Is It Time To Lower The Drinking Age?

[Socrates]

[quote name='havok579257' date='18 April 2010 - 01:11 AM' timestamp='1271567489' post='2095451']
guns, except in the case of military and police, i can agree with. also excluding hunters who actually use guns to hunt their own food. someone who without a gun would starve because they are unable to hunt for thier food. without guns, you dont need ammunition.

knifes- depends what kind your talking about. if its a basic knife used for your food or for some form of construction, then no it should not be illegal. the benifts of knives out weigh the amount of death that happen by them.

machetes- absolutly, unless you live in the jungle. what do you need one for except for killing or traveling in the jungle.

crowbars- same as the knives. the benifits of the crowbar outweigh the deaths from it.
[/quote]
Sounds like you advocate a kind of totalitarian "nanny state."

Besides hunting, guns can be used for legitimate self-defense and defense of family from aggressors. Guns can save lives as well as take them. The second amendment wasn't about hunting, but about the right of citizens of a free society to self-defense.

Do you really think it's the place of the government to determine whether the benefit of each and every piece of equipment or tool we own outweighs it's possible dangers? Sounds more like some kind of communist police-state than a free society.

I own a machete, but have never hurt anybody with it. I have used it to help clear woodland trails, even though I lived far from "the jungle." It's not the business of government to determine whether my potential uses for it would be "good enough" though.
Once a government starts restricting ownership of knives and other tools, it has gone beyond tyrannical.


As to the original topic, I honestly don't think changing the legal drinking age will have any real effect one way or the other. From what I've seen laws against underage drinking have done little to prevent underage drunkenness.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Socrates' date='20 April 2010 - 01:12 AM' timestamp='1271722345' post='2096481']
I own a machete, but have never hurt anybody with it. I have used it to help clear woodland trails, even though I lived far from "the jungle." It's not the business of government to determine whether my potential uses for it would be "good enough" though.
Once a government starts restricting ownership of knives and other tools, it has gone beyond tyrannical.


As to the original topic, I honestly don't think changing the legal drinking age will have any real effect one way or the other. From what I've seen laws against underage drinking have done little to prevent underage drunkenness.
[/quote]
Machetes come in handy in archaeology, too. Or at least I was thankful one of the people on the dig had one when I was digging in FL.

I do think you have a point that simply changing the law might not affect much actual change - cultural attitudes need to change for that to happen. I still would like the drinking age lowered, but that's me. Not that it would affect me since I'm over 21 anyway.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='havok579257' date='17 April 2010 - 12:01 PM' timestamp='1271520100' post='2095116']
i am all for making alcohol illegal if it means it can save millions of life. call me puritan if you want, i perfer to be called pro-life. this is an easy way to save millions of people, millions of them being completely innocent people hit by drunk drivers. its completely selfish not want to make alcohol illegal when it could and would and is guarentted to save millions of lives. i am more than willing to sacrifice the ability to use a drug so that millions of people can be saved.
[/quote]
Are you saying that MILLIONS of people are being hit by drunk drivers in this country? MILLIONS?? Don't get me wrong, I think drunk driving is horrible and, as a mom, I worry about it-- a LOT. Unfortunately, making alcohol illegal will not stop drunk driving. Drunk driving is already illegal and people still do it. Banning alcohol will just create a black market for it. We tried prohibition here once-- it was an abysmal failure.

[havok579257]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' date='20 April 2010 - 07:49 AM' timestamp='1271764197' post='2096722']
Are you saying that MILLIONS of people are being hit by drunk drivers in this country? MILLIONS?? Don't get me wrong, I think drunk driving is horrible and, as a mom, I worry about it-- a LOT. Unfortunately, making alcohol illegal will not stop drunk driving. Drunk driving is already illegal and people still do it. Banning alcohol will just create a black market for it. We tried prohibition here once-- it was an abysmal failure.
[/quote]


i don't consider drunk driving to be anymore illegal than jay walking. people can get up to 9 dui's and still be driving a year or 2 later. is that what you would call strict rules.

making alcohol illegal will drastically reduce the number of drunk drivers. just was making pot, cocaine, lsd and so on legal will mean more people will end up using the drug. by being illegal, it makes it harder to come by. sure, the addicts can get it and they will, but the average person will not be able to get it. which greatly reduces the number of dui's.

[havok579257]

[quote name='Socrates' date='19 April 2010 - 08:12 PM' timestamp='1271722345' post='2096481']
Sounds like you advocate a kind of totalitarian "nanny state."

Besides hunting, guns can be used for legitimate self-defense and defense of family from aggressors. Guns can save lives as well as take them. The second amendment wasn't about hunting, but about the right of citizens of a free society to self-defense.

