Legal Drinking age in US

[David]

Lonestar's b-day thread got me thinking, is it fair that a citizen of the US can join the military at 18 ( 17?) and theoritically die for his/her country ( but more likely someone else's country) but it still be illegal for them to drink?

[Dark Hellion]

As every 18 year old on this board would quickly think to chime in "HELL NO!"
However, many 18 year olds simply aren't ready for drinking trust me I know some major idiots who should stay away from the keg. I would almost support a licsence program, kinda like a drivers license, only for intoxication. However such a system it faulty and too many would slip through the cracks.
Frankly, I don't care about the system. If I wanted to drink, I could easily, legally or not. I think the problem is that people who would post on SD are almost all mature enough to handle alchohol, yet in real life, >75% aren't. I have no solution really. So this rant will end now.

[Xenophobe3691]

Lonestar's b-day thread got me thinking, is it fair that a citizen of the US can join the military at 18 ( 17?) and theoritically die for his/her country ( but more likely someone else's country) but it still be illegal for them to drink?

This is the same country that promotes "Intelligent Design", gives longer sentences to Pot farmers than rapists and murderers, and has generally forgotten that we were never a Christian Country. While most of us here at SD.Net are mature enough to drink at 18, the country at large is a bunch if ignorant retards who shouldn't even be allowed to breed. Leave the law as it is, it's easy as hell to get alcohol anyways...

[darthdavid]

In New York

You can baby sit at 14

You can drive a car at 16

And You can't buy Quake III(or any other m rated game or r rated movie for that matter) from wal-mart till your 17

Aint the system great?

[Lonestar]

Part of the reason why the wait is 'til 21 is because of the Doctors, not the MADD or whoever wants it. The theory being that 21 is the average age where most people's brains are finally nearing complete devolpment.

[Xenophobe3691]

Part of the reason why the wait is 'til 21 is because of the Doctors, not the MADD or whoever wants it. The theory being that 21 is the average age where most people's brains are finally nearing complete devolpment.

Good Point...

[Durandal]

Part of the reason why the wait is 'til 21 is because of the Doctors, not the MADD or whoever wants it. The theory being that 21 is the average age where most people's brains are finally nearing complete devolpment.

In other words, it's a slippery slope fallacy. "Let 18 year-olds drink, and they'll all drink and drive." Well fine. Then arrest and prosecute them for driving drunk, not for getting drunk and passing out on a couch or acting responsibly and walking home. The Framers would be vomiting if they knew that registered voters weren't allowed to drink alcohol. It's not the government's job to be a watch-dog for parents too lazy or incompetent to teach their kids about being responsible while drinking.

Bottom line, I have a draft card. The government can call me up at any point and send me somewhere else to kill other people for the national security of my country. Give me a fucking beer.

Side note: The drinking age is actually a state matter. But unfortunate mothers who wished to use their misfortunes as a springboard from which to perpetrate a civil rights tragedy have managed to convince the federal government that keeping registered voters and people eligible for military service from drinking is a high priority. Thus, the federal government basically extorted the states into enforcing a 21 drinking age by threatening to take away their federal highway funding if they did not.

You heard correctly. The civil rights of millions of registered voters and military personnel are being infringed because the states want to build roads. Alcohol violations for minors are yet another way for states to suck money from their residents by forcing a 20 year-old who had a few beers to pay upward of $500.

[Tsyroc]

I really hate it when the federal government gets the states to do something buy threatening to interfere with the amount of federal tax dollars that gets funelled into the state.

Most states should tell them to fuck off and let the federal interstates go to crap and just do their own thing.

One of the reasons I always thought they pushed for the 21 drinking age is because there aren't likely to be many 21 year old high school students. Which means there will be fewer high school parties with booze at them which then cuts down on the number of really underaged (<18) drinkers. It's just a theory .


Now, one thing that really sucks about the drinking ages is that back when all of the states were finally switching over to the 21 drinking age (Parts of Louisianna were the last to change IIRC) the US military decided to enforce the drinking age laws of the state in which a base was located in. Previously, the military had always allowed service members 18 and older to drink on base. Now, this might have changed but I think the only base in the contenental US in which 18 year olds are allowed to drink is the main base in San Diego and this was onlybecause Mexico is so close. It was better to have sailors drinking on base than coming back across the border late at night after boozing it up.

When the Navy serves beer onboard ship they don't give a shit how old you are. Everyone is entitled to the same number of beers (usually 2), although it was very easy to convince the underaged boots otherwise.

