College Presidents want drinking age dropped to 18..

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

AnitaPeterson

Diamond Member
Apr 24, 2001
5,962
456
126
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: amdhunter
The US will allow an 18 year old to sign up for the military to kill someone, but they won't allow that same kid to drink...

I think it should be lowered to 18 myself.
For those who join the Armed Services.

No, for everyone. That same 18yo gets to vote for which person gets the key to enough nukes to wipe out civilization. If they're capable of making that decision, they deserve to be allowed to buy a beer.

Or raise the voting / military age to 21.

Yes.
What you're saying makes sense.
Then again, many things in the U.S. legal system don't make much sense....
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,635
3,507
136
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
Originally posted by: RyanSengara
I don't really get it, when my dad went to university in the states the drinking age in California was 19.

Don't understand why it's 21, but you can buy porn, join the army and own a gun at 18.

It's 21 because that's what the feds want. They threaten to pull federal road funding if states don't comply, forcing states to change.

And the feds want it because MADD wants it. The amount of influence MADD has over these things is ridiculous.

They're the ones behind .08 too. Someone who's had a couple drinks can have a .08, but be far less impaired than someone messing with their radio, falling asleep, or yapping on their phone.

As someone said earlier, MADD is the new Temperance movement. They'd be happy if the limit was anything over zero.
 

Aharami

Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
21,205
165
106
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
I think this will just lower the age of underage drinkers accordingly.

this is what I was thinking also. I agree that lowering the drinking age to 18 might alleviate the college binge drinking problem, but will it introduce binge drinking to high school kids now? Maybe not since in HS, kids are still living at home under their parents - so they might not be as free to access alcohol as a college student living in a dorm might be.
 

Journer

Banned
Jun 30, 2005
4,355
0
0
lowering the age would have tons of benefits:
1) it decreases the mysticism involved with drinking often found in under agers. drinking isn't always as fun when it is legal.
2) kids can drink more responsibly. they wont have to go through other people to get booze and can go to establishments as opposed to parties.
3) banning something only makes it more appealing and adds more criminalization to the matter.

while we're at it lets drop all the stupid drug laws :)
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
If you are responsible and trusted enough to vote for the most powerful man in the world, responsible and trusted enough to enlist in the army and be sent overseas to kill people, responsible and trusted enough to be given a drivers license, you sure as shit should be responsible and trusted enough to have a fucking drink.
 

imported_Champ

Golden Member
Mar 25, 2008
1,608
0
0
i dont know what the big deal is...in Alberta its 18 and i've been drinking since i was 14 (house parties) and had my first fake at 17

house parties are ALOT more dangerous then pubs or bars...I would even say lower the drinking age to 17 because at that age alot of my friends had fakes and a house party at that age prtty much always goes out of control and I can only imagine what goes down when 20 year olds can't get into bars

MADD and the government are way of base on this...you can't expect a rule like this to be followed...i still remember when my parents found my fake and gave me the lecture...they had no argument when I ask what exactly will change in 7 months when I am 18 besides it was illegal (my mom got PISSED...my dad brought me to the pub the next week:p)

Thats why I am happy to be in one of the greatest countries in the world where a man who can join the army, buy smokes, buy a gun, be tried as adult, vote, can adopt and run for office (and all the other great things at 18) can go out a have a beer
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
59,208
13,801
136
Originally posted by: Journer
lowering the age would have tons of benefits:
1) it decreases the mysticism involved with drinking often found in under agers. drinking isn't always as fun when it is legal.
2) kids can drink more responsibly. they wont have to go through other people to get booze and can go to establishments as opposed to parties.
3) banning something only makes it more appealing and adds more criminalization to the matter.

while we're at it lets drop all the stupid drug laws :)

I was a teenager in Germany and could go into a gas station and buy a bottle of vodka at age 15, or go out to the bars. Fun level was unaffected by legality. Still got hammered at bars and did stupid things.
 

Bibble

Golden Member
Feb 20, 2006
1,293
1
0
My college is cited in this article! Woot?

I would say my school as a whole has a drinking problem (although a significant minority does not drink/party much). I am part of the partying majority, however, and I could name more than a few people who are well on their way to alcoholism (carrying SoCo around in your purse is a good sign). I am sure that doing their drinking 'underground' contributed to such behavior. If they had learnt to drink in a legal and legitimate environment I think their habits might be less dangerous.

