Thread: Legal Age

Originally Posted by BKratchmer

I think there is a certain logic to the "same age" arguments, but they fail to take into account that beyond responsibility questions there are significant, independently verified, scientific reasons alcohol is particularly harmful to developing brains (perhaps any under 30), particularly those under the 20-23 age range.

Even if a person chooses to use alcohol responsibly at or before age 18 it is inalterably changing brian chemistry and can permanently arrest the development of major sections of the brain.

Okay, but how does having a law saying "no booze for you until you are 21" change the reality that booze has been, and will be, procured and consumed by minors? At minimum, the laws should reflect this.

Don't get me wrong, I am in favour of a LDA, just one that is in balance with other activities associated with the age of majority.

In the U.S often times it's more about where you can buy liquor. States vary as to the days you can buy, where you can buy and where you can consume.

As far as the age goes that's all politics and business.

There are segments of the population that if they had their way prohibition never would have been repealed here.

Originally Posted by Ryan82

Okay, but how does having a law saying "no booze for you until you are 21" change the reality that booze has been, and will be, procured and consumed by minors? At minimum, the laws should reflect this.

Don't get me wrong, I am in favour of a LDA, just one that is in balance with other activities associated with the age of majority.

Well, is what is right defined by what happens?

For instance, based on your reasoning the fact that many homicides occur each year in Miami, we should change the law to reflect that by making it a misdemeanor.

The logical solution to your complaint is not to change a good law, but rather to better enforce it.

Originally Posted by CarrieM

When I was growing up the drinking age was still at 18, I was introduced to alcohol at around 14, My mom always said, if you're going to drink, I would rather you drink at home, so it was no big thing to have a glass of wine or a beer once in a while. Having parental consent also too the "rebelliousness" out of it too as you can't really be cool sneaking around the parents back when there the ones letting you have it. It also taught responsible drinking habits. Not to say we didn't tie one on occasionally, but we got absolutely no sympathy the next day and were actually expected to do more. More of a tough love thing now that I look back at it, but I just thought they did it to torture us at the time.

CarrieM, that's a great common sense approach to this dilemma IMHO, and one that not only reflects the European model but sounds a bit like my upbringing too. Alcohol education goes a long ways towards responsible drinking habits as an adult, much more so than laws.

Originally Posted by BKratchmer

Well, is what is right defined by what happens?

For instance, based on your reasoning the fact that many homicides occur each year in Miami, we should change the law to reflect that by making it a misdemeanor.

The logical solution to your complaint is not to change a good law, but rather to better enforce it.

Apples and oranges...

No one disputes that homicide is wrong, just as most would say that the ability to have a beer before 21 should not only be acceptable (due to the lower age of majority for other things) but is inevitable. I'm not sure how better enforcement will remedy the situation, other than to clog up the legal system further and to line the pockets of those who stand to profit from it. Like I said previously, education is likely the better route.

BKratchmer, when did you have your first drink? Was it on your 21st birthday (or whatever the age was when you reached it)? You obviously lived to tell the story...

Well, if you want to judge the effectiveness of a law or policy you have to present some data. Anecdotal evidence isn't really the best way to make policy.

Every single law gets broken, the only thing that can prevent somebody from doing that is the threat of the consequences of breaking it.
Now, the question is what is the cost of enforcing it and how does it stack against the cost of not enforcing it, or the situation when the law doesn't exist in the first place.

So here are the questions that have to be answered are: If there is a different or no age limit to drinking, what would be the rate of people drinking? How much higher/lower and how much more/less costly that would be to the society? What about drugs, tobacco?

I'm sure there are people who do care about these things, but at the end of the day the reality seems to be that it boils down to money, politics, talking points, etc, i.e. this is decided in a completely irrational manner, no matter which outcome.

So, unless we start looking and discussing scientific data, this thread will be just like any other political/religious thread.

In my ideal world before somebody is allowed to vote, drive, shoot, breed, and any other activity with the potential to cause big damage to others, they will have to be evaluated that they can handle that responsibility. The age doesn't matter at all, some will have to spend their lifetime without being able to do any of these things (legally that is, but in my ideal dictatorship nobody is able to break the laws either).