No one carded me in the St. Thomas when I was there either but I don't know that they follow US drinking ages or not.

[Phil Skayhan]

In other words, it's a slippery slope fallacy. "Let 18 year-olds drink, and they'll all drink and drive." Well fine. Then arrest and prosecute them for driving drunk, not for getting drunk and passing out on a couch or acting responsibly and walking home. The Framers would be vomiting if they knew that registered voters weren't allowed to drink alcohol. It's not the government's job to be a watch-dog for parents too lazy or incompetent to teach their kids about being responsible while drinking.

The framers certainly thought that a certain age must be reached before running for Federal office. So, while not as many people may be put in danger by an 18 year old drunk driver as an 18yo President, I think you may be underestimating their intestinal fortitude.

Now back to the topic. The drinking age was 21 in nearly all the states following the end of Prohibition. In the early 70's, 29 states lowered it to 18-20. This action coincided with the lowering of the voter age. In states that had lowered the age to 18, hard numbers showed that the number of fatal crashes involving youthful drivers increased and that the rate of alcohol involvement jumped significantly. With the current minimum drinking age that number is down to around half. By far, motor vehicle fatalities continues to be the leading cause of death for teenagers even without throwing alcohol into the mix. Perhaps we should raise the driving age to 21.

Bottom line, I have a draft card. The government can call me up at any point and send me somewhere else to kill other people for the national security of my country. Give me a fucking beer.

Yes, that was the popular slogan back when they lowered the drinking age. It was illogical then and it still is.

Side note: The drinking age is actually a state matter. But unfortunate mothers who wished to use their misfortunes as a springboard from which to perpetrate a civil rights tragedy have managed to convince the federal government that keeping registered voters and people eligible for military service from drinking is a high priority. Thus, the federal government basically extorted the states into enforcing a 21 drinking age by threatening to take away their federal highway funding if they did not.

Civil advocacy groups backed with hard numbers convinced states to return the drinking age to 21 well before 1984 when the Federal "21" minimum drinking age bill was enacted. That law was targeted at the few states that had not returned the drinking age to 21. And like you said, it's a state right; they didn't have to do it.

You heard correctly. The civil rights of millions of registered voters and military personnel are being infringed because the states want to build roads. Alcohol violations for minors are yet another way for states to suck money from their residents by forcing a 20 year-old who had a few beers to pay upward of $500.

So imbibing alcoholic beverages is a civil right? Pull my left leg and it plays "Jingle Bells". So you're telling me that every time I refuse to serve a someone under the age of 21 or cut someone off because I believe they've had too much to drink, I'm violating their civil rights? Damm! I'm one oppressive son of a bitch

[Howedar]

Yes, that was the popular slogan back when they lowered the drinking age. It was illogical then and it still is.

By all means, explain why I have all of the responsibilities of a US adult citizen but not all of the freedoms and priviledges.

[Phil Skayhan]

Yes, that was the popular slogan back when they lowered the drinking age. It was illogical then and it still is.

By all means, explain why I have all of the responsibilities of a US adult citizen but not all of the freedoms and priviledges.

Draw me the logical relation between the draft and the drinking age. That was the point.

Anyway, it is a state right to determine laws regarding importation/sale/use of intoxicating liquors as per the 21st Amendment. If it wasn't for that, the Federal Goverment wouldn't have had to "convince" the holdout state to raise the drinking age or, currenly, lower the legal BAC to 0.08 nationwide. It simply would have passed a Federal law mandating the legal drinking age as 21.

What's your constitutional argument?

EDIT: While the Federal government lacks the power to regulate liquor sales by one citizen to another within the territorial limits of a given state, or to prescribe liquor-related business within any state, because of the commerce clause, the Federal government can and does regulate the importation and interstate transportation of intoxicating liquors

[Sea Skimmer]

Lonestar's b-day thread got me thinking, is it fair that a citizen of the US can join the military at 18 ( 17?) and theoritically die for his/her country ( but more likely someone else's country) but it still be illegal for them to drink?

You can join at 17 with parental permission, though currently policy is not to deploy such soldiers overseas, or at least not to combat zones, 200 where pulled from units deploying for Operation Iraq freedom. Though the total number in the military is less then 1000. You can join the British military at 16.

The drinking age should be 18 and I'd like to see the law which prevents you from buying handguns before your 21 knocked back as well, you can own firearms at age 14 in many states after all.