I think it is safe to say that if the drinking age was lowered to 18 far fewer freshmen would be sent to the hospital the first weekend of the semester. This is a huge problem at my school. DUI is also fairly frequent, but in most cases the driver's BAC is under .08, but since they are under 21 it doesn't matter. My friend blew a .03 and was kicked out for the semester. This leads me to believe that if the age was lowered to 18 there would be far fewer DUIs on campus.

While some of these college presidents may believe that lowering the drinking age to 18 will be a positive thing, I can all but guarantee their main motive behind wanting it is because they do not want the responsibility/liability of under age drinking occurring on campus.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
59,208
13,801
136
Originally posted by: Bibble
While some of these college presidents may believe that lowering the drinking age to 18 will be a positive thing, I can all but guarantee their main motive behind wanting it is because they do not want the responsibility/liability of under age drinking occurring on campus.

Exactly.
"What are we going to do about this underage drinking problem?"
"I know, lower the drinking age! TADA!!!"
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,213
11
81
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: Bibble
While some of these college presidents may believe that lowering the drinking age to 18 will be a positive thing, I can all but guarantee their main motive behind wanting it is because they do not want the responsibility/liability of under age drinking occurring on campus.

Exactly.
"What are we going to do about this underage drinking problem?"
"I know, lower the drinking age! TADA!!!"

So what? It makes sense regardless of their motive. The point is colleges have been fighting underage drinking for years, and time and time again it's been proven there is NOTHING they can do about it. It's going to happen. So why should it continue to be illegal?
 

SneakyStuff

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2004
4,294
0
76
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: Bibble
While some of these college presidents may believe that lowering the drinking age to 18 will be a positive thing, I can all but guarantee their main motive behind wanting it is because they do not want the responsibility/liability of under age drinking occurring on campus.

Exactly.
"What are we going to do about this underage drinking problem?"
"I know, lower the drinking age! TADA!!!"

So what? It makes sense regardless of their motive. The point is colleges have been fighting underage drinking for years, and time and time again it's been proven there is NOTHING they can do about it. It's going to happen. So why should it continue to be illegal?

:thumbsup:
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
59,208
13,801
136
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: Bibble
While some of these college presidents may believe that lowering the drinking age to 18 will be a positive thing, I can all but guarantee their main motive behind wanting it is because they do not want the responsibility/liability of under age drinking occurring on campus.

Exactly.
"What are we going to do about this underage drinking problem?"
"I know, lower the drinking age! TADA!!!"

So what? It makes sense regardless of their motive. The point is colleges have been fighting underage drinking for years, and time and time again it's been proven there is NOTHING they can do about it. It's going to happen. So why should it continue to be illegal?

I'm just saying that personally I feel this will do absolutely nothing to address the problem, based on my experience as a teen with legal access to alcohol. I also feel it will increase drinking in lower ages.
And the stats I read in the newspaper article on this did in fact show a decrease in underage drinking at college over the last 11 years.
 

manowar821

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2007
6,063
0
0
Originally posted by: 0
Originally posted by: Anubis
why a WTF
its not a bad idea

it IS a bad idea. This will lead to more drunk driving.

You're not looking at this the right way. If the drinking age is 18, they have time to drink with their family and learn the ropes. The drinking age at 21, I would argue, causes a sort of sudden binge of alcohol consumption as soon as they turn. If it's lowered to 18 they have more time to learn what is appropriate, and they have time to drink with their family before heading out on their own.

If the drinking age is 21, they have no supervision when they finally come of age. If it's at 18, the burden is pushed back to where it should be, on the parental figures. Right now legal drinkers are all alone when they finally are allowed to purchase it. The "role models" they are around at 21 are not real role models in any sense of the term.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
I've been saying this for many years... the age should be lower. You can search my old posts and find other instances of me pointing it out here. MADD uses faulty reasoning and analysis of statistics in its claims that raising the drinking age reduced DWI deaths. Did the rate of deaths in DWI accidents go down after the age went from 18 to 21? Certainly - but MADD attributes that to causation, not correlation. Around the same time (at least in NY), mandatory seat belt laws came into effect. Airbags were just starting to become more common. It's like draining a bathtub, and after the water has already been going down for a minute or two, tossing in a rubber ducky & claiming that the water is continuing to go down because of the presence of the duck.