Originally Posted by Bruce

There needs to be a uniform age of majority, be it 14 or 37. If one is mature enough to make life or death decisions behind the wheel one should also be mature enough to decide to drive drunk, having just returned from a tour with the Marines, and while celibrating successfully inseminating the neighbors darling daughter, and to vote for the politician who promised to introduce a bill to pay for all child care costs.

Brilliant post Bruce! Thanks!

In the last few years the drinking age here in New Zealand was lowered from 20 to 18. Currently there are moves afoot to change it back - completely or in part. That would mean that you could buy in a licensed (and therefore supervised) bar at 18 but not get off-licence alcohol to take home until 20.

It was 20 when I was young and I started "drinking" at about 14 with the occasional binge when away with older friends. Wasn't a problem to purchase in a bottle store by about 16, though they are far stricter these days.

Alcohol wasn't a big part of my home life but had been trying the occasional beer or wine since about 10.

As a paramedic I see the effects of teenage drinking on a weekly basis. Not at all uncommon to get called to paralytic 14 year olds. The biggest problem seems to be that no-one is taking care of them. When I was that age the older ones looked out for the younger ones. Now they expect an ambulance to take them to hospital. Don't know how many times I've explained that the hospital doesn't need to watch someone vomit, they've seen it before!

Can be very interesting dropping kids home to their parents at 03:00. Have explained to a few that yelling isn't going to be remembered now... wait til they've had a few hours sleep and then tell them off.

My own kids are 8. They've been allowed to try Dad's beer since about 6. One approves and one doesn't. But they are already being exposed to adults drinking sensibly and the concept that alcohol can be consumed sensibly.

Cheers

Kids at the age or 14 or 15 feel old enough to test their limits and there is no way that law could stop it for good. It can be made difficult but that is all.

I took my first beers at the age of 14 or 15. Most parents that time maybe thought that kids are going to drink anyway so there's no need for them to go and hide somewhere while they could as well do it open and safer. I got yells every now and then but now i think my grandparents did just for the record and then went laughing behind the corner.
We took care of mates if someone got too drunk.
Nowadays it's maybe different. Even kids do not always care about their friends. Maybe it is just the sign of these times and subject to another thread.

My daughter got home very drunk first time she was 17 and my son did the same at 15. I was happy to see that their friends took them here. At morning i gave them a little sermon and then fried some egg and greasy sausage. Not sort of a food you want to eat or even smell when hangover, but i said that you had a hard evening and now it is your time to eat this all to get some strength. Want it or not. And then i went laughing behind the corner.

Another thing to remember with kids is to show them whatever they do, they can always come back home and not be too scared what happens here. It is not accepting everything they do but rather showing them that we do care.

I think that the best way to teach kids how to deal with alcohol is to show some example of civilized drinking and not making alcohol some miracle taboo that should be taken fast in some hiding place. I've been seriously drunk many times but never in sight of my kids.

Maybe..we should just go back to the 1800's when you either made it or not in the gene pool based on wether you were smart/wise or smart enough to learn to be wise ,and to learn how to suvive and get with the program ,and everything in life was not an entitlement. Yes...sounds good. Shooting your mouth off and being stupid,foolish and unwise in realms of drinking,politics,war,sexual affairs etc. would make or break you. And while we are at it, let's bring back dueling. True it would be scary to have unwise people running around with weaponery(drunk no less)....But nature knows better than us eh. Sooner or later things would even out to the wise and not so wise.Then maybe a kid who just got done helping the family out with chores i.e using dangerouse tools,hard backbreaking work. And was a well learned manchild instead of some college schooled rich kid who learned how to be a drunk ,take cocaine or meth and copulate on mommy and daddies pocketbook ,could maybe enjoy a beer responsibly. Sorry...got a little heated there. I'm of the later 40's age group and I get a little touchy . Hrmph ! Waiter...check please !