(04-23-2014 09:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 09:03 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 08:52 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 08:51 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 08:49 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Then why have an age limit?

I don't know, we have a love of legislation.

So you feel it is ok to allow an 8yo to drink?

I got one small glass of wine on baptism days since I was young. Used to get one for Sunday dinner too.

But no, of course I don't think we should have 8 year olds popping a beer open should be legal in the context in which we are speaking.

Then you have a clear understanding why we have a drinking age and have made no logical argument that it needs to be lowered.

It should be lowered because for every other significant thing in a person's life we treat someone 18 years old as an adult. Fighting our enemies in the military, signing and being held as an adult for contracts, getting married, going to adult prison if convicted of crimes....and on and on.

You may be in favor of raising the age of consent for these things, but the fact is that 18 has been determined as adulthood, drinking alcohol should be no different.

I can never reconcile an 18 year old risking his life in Iraq as being okay, but drinking a beer is not.

You want to put a damper on drinking and driving - make it a mandatory 10 year prison sentence if caught - see if that doesn't lower drinking and driving.

(04-23-2014 02:11 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-23-2014 02:00 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  I know 18 year olds perfectly capable of drinking responsibly. I know 50 year olds who have never, and cannot now, do it.

You know, I hear you people make silly comments like that and talk about freedom and liberty, but IMO you are doing nothing more than aiding the left in the dumbing down of our country.

The Son of Man came eating and drinking and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners

IMO this isn't a libertarian, conservative or liberal thing and we need to get out of the habit of using one of those descriptors to just be a word to be your go-to negative. It's intellectually lazy.

I personally know people from all three groups who stand on both sides of the issue.

(04-23-2014 10:13 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  IMO this isn't a libertarian, conservative or liberal thing and we need to get out of the habit of using one of those descriptors to just be a word to be your go-to negative. It's intellectually lazy.

I personally know people from all three groups who stand on both sides of the issue.

Agreed. I think we should do the same thing in regards to being good stewards of the environment.

Ill stand by my position...and I think I am in the majority. If I can be dragged into battle against my will?...I can drink a fcking beer. I don't give a damn what age that is allowed. Just be consistent.

(04-24-2014 05:50 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Ill stand by my position...and I think I am in the majority. If I can be dragged into battle against my will?...I can drink a fcking beer. I don't give a damn what age that is allowed. Just be consistent.

Yep, and the legal age of adulthood, right or wrong can be debated, is 18 years old. The age was raised due to insurance lobbying and MADD tugging at the heart strings of moms. The insurers got to keep their premiums high for young drivers while paying out less in claims.

I don't argue at all that raising the legal drinking age has lowered traffic fatalities, but would also argue that the overall crackdown on drinking and driving lowered fatalities as well.

It's ironic that when I turned 18 in 1962, the legal drinking age was 18 in New York. I was legal at my senior prom.

The irony continues in that in Ontario, the drinking age was 21, so when my friends and I turned that age, we rented summer cottages in Crystal Beach, along the northern shore of Lake Erie, to escape the teenagers.

Now it's 21 in NY and 19 in Canada.

(04-24-2014 05:50 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Ill stand by my position...and I think I am in the majority. If I can be dragged into battle against my will?...I can drink a fcking beer. I don't give a damn what age that is allowed. Just be consistent.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong.

• The behavior of 18-year-olds directly affects the behavior of 15-17 year-olds, reducing drinking behavior for the prior also reduces it for the latter.

• A drinking age of 18 is associated with adverse outcomes among births to young mothers.

• There is potential harm alcohol may have on the developing brain, which is maturing well into the 20s. 18 year olds are not physically or mentally adults. It's no different than giving booze to a 12 year old.

• When teens drink they tend to drink heavily

• The later a youth is introduced to alcohol the less likely they are to have problems surrounding drinking; DWIs, school dropout rates, dependency, traffic crashes and violent crimes. Waiting until 21 to consume alcohol gives them the best odds.

sources: U.S. Department of Transportation, National High Traffic Administration-Underage Drinking Prevention Project; MN Department of Health and Education; MN Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety.

(04-24-2014 08:35 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 05:50 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Ill stand by my position...and I think I am in the majority. If I can be dragged into battle against my will?...I can drink a fcking beer. I don't give a damn what age that is allowed. Just be consistent.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong.

