Should the legal age for purchasing alcohol in the US be reduced to 18?

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@Sage_Rat

In the case of drunk driving, the person being asked to decide who is allowed to drive is a dude in Washington DC, who may have died several decades ago, and who has no reason to believe that he (or his proxy, in the form of a store clerk) can reasonably find out any more information about you than your age. If the decision seems slipshod, then there you go, but you’d need to have a better recommendation.

No, I get that – and all ‘he’ could reasonably find out was my age when making the decision to let me vote at eighteen, or enter into contracts at eighteen, or be tried as an adult at eighteen, or be eligible for the draft at eighteen, or get called for jury duty at eighteen, all of which seems pretty slipshod.

I just would’ve liked to get the rights of a grown man when I got the responsibilities of a grown man, is all. Not, y’know, two different slipshods.

Fundamentally, drinking alcohol isn’t a necessity of life.

Plenty of things aren’t necessities of life, but I don’t feel right about barring some consenting adults while letting others in based on so slipshod a criterion.

(Say a word enough times and it gets weird. Slipshod. Slipshod. Sliipsshod.)

[racepug]

In my opinion: no. But if it were to be would that really make all that big a difference with so many who are 21 and older already making VERY poor decisions as far as their consumption of alcohol goes?

[2sense]

@pkbites

I don’t think your idea of special drink cards for high school graduates would pass legal muster.

Why not?

And the law in some states does allow underagers to drink with their parents. Around here it is not all that uncommon in some bars to see a 14 year old drinking with his old man.

I live in Pennsylvania.

@Bozuit

Any evidence that this is still true? In my experience, few businesses are willing to risk selling anything to underage people anymore. Hence the stupid “Challenge 25” crap.

Here in Penna anyone who looks under 30 is to be carded. Our liquor laws are particularly benighted.

[CarnalK]

Regardless of how you feel about the proper drinking age, doesn’t it bug anyone that the Feds strong armed the States on a decision that should be theirs?

[drewtwo99]

This is an issue where I’m way out on left field compared to most people. I honestly think that the age of majority should be 16 or so, for just about everything including voting, signing contracts, drinking, etc. A lot of people seem to think that’s insane and that I definitely won’t be feeling that way once I have children of my own, and maybe there is something to that. But I honestly feel like a 16 year old should be able to consent to sex with anyone they want who is also over the age of 15. And I also feel that if sex is on the table, all other legal responsibilities/obligations should be as well.

As an extension of this, I feel if a 16 year old kills someone, they should be tried as “an adult” because to me, they are adults. So they should be held responsible for crimes as if they were adults. But we should also give them the same exact rights, including voting, drinking, smoking, etc.

I think it’s very hypocritical for states to say that a 16 year old can have sex (and a large percentage of states have that as the age of consent), and also be tried as an adult for crimes (also a large number of states, probably all), but can’t do anything else that adults can legally do. I would prefer much more consistency in this area.

[2sense]

@CarnalK

Regardless of how you feel about the proper drinking age, doesn’t it bug anyone that the Feds strong armed the States on a decision that should be theirs?

I don’t. States are free to ignore the federal government’s preference on the drinking age if they are willing to forgo federal highway funding. If states want the funding they shouldn’t expect to ignore the strings that come with it. I think Justice Ginsburg gets it right:

At bottom, my colleagues’ position is that the States’ reliance on federal funds limits Congress’s authority to alter its spending programs. This gets things backwards: Congress, not the States, is tasked with spending federal money in service of the general welfare. And each successive Congress is empowered to appropriate funds as it sees fit. When the 110th Congress reached a conclusion about Medicaid funds that differed from its predecessors’ view, it abridged no State’s right to “existing”, or “pre-existing”, funds…

[2sense]

@drewtwo99

As an extension of this, I feel if a 16 year old kills someone, they should be tried as “an adult” because to me, they are adults. So they should be held responsible for crimes as if they were adults. But we should also give them the same exact rights, including voting, drinking, smoking, etc.

Interesting point. Do the people making the “Old enough to vote/fight, old enough to drink” argument believe that people under 18 should not be allowed to have sex or be tried as an adult?

[Hector_St_Clare]

@2sense

Interesting point. Do the people making the “Old enough to vote/fight, old enough to drink” argument believe that people under 18 should not be allowed to have sex or be tried as an adult?

Well, there are already all sorts of restrictions on whether under-18 people can have sex or be tried as an adult.

The age of consent issue is a bit different because one can believe that minors shouldn’t be having sex, without necessarily feeling its always a good use of police power to put their partners in jail. Having said that, I do think 18 should be the age at which you’re considered ready to have sex (as well as to sign contracts, drink, serve in the military, not need a legal guardian, work any job you’re suited for, etc.), and that there should be a cultural/moralthat if you’re interested in a 17 year old you must wait till they’re 18 to ask them out, even if the official age of consent is lower.

[Hector_St_Clare]

Regarding the drunk driving issue, I’d say three things.

