efforts are working.

The University of Washington now enforces its campus behavior code off campus as well. A student doesn't need to be charged with a violent crime to activate the campus code at this Seattle university. Being cited for breaking the city's noise regulations is enough to score an invite to the student conduct office.

Architecture professor Earl Bell, who bought a house in the University Park neighborhood 40 years ago, says he has discovered that there's a fine line between convenient and too close.

"We've all got a kind of love-hate relationship with the University of Washington," said Bell, acknowledging that he and his neighbors have noticed a slight improvement lately.

The University of Colorado-Boulder and Penn State also are taking a broader view of offenses that can activate the campus discipline system. In Colorado, the code regulates any conduct that "affects the health, safety or security of any member of the university community or the mission of the university."

Since most college students live off campus, colleges that want to be on top of discipline need to extend their reach beyond their own real estate.

To some, this may sound like an overreaching of university authority; to others, it's a teachable moment.

"We have a responsibility to educate our students about being responsible citizens," said Elizabeth A. Higgins, Washington's director of community standards and student conduct, whose office has "educated" 19 students since the extended code of conduct took effect in January.

The legal ramifications of these policies are not entirely known, said Sheldon Steinbach, an attorney in Washington, D.C., who formerely worked for many years with the American Council on Education, representing school presidents from 1,800 colleges and universities.

"I fully anticipate a judicial challenges over time," Steinbach said.

Penn State's rules are similar to those at the University of Washington, but as university spokesman Bill Mahon points out, he has to first hear about a student behaving badly. Some local police departments work closely with campus authorities, passing along arrest information; others do not.

For example, if a Penn State student breaks the rules over the weekend in State College Borough, the university would probably hear about it on Monday morning, but the same violation in another town would go unnoticed.

"It's an imperfect system," Mahon said.

University of Washington police work with Seattle officers to patrol the area north of campus thick with off-campus housing including fraternities and sororities. Boston College goes further by sending a college official off campus to look for parties and students breaking the law.

An assistant dean of students at Seattle University does something similar via the Internet. A number of parties were shut down this past year after Glen Butterworth spied a page on Facebook publicizing the events. The private university has put its students on notice that cyber-patrolling will continue this year.

The University of Minnesota's campus code is more typical: It is only applied off campus during melees that happen around a campus event. Ohio State University applies its code off campus in cases of assault, drug dealing and major incidents that affect safety on campus.

In New Jersey, Rutgers University polices off-campus behavior only when campus officials have reasonable grounds to believe a student could be dangerous, said university spokeswoman Sandra Lanman. Typically, that means a pending criminal charge relating to a violent crime.

Some universities take their discipline policies a step further. At Duke University, the campus code requires students to report misbehavior by their fellow students to campus officials, no matter where the students find themselves.

In a rural setting, where a university can dominate the community, responsible behavior is much easier to enforce, said Elaine Voss, director of the office of student conduct at Washington State University in rural Pullman, Wash.

A 1998 riot along Greek row and Washington State's national reputation as a "party school" led the university to start taking a more proactive approach to curbing off-campus behavior.

The student code was revised to make the same rules apply to both on- and off-campus behavior. A staff member checks the local police log every day. Campus police forward their log to Higgins' office. Her staff does a lot of on- and off-campus education about alcohol abuse, personal safety and university expectations, including a three-day intensive freshman orientation.

"I think we've made huge strides in calming the place," Voss said.

(This version CORRECTS title of Steinbach to show he no longer works for American Council on Education.)

[Illuminatus Primus]

If someone complains that someone else is being too legalistic, should it not seem obvious that he is not interested in more legalism? Why do I even have to spell this out? And legalism has nothing to do with my argument, which is about school policy and the fact that university administrators obviously don't give a damn. Schools can implement expulsion policies regardless of whether the kids have the legal right to drink.

As I've stated several times, not they cannot simply summarily expel you, and they can be legally challenged. They're allowed to bring lawyers into the meetings and they can be appealed to court on the basis of the school denying legal protection to its students.

Banning binge drinking regardless of age would be a very welcome development. The fact that people have the legal right to do something does not mean they can't be expelled for it. Frosh McDumbass has the legal right to do all kinds of things that might get him expelled.

Yes, but that doesn't mean that the law does not apply and that legal challenges cannot be mounted.

Correction: most students agree with it. Parents often have much different attitudes about it, and they're the ones paying the bills. How many people do you honestly think want to shell out forty thousand dollars so their kid can go on a year-long bender?

Most schools do not cost $40,000/year for parents. Especially state schools where the drinking is most endemic. Furthermore, who do you think keeps paying for these lawyers to challenge disciplinary measures against the drinking kids. The idea that its natural for college students to binge drink (by the strict definition of binge drinking) is taken for granted by adults and parents around here (my classmates' parents, my high school classmates' parents, my boss, ad nauseum).

There is a lot of inertia to overcome and a lot of people with vested interests, which is why it won't happen, but if it were to be magically put into place, I think you'd find that this big uproar you're expecting wouldn't happen.

Who do you think provides the tailgating RVs for every big game day? At least in the South, especially when you add the Greek Life into the mix, the parents want their kids to do well, but they also expect them to party like they did.

As I said, these people are mostly spoiled brats living on Daddy's money. When I went to school, you always knew the people who were paying their own tuition; they actually came to school to learn, not to re-enact scenes from "Animal House".

In FL anyone with a 3.00 across the board could get 100% tuition paid for, granted that is not that common. But a lot of students with grants and scholarships and loans binge drink, at least on occasion. There might be a slight difference, but in my experience, its definitely not major. Those students aren't mostly free of binge drinkers.