Old enough to die, not old enough to drink?

[dustdevil28]

I've heard that it used to be if you were active duty military that you could pretty much walk into any bar and buy a beer.

That changed sometime in the 1980's and the U.S. started a program in which a 18 year old could voluntarily put himself in harms way for his country, but he could not have a beer.

A Wisconsin lawmaker is seeking to change the law in that state. He's proposing to allow any servicemember at least 19 years of age residing in the state to consume alcohol.

Any thoughts?

www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_drink_060105,00.html

[Merceditas]

I think the alcohol laws in our country are unecessary. Is the public that irresponsible that we can't even learn how to handle alcohol without the government interfering with it?

I grew up in NY, could buy beer at the corner deli for my father when I was old enough to carry home a six pack for him. What is wrong with that?

It hit me rather hard, when I turned 18, and I was now allowed in bars or to purchase spirits in a liquor store (in NY), I had moved to ND, where the legal drinking age was 21. At 19 I was married, but couldn't even (legally ) have a drink at my wedding or a restaurant with my husband.

It is not reasonable to prohibit smoking, alcohol, etc from people who are legally permitted to marry and serve their country.

[retire2005]

Yesterday I heard a spokeswoman for MADD saying that alllowing service men and women under the age of 21 to drink would be criminal. She felt it would turn into abuse. Duh?
When was the last time this loon was at a senior prom? If she thinks they are going to drink to excess while they are in service, she is totally off her rocker. Most kids drink the most when IN highschool and college, not when they have jobs or are in the military. For one thing, they are too damn busy to sit around and get shitfaced.
If an 18 year old is old enought to lay his life on the line for his nation, then he/she should damn well be able to buy a drink. And the MADD mother didn't bother to say that if a soldier gets unruly, well, then the MP, SP and other military police will have a little "Come to Jesus" meeting with that soldier that he won't like.

[virginian]

I can always use more DUI clients.

[Husky23]

Ya well - I'm abit torn on the subject.

I recall in the early eighties a young soldier could drink on base establishments but if under age for that state could not outside post. Then, laws were set in motion for bases to match the legal drinking age of the state it resided in - so if under age for that state - now no drinking on base either.

Generally I think if old enough to die for Uncle Sugar then old enough to drink. But, qualify that with knowing 18,19 & 20 year olds at high testosterone levels will get themselves (and others) in trouble, or worse. It's a trade off - but when do the scientific numbers and data indicate 21-25 year old shouldn't drink either? Or when responsible enough to get a liciense? Or vote? Or how many hours a 16 year old can monitor younger sibling during daylight hours while mom and pop are away? Or when is one old enough to peel potatoes or slice onions? Or turn on the stove and boil water?

[101ABN]

Virginian said:

I can always use more DUI clients.

I have plenty to go around as it is.

No need to invite more.

[101ABN]

Maybe the slogan should be "Old enough to die in Iraq, Old enough to splatter yourself all over the highways, taking a few innocents with you."

Anyone who thinks there isn't a significant difference in the maturity level of an 18 year old and a twenty-one year old is grossly misinformed. Additionally, there are issues with brain physiology that need to be considered as the brain is still a work in progress at age 18.

When drinking ages were lowered to match the voting ages back in the 70's there was an immediate spike in alcohol related deaths involving 18-21 year olds, mostly males. This caused many states to raise the minimum age back to 21 until the Feds got involved. ('84?)

I understand the feelings related to wanting the troops to be able to partake in adult refreshment. The reality is that although millions of Americans enjoy alcohol responsibly, it is still the most dangerous and most abused drug in our society.

There is no benefit to lowering the drinking age, except to the brewers, distillers and distributors of alcoholic beverages. No benefit and significant societal cost.

Sounds like a bad idea to me.

[LorSpi]

101ABN said:

Maybe the slogan should be "Old enough to die in Iraq, Old enough to splatter yourself all over the highways, taking a few innocents with you."

Anyone who thinks there isn't a significant difference in the maturity level of an 18 year old and a twenty-one year old is grossly misinformed. Additionally, there are issues with brain physiology that need to be considered as the brain is still a work in progress at age 18.

When drinking ages were lowered to match the voting ages back in the 70's there was an immediate spike in alcohol related deaths involving 18-21 year olds, mostly males. This caused many states to raise the minimum age back to 21 until the Feds got involved. ('84?)

I understand the feelings related to wanting the troops to be able to partake in adult refreshment. The reality is that although millions of Americans enjoy alcohol responsibly, it is still the most dangerous and most abused drug in our society.

There is no benefit to lowering the drinking age, except to the brewers, distillers and distributors of alcoholic beverages. No benefit and significant societal cost.

Sounds like a bad idea to me.

Even with it being illegal, kids are killing themselves and others with alcohol. There a string of car accidents involving high schoolers - something like 23 deaths within a matter of weeks. Most were alcohol related. It was so bad that both states (Md and Va) are restricting under 18 drivers and are prosecuting adults who allow their teenagers to drink at home. Personally - I think that's a bit extreme. But that body count - I don't see what other options are there.

[retire2005]

101ABN said:

Maybe the slogan should be "Old enough to die in Iraq, Old enough to splatter yourself all over the highways, taking a few innocents with you."

Anyone who thinks there isn't a significant difference in the maturity level of an 18 year old and a twenty-one year old is grossly misinformed. Additionally, there are issues with brain physiology that need to be considered as the brain is still a work in progress at age 18.


I understand the feelings related to wanting the troops to be able to partake in adult refreshment. The reality is that although millions of Americans enjoy alcohol responsibly, it is still the most dangerous and most abused drug in our society.

There is no benefit to lowering the drinking age, except to the brewers, distillers and distributors of alcoholic beverages. No benefit and significant societal cost.

