Can't drink but can die

[mustang_wife]

One of my questions to my classmate was what are the DUI, deaths, or alcoholic ratio to those countries who have younger drinking age limits, such as Germany, Japan, . I remember going to visit my cousin in a Germany High School who had soda machines and beer machines. The legal drinking age is 16 in Germany. Does anyone know of statistics from other countries? China, Thiland, and Portugal are few countries that don't have any age limit set up for drinking. And if other countries have lower age limits with minimum repercussions then why aren't our age limits lowered?

I agree with Devil Dog "It will give these young Marines a new responsibility, and I have faith most will handle it well. Of course, those 'few' might ruin it for all. We'll see..."

 

[Brett327]

One of my questions to my classmate was what are the DUI, deaths, or alcoholic ratio to those countries who have younger drinking age limits, such as Germany, Japan, . I remember going to visit my cousin in a Germany High School who had soda machines and beer machines. The legal drinking age is 16 in Germany. Does anyone know of statistics from other countries? China, Thiland, and Portugal are few countries that don't have any age limit set up for drinking. And if other countries have lower age limits with minimum repercussions then why aren't our age limits lowered?

I agree with Devil Dog "It will give these young Marines a new responsibility, and I have faith most will handle it well. Of course, those 'few' might ruin it for all. We'll see..."

In many other countries (most of the EU), you can't drive until you're at least 18. From what I've observed, much of the difference in drinking age is cultural as well. Most kids in Europe (France in my own experience) don't go binge drinking like many in the US, so it might be difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions between other countries and the US. I don't know if it's the "forbidden fruit" issue, as plenty of older people binge drink as well.

Frankly, IMO, if we're going to call 18 year olds adults, then that's when they should drink, but it's easy to see the political and public safety reasons why the government exercises increased control in this area. I think there's probably some residual institutional effects from the days of prohibition, along with the underlying cultural influence of the Puritanical abhorrence of vice.

Bottom line: Blame Jesus

Brett

 

[FUPaladin]

One of my questions to my classmate was what are the DUI, deaths, or alcoholic ratio to those countries who have younger drinking age limits, such as Germany, Japan, . I remember going to visit my cousin in a Germany High School who had soda machines and beer machines. The legal drinking age is 16 in Germany. Does anyone know of statistics from other countries? China, Thiland, and Portugal are few countries that don't have any age limit set up for drinking. And if other countries have lower age limits with minimum repercussions then why aren't our age limits lowered?

I don't really know what I'm talking about, but I can think of at least one reason why lowering the drinking age might have greater repercussions here than elsewhere. I'm pretty sure that 16-year-olds can't drive in most European countries, so it's not nearly as big a deal that they can drink. Sixteen may be old enough to drive, and it may be old enough to drink, but I think we can all agree that throwing both of those responsibilities onto 16-year-old kids at the same time would be a really, really bad idea. A larger point is that we have much more of a car culture here than anywhere else in the world, along with far more cars and roads, so any change in the drinking age naturally has greater implications here than elsewhere.

Don't get me wrong, I support lowering the drinking age to 18 for basically the reason stated in the topic title (the same argument that got 18-year-olds the vote). But I also don't think that the US is exactly analogous to other countries when it comes to drinking laws.

Edit: I see that Brett made pretty much the exact same point around the time I started typing up mine.

 

[scoober78]

Or here's a crazy thought....Why the #$%^ should the governmet have any right at all to say when I can, and cannot drink?

Have an alcohol related motor vehicle accident and lose your medicare benefits for that treatment. Kill or injure someone while under the influence? Go to jail. These are laws I can get behind...but an arbitrary age where I am "allowed" to drink? Quite frankly, piss off.

 

[Cate]

Or here's a crazy thought....Why the #$%^ should the governmet have any right at all to say when I can, and cannot drink?

Have an alcohol related motor vehicle accident and lose your medicare benefits for that treatment. Kill or injure someone while under the influence? Go to jail. These are laws I can get behind...but an arbitrary age where I am "allowed" to drink? Quite frankly, piss off.

The government tells you when you can do a lot of things. They tell you when you can drive a car by yourself, when you can officially post your opinion on the runnings of government, when you can buy cigarettes, when you can consent to sex, when you can be held accountable for certain crimes, and so on.

To some extent, they do have an interest in that. Up to a point, it's to be expected that a child will make poor, uninformed, inexperienced, irresponsible decisions, and that a parent or guardian has a right to make decisions on the child's behalf because of that (and that if the parent/guardian also makes poor decisions for the child, the government can step in). The government has arbitrarily decided that eighteen years outside of the womb is the point at which a child can start making his/her own decisions (or, in the case of drinking, 21). You're just pissed because you're not there yet.

The argument isn't whether or not the government has the right to restrict you from doing things until you have the physical and mental capacity to do them without killing people. The argument is why the government has chosen the relatively advanced age of 21 for drinking when the age for just about everything else is 18.

In terms of anecdata, I spent a semester in Reading, England, and one thing I noticed about the first-years was that they got just as pissed as the freshmen did back home at UGA. The difference was that in England, where the drinking age was 18, they were more likely to take a cab home or call the hall for a ride when they were too drunk to get home on their own, and they were more likely to seek medical attention when they'd had way too much, because they weren't afraid of being caught drinking underage.

Of course, we also had three bars in the Student Union and one in our residence hall, so it's not like they had to stumble too far to get home anyway.