I tend to agree with Fo Shizzle. If I'm expected to take a bullet, I should be able to drink a beer. It's not a matter of age, it's a matter of maturity. The two are not directly related.

(04-24-2014 08:52 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 08:35 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 05:50 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Ill stand by my position...and I think I am in the majority. If I can be dragged into battle against my will?...I can drink a fcking beer. I don't give a damn what age that is allowed. Just be consistent.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong.

I tend to agree with Fo Shizzle. If I'm expected to take a bullet, I should be able to drink a beer. It's not a matter of age, it's a matter of maturity. The two are not directly related.

It's a matter of statistics and health consequences associated with giving alcohol to people who are not fully developed.

It's all a moot point anyway. The drinking age is not going to be lowered to 18. It's a pipe dream for young libertarians who don't have kids of their own.

(04-24-2014 08:57 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 08:52 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 08:35 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 05:50 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Ill stand by my position...and I think I am in the majority. If I can be dragged into battle against my will?...I can drink a fcking beer. I don't give a damn what age that is allowed. Just be consistent.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong.

I tend to agree with Fo Shizzle. If I'm expected to take a bullet, I should be able to drink a beer. It's not a matter of age, it's a matter of maturity. The two are not directly related.

It's a matter of statistics and health consequences associated with giving alcohol to people who are not fully developed.

It's all a moot point anyway. The drinking age is not going to be lowered to 18. It's a pipe dream for young libertarians who don't have kids of their own.

I agree. Wonder if they could move both the legal age and drinking age to may 19 or 20?

(04-24-2014 08:39 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  • The behavior of 18-year-olds directly affects the behavior of 15-17 year-olds, reducing drinking behavior for the prior also reduces it for the latter.

• A drinking age of 18 is associated with adverse outcomes among births to young mothers.

• There is potential harm alcohol may have on the developing brain, which is maturing well into the 20s. 18 year olds are not physically or mentally adults. It's no different than giving booze to a 12 year old.

• When teens drink they tend to drink heavily

• The later a youth is introduced to alcohol the less likely they are to have problems surrounding drinking; DWIs, school dropout rates, dependency, traffic crashes and violent crimes. Waiting until 21 to consume alcohol gives them the best odds.

sources: U.S. Department of Transportation, National High Traffic Administration-Underage Drinking Prevention Project; MN Department of Health and Education; MN Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety.

Do you think your sources may have an agenda?

I wonder if having an 18 year old in a war zone has an adverse impact on his mental health and could lead to bad physical outcomes?

I don't disagree that there are some negative consequences of drinking to excess, but I'd say that's probably true at any age.

The fact is that we treat 18 year olds as an adult in every way I can think of save for drinking age. If an 18 year old stupidly signs a contract that's bad for him at 18, we don't say "Ah, you're only 18, we'll give you a pass on this, forget about it". No, he's treated just like any other adult.

You won't change my opinion on this and I'm betting I won't change yours.

I just can't personally reconcile treating an 18 year old as an adult for everything, both good or bad consequences, and not allowing them to drink alcohol. and it's not like I'm anywhere close to that age.

(04-24-2014 09:03 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 08:39 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  • The behavior of 18-year-olds directly affects the behavior of 15-17 year-olds, reducing drinking behavior for the prior also reduces it for the latter.

• A drinking age of 18 is associated with adverse outcomes among births to young mothers.

• There is potential harm alcohol may have on the developing brain, which is maturing well into the 20s. 18 year olds are not physically or mentally adults. It's no different than giving booze to a 12 year old.

• When teens drink they tend to drink heavily

• The later a youth is introduced to alcohol the less likely they are to have problems surrounding drinking; DWIs, school dropout rates, dependency, traffic crashes and violent crimes. Waiting until 21 to consume alcohol gives them the best odds.

sources: U.S. Department of Transportation, National High Traffic Administration-Underage Drinking Prevention Project; MN Department of Health and Education; MN Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety.

Do you think your sources may have an agenda?

I wonder if having an 18 year old in a war zone has an adverse impact on his mental health and could lead to bad physical outcomes?

