(04-23-2014 03:40 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:26 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  I am getting the feeling we have some Baptist posters here.

Southern Baptist here, and while I may sound hypocritical when I say that at the age of 18, I was going to my GF's house and drinking beer after church every Sunday, I'll also say that I knew the consequences of what would happen if I got caught, so I was always responsible and never drove home until I wasn't intoxicated anymore. I don't think Baptists are as hard up about things like this as you think. We'd get out of church service and light a cigarette as soon as we got outside.

In your state the article I posted says you can legally drink, under 21, on private property with no parental supervision.

(04-23-2014 03:28 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:18 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Underage drinkers who drink and drive can get a DUI below .08

By lowering the drinking age the amount of under 21 year olds getting a DUI in this regard will go down. But I must stress that this is just one of a number of factors to consider

No, I think you have to use the 18-21 age like a learners permit period. If an 18 year old drives with ANY BAC they lose 3 whole years. If you are 19 and DUI then legal drinking age is now 23.

I think if you want to drink at 18, you have to go to a class sort of like hunter-safety or concealed carry.

Making it for beer and wine only I wouldn't be opposed to.

The goal is not to have laissez-faire drinking at 18. Its to encourage learning how to drink responsibly.

Ok Arky, NOW you're making some sense. However, if you're responsible enough to drink at the age of 18 to 20, you won't get a DUI and the whole thing would be for nothing. I did it, I won't lie, but I did it responsibly. And I felt the same then as I do now. I do like the idea of SUSPENDING your license for 3 years if you get caught drinking and driving underage. I believe that would stop a lot of people from trying once some cases were reported. But if you want to fix things, you have to be more strict, not more lax. 18 y/o's can already legally drink on private property. They just can't buy it, and the driving laws that apply to 21+ also apply to them.

Poland, Canada, England, France, Sweden, Ireland, New Zealand, all 18 or lower.

You missed my point Dixie and Ark30s as well. I think the European model of allowing drinking in moderation from a younger age and overall education/respect for the substance is much more effective than an arbitrary law that is not really followed anyway. One approach is easy to grasp in that it is just a classic ban which rarely works and the other is truly understanding the issue at hand and trying to make people have a more responsible attitude from a young age.

(04-23-2014 03:35 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:28 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

Quote:Personal responsibility makes more sense to me.

Apparently you agree with me, and don't want to acknowledge that fact, since you didn't answer my question.

I did. Making more laws in this country does not prevent things. Teaching personal responsibility does.

So teach responsibility. You can legally drink on private property as long as you're responsible. How do you learn what it is to be irresponsible? You act stupid and get caught. Hard lessons are the easiest learned. Dropping the age limit isn't going to make people more responsible though.

I was all for it at 18. Now I don't want to see a bunch of kids at the bar. But there are a lot of.benefits and consequences on either side (like some have said). Its a balancing act and right now our tight rope needs tightening before we can give this the amount of attention needed to make good decisions.

Also if you can have shrapnel from an IED render your private parts useless in Iraq then you are sure as hell old enough to buy a beer at the bar. I guess I am just more patriotic than most though tbh

(04-23-2014 03:52 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  Also if you can have shrapnel from an IED render your private parts useless in Iraq then you are sure as hell old enough to buy a beer at the bar. I guess I am just more patriotic than most though tbh

Meh..I considered enlisting at 18 and not being old enough to
drink a beer didn't play into my decision. If kids were getting drafted id feel differently. Many will drink underage anyway.

(04-23-2014 03:37 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:35 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:28 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

Quote:Personal responsibility makes more sense to me.

Apparently you agree with me, and don't want to acknowledge that fact, since you didn't answer my question.

I did. Making more laws in this country does not prevent things. Teaching personal responsibility does.

Uh that is just not true. Getting alcohol was much harder for me before I turned 21.

So what John is saying is that he wants anarchy with education.

He wants it to be easier to buy because it'll "teach personal responsibility" and stop kids from getting high on pills, which, if I'm not mistaken, gives you a better feeling than alcohol. So what he fails to realize is that people who are on drugs aren't going to stop, because they can NOW legally get alcohol and will mix those drugs with alcohol and intensify the high they have. Talk about a lack of common sense.

(04-23-2014 03:52 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  I was all for it at 18. Now I don't want to see a bunch of kids at the bar. But there are a lot of.benefits and consequences on either side (like some have said). Its a balancing act and right now our tight rope needs tightening before we can give this the amount of attention needed to make good decisions.

Bar owners are free to say 21 and over, even if legal age is 18. Some will cater to the young crowd, usually around universities.

(04-23-2014 03:56 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  He wants it to be easier to buy because it'll "teach personal responsibility" and stop kids from getting high on pills, which, if I'm not mistaken, gives you a better feeling than alcohol. So what he fails to realize is that people who are on drugs aren't going to stop, because they can NOW legally get alcohol and will mix those drugs with alcohol and intensify the high they have. Talk about a lack of common sense.

WPDAWG08 says it best...

Quote:I think the European model of allowing drinking in moderation from a younger age and overall education/respect for the substance is much more effective than an arbitrary law that is not really followed anyway. One approach is easy to grasp in that it is just a classic ban which rarely works and the other is truly understanding the issue at hand and trying to make people have a more responsible attitude from a young age.

The minimum legal drinking age varies dramatically around the world. Most such laws apply only to drinking alcoholic beverages in public locations. The only country with a minimum legal age for consuming alcohol at home is the United Kingdom, which prohibits drinking below the age of six.

The average (mean) minimum legal drinking age around the globe is 15.9. The majority of countries have set the drinking age at 18. In fifty countries the minimum age is lower than 18 and in 12 countries it is higher than 18.

