"All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language...No man is an island, entire of itself...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee." - John Donne
Here, you can buy beer at 16, and we don't have so many problems about young teenagers being alcoholics. Of course, sometimes some of them try the "binge drinking" (?), but some young people also breath deodorants or even gas from lighters. You can't prevent immature people from doing immature things.
Furthermore, bans like that make drinking alcohol more exciting: when you're prevented from doing something and suddenly you're allowed to do it, you're "forced" to try, especially when you're 18 or 21 years old.
The main problem is not that young people can or cannot drink alcohol at a certain age, it's rather that some people become drunkards. And bans don't prevent this. Only education can do it. It's much better to be allowed to drink young and get used to it, to learn the effects of alcohol (hangovers...) and to learn to control your consumption.
I am happy about the liberal Danish views on alcohol when I grew up in the 80's and 90's. From a very early age I was allowed to taste small sips of alcohol and when I turned about 15 alcohol became commonplace at parties. However there were always responsible adults (typically parents) present to prevent things from getting out of hand. Of course someone got sick at some point but the most that happened was that they puked, had a bad hangover the next day and learned where their limits were. It is unpleasant while it is going on but a good thing afterwards. I had a lot of good experiences with alcohol and have not turned into an alcoholic drunk-driver.
Instead of alcohol being something mystic it becomes a common part of life and you learn to deal with it responsibly. Thus I don't think teenagers should be kept completely dry - instead they should be allowed to make their mistakes in a safe environment.
The poor complain; they always do
But that’s just idle chatter
Our system brings reward to all
At least all those who matter.
I think the real question is:
If we have as a society "deemed" 18 to be the age in which we consider a person to be an adult, what right does the government have in telling an adult whether they can drink alcohol?
I understand that younger people make more stupid decisions, yada yada yada....but I don't think the government should be making decisions for people who have been deemed "Adults".
Women (Nasty or otherwise) are going to be the reason that Donald Trump is NEVER President!
how do i create a poll?
Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:
These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.
I voted for no age limit, with parental consent of course.
My parents allowed me to drink wine with dinner by the time I was about 12, I think, and I didn't like it. My dad offered me a taste of his beer whenever he would have it, and I didn't like that either. By the time I was 21 I wasn't interested in liquor of any kind. Only recently have I discovered that Mike's Hard Lemonade is pretty good, and that Tequila, while it tastes like ass, can make it so that you can't feel your face, and that not being able to feel your face is kind of funny when in the company of friends.
I voted "no age," which is actually more consistent with existing laws than some would expect. The so-called "minimum legal drinking age" is actually a minimum purchase age, with actual consumption of alcohol by people under 21 prohibited in only a few states. There are additional laws against possession that are quite prevalent, however, and cause many to be hit with the charge of "internal possession" after drinking.
I and others have theorized that the drop in fatal crashes that occurred both in the U.S. and Canada might be better attributed to the numerous vehicular safety improvements have been made in cars since the 1980's, and the fact that auto accidents in general have decreased. Hence, it is not so implausible to suggest that alcohol-related auto accidents would decrease as part of this trend (and yes, I saw what you said in regard to that, but I'll need to see more data). In fact, I'd say it's more implausible to suggest the opposite, considering that, again, alcohol-related fatalities among drivers under 21 have fallen by a similar proportion in Canada, despite the fact that the drinking age remains 18 or 19 depending on the region. Incidentally, this is also NHTSA data.
U.S. Department of Transportation - NHTSA - Determine Why There Are Fewer Young Alcohol-Impaired Drivers - IV. What Caused the Decrease? - DOT HS 809 348
The NHTSA attributes this to alcohol education programs in Canada, (which would still question the necessity of a high drinking age), but has essentially no evidence to validate this claim. It could very well be true, of course, but I'm inclined to believe that vehicular safety improvements in industrialized countries resulted in these overall decreases.Originally Posted by NHTSA
thank you agers, good info for my new position.
Ps your barred
So even though most of the reductions have been other factors, the increased drinking age still has made some impact.