Do you really think it's the place of the government to determine whether the benefit of each and every piece of equipment or tool we own outweighs it's possible dangers? Sounds more like some kind of communist police-state than a free society.

I own a machete, but have never hurt anybody with it. I have used it to help clear woodland trails, even though I lived far from "the jungle." It's not the business of government to determine whether my potential uses for it would be "good enough" though.
Once a government starts restricting ownership of knives and other tools, it has gone beyond tyrannical.


As to the original topic, I honestly don't think changing the legal drinking age will have any real effect one way or the other. From what I've seen laws against underage drinking have done little to prevent underage drunkenness.
[/quote]


so now someone who wants weapon reduction wants a nany state. i guess people who don't want a nanny state want every person have access to rocket launchers and wmd's. this point is unitelligent.

yes, but making guns illegal greatly reduces the number of guns and limits the number of times someone would need them.

and here you are again spewing liberal rhetoric. i said one thing and your twisting words to try and make your arguement. i believe its the role of the government to keep their people safe and provide them with the oppertunities to fullfill thier dreams. reducing guns and making them illegal will work to better keep society safe. unless your really going to tell me, if we drastically reduced guns and weapons, more people would die.

[havok579257]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' date='20 April 2010 - 01:18 AM' timestamp='1271740703' post='2096597']
Machetes come in handy in archaeology, too. Or at least I was thankful one of the people on the dig had one when I was digging in FL.

I do think you have a point that simply changing the law might not affect much actual change - cultural attitudes need to change for that to happen. I still would like the drinking age lowered, but that's me. Not that it would affect me since I'm over 21 anyway.
[/quote]


this is the same kind of logic people use to say abortion should not be made illegal. they say until cultural attitudes change, people will not stop aborting babies, so we should not bother trying to make it illegal.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='havok579257' date='21 April 2010 - 06:57 AM' timestamp='1271829474' post='2097231']
this is the same kind of logic people use to say abortion should not be made illegal. they say until cultural attitudes change, people will not stop aborting babies, so we should not bother trying to make it illegal.
[/quote]
Besides the fact that abortion and drinking are vastly different, please note that I said the law should change [b]and [/b]cultural attitudes should change. I believe that about abortion, too.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='havok579257' date='21 April 2010 - 12:56 AM' timestamp='1271829368' post='2097229']
yes, but making guns illegal greatly reduces the number of guns and limits the number of times someone would need them.
[/quote]

That would probably work as well as making alcohol illegal for those under 21 has worked.

Now, at the end of my sophomore year, at least half of those in my class (if not more) have participated in illegal drinking without the consent of their parents. Such drinking is almost never done in moderation.

Just as making alcohol illegal to those under 21 just encourages binge drinking and other lawless behavior, so too making guns illegal would just encourage the irresponsible use thereof. I think that Victor Hugo made an excellent observation on the matter in his great novel [i]Notre-Dame de Paris[/i]: "The outlawing of the dagger led only to the transformation of the name of Slash a Gullet Alley to Cutthroat Alley, which is an obvious sign of progress."

[havok579257]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='21 April 2010 - 04:36 PM' timestamp='1271882191' post='2097488']
That would probably work as well as making alcohol illegal for those under 21 has worked.

Now, at the end of my sophomore year, at least half of those in my class (if not more) have participated in illegal drinking without the consent of their parents. Such drinking is almost never done in moderation.

Just as making alcohol illegal to those under 21 just encourages binge drinking and other lawless behavior, so too making guns illegal would just encourage the irresponsible use thereof. I think that Victor Hugo made an excellent observation on the matter in his great novel [i]Notre-Dame de Paris[/i]: "The outlawing of the dagger led only to the transformation of the name of Slash a Gullet Alley to Cutthroat Alley, which is an obvious sign of progress."
[/quote]


the reason making alcohol illegal for anyone under 21 has not worked is because the laws are way to leanient. the fact that people can get up to 9 dui's and still be driving says it all. gun control would work if stricter laws were enforced. your agruement works now because of how pathetic the laws are. my theor works if we actually had a government who enforced laws to protect citizens. which is somethin i advocate but america has not been doing for decades.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='havok579257' date='21 April 2010 - 10:34 PM' timestamp='1271907276' post='2097739']
the reason making alcohol illegal for anyone under 21 has not worked is because the laws are way to leanient. the fact that people can get up to 9 dui's and still be driving says it all. gun control would work if stricter laws were enforced. your agruement works now because of how pathetic the laws are. my theor works if we actually had a government who enforced laws to protect citizens. which is somethin i advocate but america has not been doing for decades.
[/quote]
So at the end of the day, you don't believe the average American adult has the responsibility or intelligence to drink responsibly and in moderation?