The enforcement of minimum legal drinking ages also varies widely between countries and often within countries. In many nations the law isn’t generally enforced unless alcohol is abused and associated with behavioral problems.

Internationally, the average age at which drinking alcohol first occurs is 12 years and about 80% of young people begin drinking alcoholic beverages regularly at age 15 or younger according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

(04-23-2014 03:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:52 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  I was all for it at 18. Now I don't want to see a bunch of kids at the bar. But there are a lot of.benefits and consequences on either side (like some have said). Its a balancing act and right now our tight rope needs tightening before we can give this the amount of attention needed to make good decisions.

Bar owners are free to say 21 and over, even if legal age is 18. Some will cater to the young crowd, usually around universities.

Yeah but if the age is 18 why would they? Do bars currently exist that are say, 25 and up?

(04-23-2014 03:38 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:37 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Uh that is just not true. Getting alcohol was much harder for me before I turned 21.

I had no shortage of people willing to buy me alcohol underage. Women get it even easier.

I'm not sure how old you are, but I'm 35 and I was scared to death of the risk I would have taken, when I drank underage, of getting caught by my parents or the police... And in 1997, it was so much easier to avoid police. Had it been legal, I would have gotten it much easier and would have probably done crap I shouldn't have done.

(04-23-2014 03:59 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:52 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  I was all for it at 18. Now I don't want to see a bunch of kids at the bar. But there are a lot of.benefits and consequences on either side (like some have said). Its a balancing act and right now our tight rope needs tightening before we can give this the amount of attention needed to make good decisions.

Bar owners are free to say 21 and over, even if legal age is 18. Some will cater to the young crowd, usually around universities.

Yeah but if the age is 18 why would they? Do bars currently exist that are say, 25 and up?

We have one here that is actually 35 and up.

(04-23-2014 03:42 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:40 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:26 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  I am getting the feeling we have some Baptist posters here.

Southern Baptist here, and while I may sound hypocritical when I say that at the age of 18, I was going to my GF's house and drinking beer after church every Sunday, I'll also say that I knew the consequences of what would happen if I got caught, so I was always responsible and never drove home until I wasn't intoxicated anymore. I don't think Baptists are as hard up about things like this as you think. We'd get out of church service and light a cigarette as soon as we got outside.

I am really teasing some, and I think there might be differences across the country. When I was 18 or 17, never touched alcohol on Sunday. 100% study and prepare for Monday at school. I drank on many Fri-Sat though.

It really makes no difference either way. Like Dixie stated before, if you're 18 and drink with 16 to 18 year olds, you're likely to act immature and be irresponsible, but if you drink with older people, you want to be like them and not annoy them by acting like a kid. Since I always drank with my GF's parents, I had to be mature.

(04-23-2014 03:12 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  18 = legal adult = you can buy alcohol, booze, beer, wine etc.

I am all for the drinking age being 18. It used to to be the case here in Ohio. You could go to bars and drink beer.
For hard liquor it was 21 I believe.
Ohio, along with 41 other states, do allow alcohol consumption if you are under 21 (and usually at least 18).
An example would be, you are 18 and your parents have friends over (or not have friends over), your parents
are home....it is perfectly legal for the 18 year old to drink. Some states you can legally drink if you are
on non alcohol private property with zero parental supervision.

In other states, if you are with your parents, it is legal to drink at an alcohol selling premises, like a restaurant,
if you are under 21.
http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/YouthIss...1gbEaKwVmw
41 states
Key

1 = On alcohol-selling premises with parental consent

2 = On private non-alcohol-selling premises with parental consent

3 = On private non-alcohol-selling premises without need of parental consent

4 = For religious purposes

5 = For medical purposes

6 = For educational purposes

7 = For governmental purposes

8 = For good Samaritan purposes (reporting alcohol-related medical emergencies of other persons)

Wait, so 9 states allow you to drink at a bar or restaurant under 21 if your parents are there? Wild..

(04-23-2014 03:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:40 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 03:26 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  I am getting the feeling we have some Baptist posters here.

Southern Baptist here, and while I may sound hypocritical when I say that at the age of 18, I was going to my GF's house and drinking beer after church every Sunday, I'll also say that I knew the consequences of what would happen if I got caught, so I was always responsible and never drove home until I wasn't intoxicated anymore. I don't think Baptists are as hard up about things like this as you think. We'd get out of church service and light a cigarette as soon as we got outside.

In your state the article I posted says you can legally drink, under 21, on private property with no parental supervision.

Yeah I didn't see it but I've mentioned a couple times that you can do it legally here, just can't buy it or go to a bar... Or drive of course. Louisiana was also the last state to change their drinking age from 18 to 21... I believe it was in 1995, right before my sister turned 18.

(04-23-2014 03:49 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  You missed my point Dixie and Ark30s as well. I think the European model of allowing drinking in moderation from a younger age and overall education/respect for the substance is much more effective than an arbitrary law that is not really followed anyway. One approach is easy to grasp in that it is just a classic ban which rarely works and the other is truly understanding the issue at hand and trying to make people have a more responsible attitude from a young age.

Then we face this:

The honest kids wait for 21 or drink behind closed doors while the others don't. Once the age is lowered, we face the risk of those honest kids making alcoholically stupid decisions.

So let's just get to actual issue. What is the current obsession legalizing pot and lowering the drinking age? Are we not ready to admit that it is the liberalization of our society. Are we willing to acknowledge why that is happening and who is pushing these ideas?

1. Legalizing pot.
2. Lowering the drinking age.
3. Giving clemency to imprisoned drug dealers.
4. Decriminalizing drugs in general.

I'm not interested in the bogus argument about liberty and freedom. That argument can be used to justify anything.

I want to see if anyone can pinpoint the real reason this has become such a stylish cause.