As every 18 year old on this board would quickly think to chime in "HELL NO!"
However, many 18 year olds simply aren't ready for drinking trust me I know some major idiots who should stay away from the keg

Wow, I know people over 21 that shouldn't be drinking either, are utter morons and get into accidents.

[Joe]

The morons who aren't ready to drink are going to drink anyway, illegally. Might as well make it legal for the people who are in fact ready to drink.

[Flash]

By all means, explain why I have all of the responsibilities of a US adult citizen but not all of the freedoms and priviledges.

Exactly. If you are deemed responsible enough to drive, enter into contracts, vote, and even run for public office, why are you not deemed responsible enough to drink?

[Hendrake]

The US legal drinking age is 21?!

That's crazy! I mean, two years ago I didn't even know there where places on earth with a limit on drinking age, and in the US it's not 18 but 21?

I mean, the first time I got drunk I was 10 (not that I'm proud of it)...

Frankly, I don't think it should be any government job to babysit its citizen, especially on this level. The parents, not the gov, should be responsable for the drinking of the children, for the Serpent's sake!

[Solid Snake]

I'm 17 and in the Army. I'm an infantryman. Meaning my specialty, to paraphrase Shep, is "killing people and breaking things". So, i can handle a 5.56mm automatic rifle, which someone of any age would be arrested for having, but i cant handle a bottle of whiskey. I heart the system, dont you?

[Durandal]

The framers certainly thought that a certain age must be reached before running for Federal office. So, while not as many people may be put in danger by an 18 year old drunk driver as an 18yo President, I think you may be underestimating their intestinal fortitude.

Please explain the corollary between running for public office and drinking alcohol. One is public; the other is private.

Now back to the topic. The drinking age was 21 in nearly all the states following the end of Prohibition. In the early 70's, 29 states lowered it to 18-20. This action coincided with the lowering of the voter age. In states that had lowered the age to 18, hard numbers showed that the number of fatal crashes involving youthful drivers increased and that the rate of alcohol involvement jumped significantly. With the current minimum drinking age that number is down to around half. By far, motor vehicle fatalities continues to be the leading cause of death for teenagers even without throwing alcohol into the mix. Perhaps we should raise the driving age to 21.

Completely irrelevant. It's not the government's problem that the majority of parents are obviously too incompetent or apathetic to teach their children about responsibly drinking alcohol. Why the hell should my enjoyment be ruined because other people are stupid? I'm certainly not hurting anyone by sitting back and having a beer after a long day at work.

Furthermore, how many of those killed in drunk driving accidents were legal to drink? Lowering the drinking age also makes 18 year-olds able to buy liquor for those underage, making it more accessible. This is why a drinking age is a stupid idea. Lower it, and you make alcohol more accessible to those underage. Raise it and trample registered voters' right to privacy.

Canada has a drinking age of 19. If 18-20 year-olds are so reckless and prone to drinking and driving, why doesn't Canada have the same problems we did when the drinking age was lower? Where is the evidence that it's actually 18-20 year-olds that are the problem? Is everyone over 21 immune to making reckless decisions?

Yes, that was the popular slogan back when they lowered the drinking age. It was illogical then and it still is.

Proclaiming your stance as fact and leaving it at that does not make it so. The government would consider me responsible enough to handle an M16, something intended only for killing other people, but doesn't think I'm mature enough to decide which recreational substances I put into my body. And yes, before you ask, I am vehemently opposed to the drug war. It's yet another example of lazy parents wanting the government to do their work for them.

Civil advocacy groups backed with hard numbers convinced states to return the drinking age to 21 well before 1984 when the Federal "21" minimum drinking age bill was enacted. That law was targeted at the few states that had not returned the drinking age to 21. And like you said, it's a state right; they didn't have to do it.

The states were extorted into it by the federal government, which is purely asinine.

So imbibing alcoholic beverages is a civil right? Pull my left leg and it plays "Jingle Bells". So you're telling me that every time I refuse to serve a someone under the age of 21 or cut someone off because I believe they've had too much to drink, I'm violating their civil rights? Damm! I'm one oppressive son of a bitch

This has nothing to do with you personally. Stop acting like I have a grudge against bartenders and nightclub owners for not wanting to get their establishments shut down and following a stupid law.

And yes, consumption of alcohol is a civil right. Potential for abuse is a poor justification for outlawing something. It is your right to do with your body as you please. This was decided long before 1984 in Roe v. Wade.

[Vendetta]

Completely irrelevant. It's not the government's problem that the majority of parents are obviously too incompetent or apathetic to teach their children about responsibly drinking alcohol. Why the hell should my enjoyment be ruined because other people are stupid? I'm certainly not hurting anyone by sitting back and having a beer after a long day at work.