I don't disagree that there are some negative consequences of drinking to excess, but I'd say that's probably true at any age.

The fact is that we treat 18 year olds as an adult in every way I can think of save for drinking age. If an 18 year old stupidly signs a contract that's bad for him at 18, we don't say "Ah, you're only 18, we'll give you a pass on this, forget about it". No, he's treated just like any other adult.

You won't change my opinion on this and I'm betting I won't change yours.

I just can't personally reconcile treating an 18 year old as an adult for everything, both good or bad consequences, and not allowing them to drink alcohol. and it's not like I'm anywhere close to that age.

What agenda? Reducing the amount of deaths, birth defects and other damaging factors related to drinking?

I think it's pretty silly to assume that the amount of traffic fatalities wouldn't rise by lowering the drinking age.

(04-23-2014 04:00 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  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.

35, class of 1997.

(04-23-2014 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Help me out with this. Religious Organizations don't want someone telling them their birth control rights?

Yes... such as the churches that don't believe in birth control but they were going to be forced to provide it as part of health care coverage through Obamacare.

(04-23-2014 08:44 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Drinking should never be considered a reward or right of passage.

Except that our prohibitionist laws have done exactly that. The is the point I made from the very beginning... your thoughts on how to handle it also just pushes the whole "right of passage" views further. How many people at the age of 21 went out and got hammered? I know I did.

(04-23-2014 09:22 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Try reading what I wrote. I said those were symptoms of a collapsing society. It's about infecting a culture with liberalism WHICH IS exactly what libertarians do.

So what you are saying is that the human race has been collapsing since the day it was created/evolved? I mean, since the beginning of time humans have been finding ways to get high. The most "advanced" society ever got was Adam and Eve and it has been downhill since then?

It is pretty apparent you believe in having a fundamentalist Christian society. Outlaw all intoxicants, take away a woman's right to vote, stone the homosexuals... based on your posts on this board you certainly present yourself that way if you aren't actually that way.

(04-24-2014 09:14 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:03 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 08:39 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  • The behavior of 18-year-olds directly affects the behavior of 15-17 year-olds, reducing drinking behavior for the prior also reduces it for the latter.

• A drinking age of 18 is associated with adverse outcomes among births to young mothers.

• There is potential harm alcohol may have on the developing brain, which is maturing well into the 20s. 18 year olds are not physically or mentally adults. It's no different than giving booze to a 12 year old.

• When teens drink they tend to drink heavily

• The later a youth is introduced to alcohol the less likely they are to have problems surrounding drinking; DWIs, school dropout rates, dependency, traffic crashes and violent crimes. Waiting until 21 to consume alcohol gives them the best odds.

sources: U.S. Department of Transportation, National High Traffic Administration-Underage Drinking Prevention Project; MN Department of Health and Education; MN Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety.

Do you think your sources may have an agenda?

I wonder if having an 18 year old in a war zone has an adverse impact on his mental health and could lead to bad physical outcomes?

I don't disagree that there are some negative consequences of drinking to excess, but I'd say that's probably true at any age.

The fact is that we treat 18 year olds as an adult in every way I can think of save for drinking age. If an 18 year old stupidly signs a contract that's bad for him at 18, we don't say "Ah, you're only 18, we'll give you a pass on this, forget about it". No, he's treated just like any other adult.

You won't change my opinion on this and I'm betting I won't change yours.

I just can't personally reconcile treating an 18 year old as an adult for everything, both good or bad consequences, and not allowing them to drink alcohol. and it's not like I'm anywhere close to that age.

What agenda? Reducing the amount of deaths, birth defects and other damaging factors related to drinking?

I think it's pretty silly to assume that the amount of traffic fatalities wouldn't rise by lowering the drinking age.

I see you ignored the 18 year old on a battlefield, think that has some adverse impacts?

We as humans do a lot of stuff that isn't good for us.

(04-24-2014 10:12 AM)Crebman Wrote:  I see you ignored the 18 year old on a battlefield, think that has some adverse impacts?

We as humans do a lot of stuff that isn't good for us.

I've read studies about our generation of people "working behind computer screens" having major health issues due to poor posture, and lack of exercise. Should we ban those jobs or force companies to pay for some sort of exercise class during the work day?