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 April 2010 - 11:44 PM' timestamp='1271907893' post='2097747']
So at the end of the day, you don't believe the average American adult has the responsibility or intelligence to drink responsibly and in moderation?
[/quote]

(let's be honest, who's gonna say he's wrong)

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='21 April 2010 - 10:54 PM' timestamp='1271908480' post='2097757']
(let's be honest, who's gonna say he's wrong)
[/quote]
Don't derail such a good argument.

[havok579257]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 April 2010 - 11:44 PM' timestamp='1271907893' post='2097747']
So at the end of the day, you don't believe the average American adult has the responsibility or intelligence to drink responsibly and in moderation?
[/quote]


well the question is kind of an oxymoron since when someone is drinking, even in moderation their intelligence drops. simple fact is, even one drink alters a person's mental state. it affects their decision making, their motor skills and so on. its no different then pot or any other altering drug. the fact is at the end of the day, its absolutly stupid to legalize alcohol(a chemical which alters a person's capabilities) yet making other drugs illegal. if you think there is nothing wrong with alcohol, then would you agree that pot should be illegal and so should other drugs? if not, then your argument has no ground. alcohol is a mind altering substance. same as other drugs. i believe anything that is going to alter one's mind and negatively affect them should be illegal. pot, lsd, meth are all illlegal and alter your mind the same as alcohol. they are no different.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='havok579257' date='21 April 2010 - 11:15 PM' timestamp='1271909728' post='2097782']
well the question is kind of an oxymoron since when someone is drinking, even in moderation their intelligence drops. simple fact is, even one drink alters a person's mental state. it affects their decision making, their motor skills and so on. its no different then pot or any other altering drug. the fact is at the end of the day, its absolutly stupid to legalize alcohol(a chemical which alters a person's capabilities) yet making other drugs illegal. if you think there is nothing wrong with alcohol, then would you agree that pot should be illegal and so should other drugs? if not, then your argument has no ground. alcohol is a mind altering substance. same as other drugs. i believe anything that is going to alter one's mind and negatively affect them should be illegal. pot, lsd, meth are all illlegal and alter your mind the same as alcohol. they are no different.
[/quote]
Actually that argument isn't going to work on me. Lately I've been re-examining my political/social biases, and I'm not sure I have any intellectually consistent arguments against legalizing recreational drugs. It's a thought-process in progress, and I haven't arrived at a conclusion yet.

Good try though. I'm not going to bother responding.


To hit your very first point though...

You said that the question is an oxymoron. What you're implying by this is that drinking in moderation is difficult or impossible. This is, in fact, false. I have been out drinking many times in the (almost) year that I've been over 18. At no point have I ever been even close to what you would define as drunk. At only one point could I be described as anywhere near impaired, and at that particular moment (near Christmas), my impaired state was limited to feeling ever so slightly light headed and stumbling over my words ever so slightly more than I normally do (which is a lot to begin with).

So in any case, your argument fails as soon as you can prove that alcohol can indeed be consumed responsibly and in moderation. I have had no problems with that, and I'm willing to bet that many other people here also have not had problems doing so.

[havok579257]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='22 April 2010 - 12:23 AM' timestamp='1271910238' post='2097791']
Actually that argument isn't going to work on me. Lately I've been re-examining my political/social biases, and I'm not sure I have any intellectually consistent arguments against legalizing recreational drugs. It's a thought-process in progress, and I haven't arrived at a conclusion yet.

Good try though. I'm not going to bother responding.


To hit your very first point though...

You said that the question is an oxymoron. What you're implying by this is that drinking in moderation is difficult or impossible. This is, in fact, false. I have been out drinking many times in the (almost) year that I've been over 18. At no point have I ever been even close to what you would define as drunk. At only one point could I be described as anywhere near impaired, and at that particular moment (near Christmas), my impaired state was limited to feeling ever so slightly light headed and stumbling over my words ever so slightly more than I normally do (which is a lot to begin with).

So in any case, your argument fails as soon as you can prove that alcohol can indeed be consumed responsibly and in moderation. I have had no problems with that, and I'm willing to bet that many other people here also have not had problems doing so.
[/quote]


i never stated one has to be drunk to be impaired. science shows that even having one beer impairs a person. so unless your referring to only drinking say 1/4 of a beer, then your affected by the alcohol, no matter what people say about being fine after x number of beers.

i said drinking in moderation doesn't work since drinking even one beer impairs a person. again, unless your referring to only drinking 1/4 of a beer. if not, then your argument doesn't work. unless your got evidence to go against everything science says about the effects of alcohol on the human body.

Edited April 22, 2010 by havok579257