Sounds like a bad idea to me.

Are you trying to say that an 18 year old, laying on his ass all summer waiting for school to start up again, and having money put in his pocket from mommie and daddy is of the same maturity level as an 18 year old who has been throught boot camp, has crazed terrorists shooting at him on a daily basis, and has walked the walk and talked the talk?
That's just plain nuts.
Facing a guy with a rag tied around his head holding an AK47 trying to kill you is a quick trip to maturity.
When was the last time you were at a senior prom? See anyone sober there?
Hell, yes, if you are old enough to die for your country, you damn well are old enough for me to buy you a beer.

[101ABN]

retire2005 said:

Are you trying to say that an 18 year old, laying on his ass all summer waiting for school to start up again, and having money put in his pocket from mommie and daddy is of the same maturity level as an 18 year old who has been throught boot camp, has crazed terrorists shooting at him on a daily basis, and has walked the walk and talked the talk?
That's just plain nuts.
Facing a guy with a rag tied around his head holding an AK47 trying to kill you is a quick trip to maturity.
When was the last time you were at a senior prom? See anyone sober there?
Hell, yes, if you are old enough to die for your country, you damn well are old enough for me to buy you a beer.

Are you ignoring the developmental differences that occur between 18 and 21?

Put your emotions aside and look at it rationally.

Experiencing violence is no more a quick trip to maturity than experiencing an orgasm is preparation for parenthood.

As I said, no benefit and significant societal cost.

[Merceditas]

Consider other countries which dont' have the late age limits or no limits at all on alcohol. I don't think they have large amounts of car accidents due to alcohol, certainly not more than the US. Or do they?

If not, perhaps there something wrong with Americans that we can't be as responsible.

If a person isn't mature enough to deal with alcohol at 18 then the government shouldn't allow them to be married or serve in the military in combat.

[101ABN]

Merceditas said:

Consider other countries which dont' have the late age limits or no limits at all on alcohol. I don't think they have large amounts of car accidents due to alcohol, certainly not more than the US. Or do they?

If not, perhaps there something wrong with Americans that we can't be as responsible.

If a person isn't mature enough to deal with alcohol at 18 then the government shouldn't allow them to be married or serve in the military in combat.

Most 18 yos in those countries don't have cars.

Comparing marriage, drinking and combat is like comparing apples, oranges, and walnuts.

Marriage is a societal institution necessary for the creation and preservation of the family. Combat is violent behavior between individuals, groups or nations, regrettable but sometimes necessary for the preservation of society.

Neither involves the ingestion of a mind-altering mood-altering substance that can have serious side effects, and enormous potential for abuse, that is NEVER necessary. No one needs to drink.

No benefit + significant societal cost = bad idea.

[dustdevil28]

Husky23 said:

Ya well - I'm abit torn on the subject.

I recall in the early eighties a young soldier could drink on base establishments but if under age for that state could not outside post. Then, laws were set in motion for bases to match the legal drinking age of the state it resided in - so if under age for that state - now no drinking on base either.

Generally I think if old enough to die for Uncle Sugar then old enough to drink. But, qualify that with knowing 18,19 & 20 year olds at high testosterone levels will get themselves (and others) in trouble, or worse. It's a trade off - but when do the scientific numbers and data indicate 21-25 year old shouldn't drink either? Or when responsible enough to get a liciense? Or vote? Or how many hours a 16 year old can monitor younger sibling during daylight hours while mom and pop are away? Or when is one old enough to peel potatoes or slice onions? Or turn on the stove and boil water?

This is what I think should be the norm for our troops in the states. While they should not be drinking off base I don't see the problem with a few drinks on base.

As Sailor could tell anyone, on navy bases the ships put out a group of people known as shore patrol. This groups responsibility is to walk around the bars on base and help keep people from getting out of hand.

[dustdevil28]

101ABN said:

Are you ignoring the developmental differences that occur between 18 and 21?

Put your emotions aside and look at it rationally.

Experiencing violence is no more a quick trip to maturity than experiencing an orgasm is preparation for parenthood.

As I said, no benefit and significant societal cost.

101, are you against the idea of underage drinking for military everywhere, or just off base?

If they are restricted to drinking on base it would be in a situation where any incidents would be under the control of the military. A bartender could be held more accountable for not cutting a person off at the right time. The shore patrol could keep watch over these folks and report or restrain drunks from driving.

In this case I see it as "benefit for our troops and society" by offering a venue that perhaps keeps fewer troops off base when they drink, and less drunk driving by underage military folks.

[Merceditas]

101ABN said:

Most 18 yos in those countries don't have cars.

Comparing marriage, drinking and combat is like comparing apples, oranges, and walnuts.

Marriage is a societal institution necessary for the creation and preservation of the family. Combat is violent behavior between individuals, groups or nations, regrettable but sometimes necessary for the preservation of society.

Neither involves the ingestion of a mind-altering mood-altering substance that can have serious side effects, and enormous potential for abuse, that is NEVER necessary. No one needs to drink.

No benefit + significant societal cost = bad idea.

Are you for making alcohol illegal for everyone?

For now I'll stay out of the debate over alcohol being a mind-altering substance, and stick with our rights as citizens of a free country and maturity.

I'm all for less government interference, unless it's absolutely necessary. BUT I know those of us even with 'conservative' values disagree on where to draw the line of governmental interference and governmental responsiblity.

I do believe the less rules and regulations, the better for all us. I think the govt should have stayed out of the marriage department, despite the benefits it has in staying there, but I think the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Minors drinking, that should be a parent's responsibility. If our country is needing the government to come in and make laws because our children are hurting themselves and others by drinking and driving, it's more to do with Americans being responsible parents than the need of a law that makes the responsible be held to the same standards as the irresponsible and just plain stupid.