Thread: Legal Age

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 ![/QUOTE]You're a daisy if ya do.~Doc Holliday~

Really am sorry if I got a little carried away there,feels like I did. Apologies to all,this is a gentlemanly place after all and I would rather have a good shave or Heh.. a hard boiled egg to reference someones quote I read on this site. Good cheer to all.

Originally Posted by Nightblade

Really am sorry if I got a little carried away there,feels like I did. Apologies to all,this is a gentlemanly place after all and I would rather have a good shave or Heh.. a hard boiled egg to reference someones quote I read on this site. Good cheer to all.

Actually what you say has merit. I was taught to drink in the west Texas oil fields when a young man who was willing to work on a crew (16 for me) at that time could step up to the bar. But, you learned quickly in that in a man's man environment that words and actions meant something, and you were responsable for them...If you over drank, shot off your mouth then folks were apt to cold **** you and throw out into the street and you couldn't go back until you learned some manners..The problem today is young men think like women (and I steal this famous quote grom Jack Nicholson) "to think like a woman; all I do is think like a man and take away reason and accountablility"......Make people more accountable for their action and I guarantee they will be more responsible...No offfense against women in that comment ..the offense is against men acting like men.

there in Belgium the legal age to drink is 16, 18 for the heavy stuff. but usually if you go to a shop as a 14 of 15 year old you never have a problem getting boose (well I didn't).

but to drive a car, vote, etc. you have to be 18

I drink and I am a Platoon Sergeant for an Army Scout platoon. Credentials being established, I have a strong feeling on the military portion of this discussion. I very much agreed that if you were old enough for war than you were old enough for alcohol years ago. However, now I am in charge of 27 Soldiers, ranging in age from 18-30+. Too many times I have been awakened to hear how one of my youngins has got himself arrested and everytime alcohol was involved. The younger generations are very smart but smart does not equal wise or responsible. Sadly, responsibility is waning more and more these days. The Army currently sets the drinking and purchasing age at 21 regardless of State laws. Most of my boys can't wait for that bday to have their blowout and more times than not, it ends in trouble with the law or a badger-like Sergeant tipping you onto the floor and striping you up and down. I cringe everytime I hear the "go to war" justification because deep down inside I know it too often isn't earned. A boy is a boy is a boy..... IMHO of course. Have a great CAV day my SRPudians!

Originally Posted by Ulfherjar

I drink and I am a Platoon Sergeant for an Army Scout platoon. Credentials being established, I have a strong feeling on the military portion of this discussion. I very much agreed that if you were old enough for war than you were old enough for alcohol years ago. However, now I am in charge of 27 Soldiers, ranging in age from 18-30+. Too many times I have been awakened to hear how one of my youngins has got himself arrested and everytime alcohol was involved. The younger generations are very smart but smart does not equal wise or responsible. Sadly, responsibility is waning more and more these days. The Army currently sets the drinking and purchasing age at 21 regardless of State laws. Most of my boys can't wait for that bday to have their blowout and more times than not, it ends in trouble with the law or a badger-like Sergeant tipping you onto the floor and striping you up and down. I cringe everytime I hear the "go to war" justification because deep down inside I know it too often isn't earned. A boy is a boy is a boy..... IMHO of course. Have a great CAV day my SRPudians!

I don't know about the rest of you, but at 18 and given the choice I'd rather have a beer than be deployed. Legally, of course....

Originally Posted by gugi

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).

I don't know what it is about the conversation forum, things always get heavy and someone inevitably demands imperical, scientific data. Why? This is a discussion, not a case study or topic for a masters' thesis. No policies or laws will be changed because the gents over at SRP debated the matter. But in a perfect world...

At this point we've heard from many of us old(er) guys, as well as CarrieM, but I'd personally like to hear the perspective of some of our younger members as well, those who are in the under-21 bracket. Or would that just be too predictable....

Originally Posted by Ryan82

At this point we've heard from many of us old(er) guys, as well as CarrieM, but I'd personally like to hear the perspective of some of our younger members as well, those who are in the under-21 bracket. Or would that just be too predictable....

that would be me but I have no problem with it since I live in belgium and I can drink

[QUOTE=Nightblade;644660]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.


I like it Nightblade!

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.

It's not whether or not under age people still illegally get the alcohol (they always will)- it's that the laws are there already to discourage it and give out the consequences if you break it and are caught. It does work like that too. I'm sure murder rates would sky-rocket if made legal.

Originally Posted by Ryan82

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.

The problem with that is that the "European model" isn't at all a good one. Europe has more rampant under age drinking problems than the US does.

Originally Posted by Ryan82

I don't know what it is about the conversation forum, things always get heavy and someone inevitably demands imperical, scientific data. Why?

Because Gugi always gets involved! lol