 

[Flash]

We have enough personnel issues in the military with those that are of age...

Yeah, I would have to agree with that........

 

[A4sForever]

Oh ... sorry ... I thought the thread was "You can't drink, and you can't dance .. either. "

My mistake ....

 

[scoober78]

The government tells you when you can do a lot of things. They tell you when you can drive a car by yourself, when you can officially post your opinion on the runnings of government, when you can buy cigarettes, when you can consent to sex, when you can be held accountable for certain crimes, and so on.

Not arguing that point...but the fact that it happens isn't an adequate argument for saying that it should happen. Clearly the government is entitled to tell you when you can participate in government...but its a fundamentally different thing to tell a parent that they aren't allowed to serve their teenagers wine...

You're just pissed because you're not there yet.

You don't think I'm 21? Flattered...thanks Cate.

The argument isn't whether or not the government has the right to restrict you from doing things until you have the physical and mental capacity to do them without killing people. The argument is why the government has chosen the relatively advanced age of 21 for drinking when the age for just about everything else is 18.

I agree that this was the original question...but the more interesting question to me is whether the government indeed has the right to restirct your personal behavior which does not interfere with the rights and liberty of others. I wouldn't argue against a DUI law on this grounds...but in many ways the idea of a minimum drinking age at all is more random than the "arbitrary" and "advanced" age they have chosen.

 

[xmid]

I agree that this was the original question...but the more interesting question to me is whether the government indeed has the right to restirct your personal behavior which does not interfere with the rights and liberty of others.

I think this is the same argument alot of people use for the legalization of weed, ganja, pot, PCP, LSD, ecstasy, cocaine, blow, booger sugar, etc. etc...

 

[FUPaladin]

Scoober, if you're not a Libertarian, you should be. That line of thinking leads to positions that don't exactly match up with either major party, so for example, you'd be against gun control laws and big government in general, but you also would likely support the legalization of marijuana and wouldn't oppose gay marriage. I have a fair amount of Libertarian in me, but not so much that I'm against seat belt laws or think that I shouldn't have to wear a helmet on a motorcycle. I accept some restrictions on personal behavior if they save lives, but only to a certain extent, because at the same time I'm wary of such laws going overboard and creating a nanny state.

 

[Cate]

You don't think I'm 21? Flattered...thanks Cate.

We are talking about emotional maturity, right?

But yeah, honestly, I do think that the government has an interest in restricting personal behavior, to a reasonable extent, before a certain age. I'm absolutely sure that I don't want a 6-year-old trying to drive a car, even if it's the world's most responsible 6-year-old in the world's tallest booster seat. Medical science has opinions about children and alcohol consumption that should be observed, whether or not some dad thinks his 8-year-old is man enough to take him on shot for shot. The concept of an age of majority protects minors from dangers they're not yet mature enough to fully grasp, and it protects the rest of us from dangers those minors might impose on us.

Which brings us back to the question, not should there be an age majority, but which age should it be?

As for the government's right to restrict behavior (of competent, consenting adults) that doesn't endanger others, that's a somewhat squishier argument. At that point, you get into questions of whether or not the economic impact of automotive injuries is enough to warrant a seat belt law, whether the potential for drugged-out lawlessness is enough to warrant drug laws, whether firearm use by irresponsible/naughty individuals is enough to warrant gun control laws, etc.

 

[A4sForever]

Cate .... your last paragraph .... don't we ALREADY have a plethora of "laws" covering all the "downsides" you put forth .... ????

I.e., ... don't "do" drugs ... don't drive crazy .... don't use guns to be stupid and/or commit crimes ... ???? :sleep_125

Mebbe .... just don't break the "law"???

 

[dodge]

As for the government's right to restrict behavior (of competent, consenting adults) that doesn't endanger others, that's a somewhat squishier argument...

if only there were some document that gave some guidance on the rights and restrictions on the government...

 

[nittany03]

Cate .... your last paragraph .... don't we ALREADY have a plethora of "laws" covering all the "downsides" you put forth .... ????

I.e., ... don't "do" drugs ... don't drive crazy .... don't use guns to be stupid and/or commit crimes ... ???? :sleep_125

Mebbe .... just don't break the "law"???

I think what she is saying is that in each case there are those who think the laws should be stricter and those who think they should be more lax. Thus, argument, regardless of whose head is on their shoulders or elsewhere.

We just need to get more people to obey the two basic laws of life. To wit:
-Don't be dumb.
-Don't be that guy.

 

[Rasczak]

In many other countries (most of the EU), you can't drive until you're at least 18. From what I've observed, much of the difference in drinking age is cultural as well. Most kids in Europe (France in my own experience) don't go binge drinking like many in the US, so it might be difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions between other countries and the US. I don't know if it's the "forbidden fruit" issue, as plenty of older people binge drink as well.

Frankly, IMO, if we're going to call 18 year olds adults, then that's when they should drink, but it's easy to see the political and public safety reasons why the government exercises increased control in this area. I think there's probably some residual institutional effects from the days of prohibition, along with the underlying cultural influence of the Puritanical abhorrence of vice.

Bottom line: Blame Jesus

Brett

To the first half sir, it's an age old argument. The way the parents teach the kids. (ex. My uncle, whom is French ironically, is an alcoholic, but has taught his son well enough, that he is not one of those binge drinkers and he actually scolds others when they do so. )

To the second half. I agree.