1. It’s utterly irrational to have a high drinking age and an incredibly lax laws about the legal limit for blood alcohol concentration. If you want to crack down on drunk driving, it would make more sense to lower the legal limit to 0.05 or something, rather than to try to fuss around the age limit.

2. Like the Latin proverb says, the abuse does not take away the use. The fact that some 18-20 year olds are going to abuse the right to drink, shouldn’t justify taking it away from all of them, when it’s perfectly possible for most people to drink responsibly (and for some of us, alcohol can serve a valuable role as a social lubricant, anxiety reducer, etc.).

3. Societies with a lower drinking age are not necessarily more dysfunctional than we are. Other countries which didn’t raise the drinking age, also saw a decline in drunk driving related accidents during the 1980s and 1990s. I don’t know why, but maybe declining lead levels had something to do with it, as they did for other crimes.

Even if the reduction in traffic fatalities was worth taking away the right to drink from 18-20 year olds, I’d still say the tradeoff wasn’t worth it, and there were better ways to rech the goal.

4. Young people are going to drink anyway, and by forcing drinking underground, we encourage people to drink in less safe environments (increasing the risk of alcohol poisoning, sexual assault, etc.). If it was legal for most everyone in a college to drink, for example, people would be more likely to have open and aboveboard , officially registered social activities, maybe even with a security guard present, and things like sexual assaults might be less common.

[2sense]

@Hector_St_Clare

Well, there are already all sorts of restrictions on whether under-18 people can have sex or be tried as an adult.

The age of consent issue is a bit different because one can believe that minors shouldn’t be having sex, without necessarily feeling its always a good use of police power to put their partners in jail.

And you can’t believe that minors shouldn’t drink without necessarily feeling its always a good use of police powers to put those who furnish them alcohol in jail? I don’t see the distinction. I mean, I get that you can be opposed to something without wanting to make it illegal but in that case you are simply on the same side as those who don’t want to make it illegal because they aren’t opposed to it. Either you are in favor of a law or you are not.

[Tethered_Kite]

Eighteen-year-olds shouldn’t be sent to war. They’re virtually cannon fodder. That acknowledged, we seem hypocritical by forbidding them to ingest beverage alcohol.

I think, though, that it is less of a social or moral issue, as discussed here, although those considerations come into play. Teen-aged drinking is a public health issue.

An eighteen -year-old body is not yet fully formed. Young brains, livers and endocrine systems are more susceptible to damage from drinking.

People will do it anyway? Same could be said of violating any law designed to improve social conditions. And actually, I grew up during a time when there was still enough social disapproval that it was not as widespread a problem as it is today.

[kanicbird]

@bump

Legally, nobody’s supposed to drink until they’re 21.

This is not technically true:

Although the minimum drinking age is officially 21 in all 50 states, 45 states legally exempt minors from underage drinking laws under certain circumstances, according to ProCon.org.

These exceptions for underage drinking, which have detailed state-specific requirements, include:

On private property (including homes and offices) with parental presence and consent: 29 states
On private property (including homes and offices) without parental presence and consent: 6 states
For religious purposes: 25 states
For medical purposes: 16 states
For government work-related purposes (like working undercover): 4 states
For educational purposes (such as culinary school): 11 states
When reporting medical emergency (e.g. when one underage drinker dials 911 for another minor): 17 states and Washington D.C.
On alcohol-selling premises (such as restaurants and bars) with parental presence and consent: 11 states

Five states – Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, New Hampshire, and West Virginia – have no exceptions to their underage alcohol consumption laws.

From http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2013/10/legal-for-kids-to-drink-alcohol-with-parents.html

[kanicbird]

@AnthonyElite

I think the ultimate solution is to design vehicles that the driver has to pass a breathalyzer to drive. If the driver happens to be drunk and trying to drive, the vehicle crushes that side of the car, rendering the selfish scumbag into a puddle.

I would say that autodriving cars that have been proven safer then ones under human control would be the ‘ultimate solution’.

[bobot]

In my opinion, those that volunteer for the right to give their lives for their country often end up screwed. I think a special benefit for those generous souls is the least we can do. A military ID gets you alcohol at 18.

[Tethered_Kite]

@bobot

In my opinion, those that volunteer for the right to give their lives for their country often end up screwed. I think a special benefit for those generous souls is the least we can do. A military ID gets you alcohol at 18.

Have you seen the suicide rate among our servicemen lately?

[bobot]

@Tethered_Kite

Have you seen the suicide rate among our servicemen lately?

I’m not following you. Is this an example of the poor treatment they recieve, or a reason why they shouldn’t be allowed to by alcohol?

[Tethered_Kite]

@bobot

I’m not following you. Is this an example of the poor treatment they recieve, or a reason why they shouldn’t be allowed to by alcohol?

We seem to be having a crisis in mental health in the military and I don’t see how adding alcohol into the mix for young people will do anything to improve the situation.