Reduce/eliminate the drinking age

[fushigi]

Great article on Reason. Yet more evidence that illegalizing + enforcement =/= elimination of substances/activities:

It may have negligibly reduced total underage consumption, but those who did consume were much more likely to do so behind closed doors and to drink to excess in the short time they had access to alcohol. <snip> McCardell explains that the drop in highway fatalities often cited by supporters of the 21 minimum age actually began in the late 1970s, well before the federal drinking age set in. What's more, McCardell recently explained in an online chat for the "Chronicle of Higher Education," the drop is better explained by safer and better built cars, increased seat belt use and increasing awareness of the dangers of drunken driving than in a federal standard. The age at highest risk for an alcohol-related auto fatality is 21, followed by 22 and 23, an indication that delaying first exposure to alcohol until young adults are away from home may not be the best way to introduce them to drink.

There's no drinking age in China, and I never see kids drinking. In Japan, it's 19, and (in Tokyo, at least) I saw kids hammered all the time. Definitely, in the US, kids don't have too much trouble getting ahold of alcohol. Furthermore, when they can't get it, they just turn to drugs, whip-its, airplane glue, or something else.

Kids will get drunk/high no matter what we do. Why have a drinking age that just gives us higher enforcement costs without any benefit?

At the very least, we can lower it to 18 and eliminate a huge bit of irony in the US:

It makes little sense that America considers an 18-year-old mature enough to marry, to sign a contract, to vote and to fight and die for his country, but not mature enough to decide whether or not to have a beer.

[CoffeeSaint]

Yeah, I'm going to vote for eliminating the age entirely.
The biggest problem I have with that solutionis the message it would send to kids, that now it's time to PARTY!!!! But I would hope that over time, that urge would subside into an acceptance of alcohol as simply another drink.

But I do wonder: if our culture does create kids that will get wasted no matter what, is it really a good idea to give them easy access to an intoxicant? So instead of making them seek out airplane glue, we give them a culturally acceptable drug? Are we making more alcoholics instead of less by doing this?

All I know is, stupid kids (and stupid adults) are not made less stupid by laws.

[The Bacon Guy]

My view on this is similar to my view on illegal drugs: Kids are going to drink regardless of the legal status of doing so. Pretty much everyone I know has been drinking in bars from sixteen or earlier, and drinking at home or in the streets is easily possible from much earlier. Trying to prevent this isn't working and it's wasting my money.

[Autolykos]

Quote by: CoffeeSaint Yeah, I'm going to vote for eliminating the age entirely. The biggest problem I have with that solutionis the message it would send to kids, that now it's time to PARTY!!!! But I would hope that over time, that urge would subside into an acceptance of alcohol as simply another drink.

I think that "Party Time!" would indeed happen, at first. However, I'd like to think that there would still be some semblance of parental/adult control. After all, just because it's legal for a child to purchase alcohol does not mean that 1) alcohol vendors would sell to children, regardless of age or size; or 2) parents would allow children to bring alcohol into their house.

On another note, notice that the "Party Time!" situation described above is the common defense for keeping it illegal. Thus the State perpetuates its prohibitions and regulations after the fact.

But I do wonder: if our culture does create kids that will get wasted no matter what, is it really a good idea to give them easy access to an intoxicant? So instead of making them seek out airplane glue, we give them a culturally acceptable drug? Are we making more alcoholics instead of less by doing this?

Er, you mean there isn't easy access (albeit illegal) already?

You bring up an interesting question, though. Does "our culture" (I'm not clear on what that means to you) really create kids that will get wasted no matter what? If so, how does it?

All I know is, stupid kids (and stupid adults) are not made less stupid by laws.

Hear, hear!

- Rob

[tman_ndsu08]

It's fairly stupid not to have it at 18.

Any kid that wants to drink is already doing so by that age. Often in public too.

[ZNFYRH]

Eliminate the age and let store owners reserve the right to deny sale to someone based on age.