Knowing how to responsibly handle alcohol involves two things.

1. Knowing which way to stagger home after twelve pints, numerous alcopops, and a couple of chasers.

2. Knowing enough to find a secluded corner to piss in when you're only halfway home, everywhere's shut, and nature comes a callin' (i.e. not pissing in a bin at a busy traffic island, which I've known people do)

[RedImperator]

Anyway, it is a state right to determine laws regarding importation/sale/use of intoxicating liquors as per the 21st Amendment. If it wasn't for that, the Federal Goverment wouldn't have had to "convince" the holdout state to raise the drinking age or, currenly, lower the legal BAC to 0.08 nationwide. It simply would have passed a Federal law mandating the legal drinking age as 21.

What's your constitutional argument?

I don't know about his constitutional argument, but yours sucks. By your reasoning, ALL legislative power is concentrated at the Federal level, save that specifically delegated to the states or specifically forbidden to all levels. This is as thoroughly twisted and backwards an interpretation of the document as you can possibly get, and requires you to totally disregard the 10th Amendment, which to my knowledge hasn't been repealed.

So find me the clause within the Constitution that gives the Federal government the right to regulate alcohol consumption, outside the 18th and 21st Amendments. While you're at it, explain why Congress felt it needed a Constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol if it already had the power to pass whatever laws it liked. Then you can explain how the 21st delegates Federal power to the states when all it does is give Congress the ability to enforce state alcohol laws outside the state in question.

EDIT: While the Federal government lacks the power to regulate liquor sales by one citizen to another within the territorial limits of a given state, or to prescribe liquor-related business within any state, because of the commerce clause, the Federal government can and does regulate the importation and interstate transportation of intoxicating liquors

This much is correct. It cannot, however, regulate consumption, a state matter (which brings up disturbing questions about the drug war, disturbing anyway to anyone who hasn't realized for years that it's patently unconstitutional, but I digress).

[TrailerParkJawa]

For the most part, teenagers can't handle alcohol responsibly. I think that is the idea behind the age 21 for drinking. However, if we adopted a more European outlook on drinking I think it would reduce the "lets get wasted" mentality of young people because drinking loses (sp?) some of its mystique when its been a normal part of life. ( ie: having a glass of wine with dinner every night )

Besides, being in a regimented system like the military where you receive lots of training on how to fight and how to be disciplined is not the same as letting kids out to go drinking. How much training do we give teenagers to drink responsibly? Almost none, IMO.

[Dorsk 81]

I love living in the UK....

[LadyTevar]

As a person who could have been killed in a head-on collision, caused by a drunk 20-yr old with a fake license, no insurance, and stolen license plates ...

I'm for the Over-21 Law.

Of course, I'm over 21 as well.

[Durandal]

As a person who could have been killed in a head-on collision, caused by a drunk 20-yr old with a fake license, no insurance, and stolen license plates ...

I'd say that underage drinking was the least of this guy's problems.

[Durandal]

Knowing how to responsibly handle alcohol involves two things.

1. Knowing which way to stagger home after twelve pints, numerous alcopops, and a couple of chasers.

2. Knowing enough to find a secluded corner to piss in when you're only halfway home, everywhere's shut, and nature comes a callin' (i.e. not pissing in a bin at a busy traffic island, which I've known people do)

You forgot inducing yourself to vomit before the DD drives everyone home so you don't ralph in his car.

[NapoleonGH]

To respond, it isnt teenagers who cant handle alcohol responsably, its inexperienced people. No matter what the age limit is you will still have people when they first discover the wonders of alcohol wanting to abuse it. There are much fewer risks of alcohol caused deaths in like italy and france where people grow up with alcohol availalbe so it isnt a shock or somehting they cant handle.

Furthermore as an 18 year old citizen of the united states, who is considered responsable enough to vote, drive a car, pilot an aircraft, to be drafted into the military against my will and trained to KILL then given aDEADLY weapon, who is olld enough to but an assault rifle, and old enough to be executed by my own government, and you are trying to say that with all those responsabilities and rights that I shouldnt be allowed to have a glass of red wine with my dinner at a restaurant or in the privacy of my own home? That I shouldnt be allowed to have a beer after an 8 hour day at work (in the summer, then a longer day of studying and school work during the year) to help me relax? That makes sense, old enough to be murdered by the state but not old enough to have a drink.