If we wait til "children" are 21 years of age before they're allowed to have alcohol, then who is going to be present to help them learn to drink in moderation and respect alcohol? At my son's graduation party, my wife and I would have each risked our professional licenses if we provided even a drop of alcohol to anyone underage at the party. Plus, we (and every other parent of a graduating student) were given a notice (sponsored in part by MADD) that said they were going to be out looking for that this year & wouldn't be stopping at a level of warning. Quite frankly, that still leaves me a bit pissed to think that not only wasn't I allowed to use my best judgement, but that they were going to be aggressively targeting parents who provided even a single drink to their graduating child.

 

Bibble

Golden Member
Feb 20, 2006
1,293
1
0
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: Bibble
While some of these college presidents may believe that lowering the drinking age to 18 will be a positive thing, I can all but guarantee their main motive behind wanting it is because they do not want the responsibility/liability of under age drinking occurring on campus.

Exactly.
"What are we going to do about this underage drinking problem?"
"I know, lower the drinking age! TADA!!!"

So what? It makes sense regardless of their motive. The point is colleges have been fighting underage drinking for years, and time and time again it's been proven there is NOTHING they can do about it. It's going to happen. So why should it continue to be illegal?

I almost completely agree with what you have said, Deeko. No matter why the schools want it, I think lowering the drinking age to 18 will have long term benefits.

My only qualm with your statement is that motive should absolutely not be disregarded. The real reason behind why they are doing this ought to be kept in mind. It is always good to ask the all important question of 'cui bono?'. Perhaps in this case it does not change the course of action that should be taken, but it must be considered.
 

imported_Lothar

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2006
4,559
1
0
Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
The reason why most states have a 21 drinking age is because the federal gov threatened to pull highway funds if they didn't.

Did any state ignore the threats?
If so, which states did?

Which states have a lower legal drinking age than the federal gov't?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
Originally posted by: RyanSengara
I don't really get it, when my dad went to university in the states the drinking age in California was 19.

Don't understand why it's 21, but you can buy porn, join the army and own a gun at 18.

It's 21 because that's what the feds want. They threaten to pull federal road funding if states don't comply, forcing states to change.

And the feds want it because MADD wants it. The amount of influence MADD has over these things is ridiculous.
That's because while you Frat Boys were so busy getting fall down drunk and tea bagging each other MADD was out lobbying politicians.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,213
11
81
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
Originally posted by: RyanSengara
I don't really get it, when my dad went to university in the states the drinking age in California was 19.

Don't understand why it's 21, but you can buy porn, join the army and own a gun at 18.

It's 21 because that's what the feds want. They threaten to pull federal road funding if states don't comply, forcing states to change.

And the feds want it because MADD wants it. The amount of influence MADD has over these things is ridiculous.
That's because while you Frat Boys were so busy getting fall down drunk and tea bagging each other MADD was out lobbying politicians.

haha. That's kinda the point though. Despite MADD's influence on the law, they've had no influence on the actual behavior of said frat boys.
 

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
WI ignored it the longest, and I believe they were denied federal funding. I had friends grandfathered into their age 19 drinking age. Let's just say I was not happy to be younger back then.

Ironically, WI has some of the best concrete roads I have driven on. Way too much asphaltic concrete garbage out there now. Some state like perpetual roadwork though.

Also, if you have a kid in WI, you can bring them to a bar and buy them a beer and a shot, so long as the bar allows it (which many do not).
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
Originally posted by: RyanSengara
I don't really get it, when my dad went to university in the states the drinking age in California was 19.

Don't understand why it's 21, but you can buy porn, join the army and own a gun at 18.

It's 21 because that's what the feds want. They threaten to pull federal road funding if states don't comply, forcing states to change.

And the feds want it because MADD wants it. The amount of influence MADD has over these things is ridiculous.
That's because while you Frat Boys were so busy getting fall down drunk and tea bagging each other MADD was out lobbying politicians.

haha. That's kinda the point though. Despite MADD's influence on the law, they've had no influence on the actual behavior of said frat boys.
Yeah whether it's legal or not the kids are going to binge drink. Legality has nothing to do with that kind of behavior. Lemmings will be Lemmings.