It sucks, but if a clean cut, well-spoken 15 year old comes in to buy a bottle of wine, an obnoxious 19 year old comes in to buy a case of beer, and a millionaire 40 year old comes in to buy a bottle of champagne, the store owner can deny the transaction to any of them.

[Autolykos]

How does that suck?

- Rob

[5010]

Why should an 18 year old act mature if they are treated like a child?

I say lower it.

[ZNFYRH]

It sucks because people are being discriminated against based solely on the biases of the store owner.

Personally, I think that's the way it should be.

That's the nice thing about eliminating the age restriction; it's not saying you have to sell to anyone... it's just saying that you aren't required to deny them.

I'd rather see store owners put up signs that say, "Alcohol sold to 30+ only" or "I reserve the right to deny sale"

[brien]

Lower the age to anywhere you want but increase the penalties with regard to alcohol related crimes that may accompany that lowered age. Alcohol consumption bears responsibility.

[Kamehameha34]

I think there should be a competency test completely independent of age.

[brien]

Quote by: Kamehameha34 I think there should be a competency test completely independent of age.

LOL on this one. Do this and you will bankrupt the alcohol industry. Nice try though....

[Kamehameha34]

If murder wasn't illegal, and proscribing it would bankrupt the gun industry, would that be justification to leave it alone?

[brien]

Quote by: Kamehameha34 If murder wasn't illegal, and proscribing it would bankrupt the gun industry, would that be justification to leave it alone?

With all due repsect, please don't be silly with your "what if's"

[Kamehameha34]

Copout.

The situation I submitted is logically analogical to your argument. You think that profits for brewing companies have priority.

[5010]

Now that's interesting. Imagine a license to drink. Similar to driving, we could have drinking schools and a drinking test. If you are caught drinking recklessly or cause drinking accidents (party fouls?), perhaps you could be fined or get your drinking license suspended. If caught drinking without a license, you could also be given a citation. OK I'm joking about party fouls, more like if you do something dangerous while buzzed.

However, even with driving there is an age limit. A cop can safely assume that a young child behind the wheel isn't licensed. But if a cop sees someone who appears old enough driving well, they assume they are licensed. They only get in trouble if they do something else and are caught without the license.

[DEEJ85]

The legal drinking age in Canada is 19

I don't think there is any more crime happening up here then in the U.S.

It seems silly to me how U.S. citizens aren't capable or mature enough to make responsible decision about alcohol at the age of 18 or 19.

While here in Canada you ARE capable and responsible enough to make the same responsible decision.

In the U.S. the age where you become a consenting adult is 18(i think) but your still not "old" enough to make consenting decision to drink?

Either you are old enough to consent and make decisions for yourself at 18, yet the Government is restricting your right to make a decision to drink.

or

21 is the actual age at which you are able to competently make decisions and consent. This would bring all your other decision making abilities that you have at 18 into question. Therefore they should raise the age of consenting adulthood to 21.

[fushigi]

Quote by: 5010 Now that's interesting. Imagine a license to drink. Similar to driving, we could have drinking schools and a drinking test. If you are caught drinking recklessly or cause drinking accidents (party fouls?), perhaps you could be fined or get your drinking license suspended. If caught drinking without a license, you could also be given a citation. OK I'm joking about party fouls, more like if you do something dangerous while buzzed.

But wouldn't this just create the same situation that exists now (illegal acquisition of alcohol, with all the negative results?)

[fushigi]

Quote by: 5010 Why should an 18 year old act mature if they are treated like a child? I say lower it.

Same thing could be said for 16 year-olds, who have the right to drive. Lowering it isn't enough. You have to eliminate it completely IMO.

[ZNFYRH]

Age is no indication of maturity or responsibility.

Any age chosen is, therefore, just a number.

Since it's just a number, it could be any number.

I like 5010's comments about the drinking license. Makes sense to me.