]]>
]]>
]]>
Statistics: Posted by softbaitmaker — Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:47 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
and like someone mentioned earlier, if you are old/responsible enough to lay down your life for the country, then you are old/responsible enough to drink a beer or twelve.
Statistics: Posted by SSminnow — Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:02 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
Some of the older guys can remember back in the day in high school smoking and drinking. You lived through it! A bunch of the guys I went to school with didn't make it, but it wasn't from the smoking. DRIVING AND DRINKING to the lives of a bunch of guys and gals I went to school with.
Hope this is what you were looking for.
Hey don't get me wrong I DRANK my share all the way up until 1994 and even smoked a few of them CAMELS!
SO DO WHAT YOU WANT AND YOU WILL MAKE CHANGE WHEN YOU WANT TOO, YOU WANT HAVE TO HAVE ONE OF THEM BACK STABBING ELECTED OFFICIALS TO TELL YOU WHEN.
I wonder why on the Insurance forms they only ask if you and wife smoke. I guess drinking doesn't KILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Maybe their is somebody on here that can answer that one.
Don't worry when I retire I think I'm going to start back DRANK'IN might even take up SMOKE'IN, IF YOU DON'T LIKE ME "NOW", HELL JUST WAIT TILL 2012!!!!!!!
THEM DAMN BUDS ARE LIKE OPENING UP A CASE OF CHIPS, GOOD TO THE LAST DROP! BUD_WISE_ER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Should the US legal drinking age be lowered to 18 OR should it remain at 21 years old?
A. Introduction
At 18 years old, there are many responsibilities gained, such as being able to marry, but one cannot drink alcohol at the wedding reception because every state in the United States has set the legal drinking age at 21 years old. The drinking age has a major impact on the 18-21 year-old crowd because many feel drinking is a right they should have since they are considered adults. This is an issue that faces the national and state governments. The United States passed a law in 1984, to raise the drinking age to 21, and would reduce highway funds for states that didn’t change the age. (United States. Department of Transportation.) Should the drinking age be lowered to 18 years old, when one is considered an adult, and assumes adult privileges and penalties, or should the drinking age remain at 21 years old, since people are more mature and therefore, can be safe and responsible with alcohol?
B. Background Information
There has been a debate since Prohibition, on whether alcohol consumption should be legal or not. Prohibition occurred in 1919, when the 18th Amendment was approved. Prohibition outlawed the manufacture, sale, and transportation of intoxicating liquors. This Amendment was repealed with the 21st Amendment in 1933. (FindLaw)
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required all of the states to change their legal drinking age, if the states refused to comply with the law, they would lose money under the Federal Aid Highway Act. (Koroknay-Palicz) Candy Lightner, the founder of MADD, was a key player in the passing of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. Lightner wanted to put this bill in action to prevent people from being killed in an alcohol related crash. (Koroknay-Palicz) The National Traffic Highway Safety Administration has estimated that 18,220 lives have been saved due to an increased drinking age. (Drinking Age Limits) During 2001, in Minnesota, there were 568 fatal car crashes, and 226 of which were alcohol related. (Shearouse) 41% of all of the traffic fatalities in the United States, in 2001, are alcohol related. (Shearouse)
The decision of whether or not to lower the drinking age, or to keep it at 21 is continually brought up by special interest groups, such as MADD – Mothers Against Drunk Driving, which wants to keep the drinking age at 21. (Shearouse) One of the special interest groups in favor of lowering the drinking age is LAFAA – Legalize Alcohol for all Adults. (Legal Drinking Age) Another organization that would like the drinking age to remain at 21 is SADD, or Students Against Drunk Driving.
Drinking five or more drinks in one sitting defined with the term, “binge drinker. “Frequent users,” will drink anywhere from three times a week to everyday. Drinking once per week to once per month is defined as a “moderate user.” (Lowering the Minimum) A survey by the Harvard School of Public Health College Alcohol Study indicates that 52.3% of those college students, who chose to drink, drink to get drunk. 41.5% of college students who drink alcohol reported usually binging when they drank. (Lowering the Minimum) Binge Drinking is a serious problem among college campuses.
Men in America, aged 18-21, often feel cheated that they are unable to legally drink, but must register to draft for the army. A student at Southern Methodist University in Dallas said, "You can be drafted by your country, go to war — yet you can’t have a beer. You can be tried as an adult — yet you can’t have a beer." Many Americans feel it is unfair they are able to die for their country, but cannot consume alcohol. (Tobin)
Drinking under the age of 21 is illegal, and therefore seen a rebellious activity by teenagers. Some even believe it’s made drinking alcohol, especially abusively or excessively, more widespread among college students and others in the 18-to-21 category. (Tobin) An editor for the National Review, Jona Goldberg said, “In some ways, it perversely encourages drinking because it made it a rebellious thing to do." (Tobin) There are many surveys to suggest teen drinking is on the rise. According to researchers, the average age that teens start drinking was 18 in the 1980’s, and has lowered to 16 in the 1990’s. (Drinking Among Teens) Half of high school students have consumed alcohol in the past month, and increase as students get older, according to a 1999 survey. (Drinking Among Teens) 43.7% of 8th grade students, 62.7% of 10th grade students, and 74.3% of 12th grade students report using alcohol in the past year. (Lowering the Minimum) People under 21 years of age continue to use alcohol even though it is illegal.
Evidence suggests that although teens continue to drink alcohol illegally, raising the legal drinking age from 18 to 21 has had a significant impact on the people. Teen drinking has decreased 13% since the passing of the law in 1984, according to researchers. (Tobin) The table below indicates the positives and negatives found by the Harvard Survey of College Administrators and Security Chiefs:
Table 1. Report by College Administrators on the Consequences of Increasing the Minimum Drinking Age to 21
Reported Consequence Percent
Students have become more aware of the problems related to drinking 71%
Underage student drinking has decreased 25%
Heavy drinking has decreased 20%
Student drinking has continued but gone off-campus 81%
Students drive after drinking more frequently 27%
Student drinking has continued on-campus, but gone "underground" 70%
Atmosphere on campus has become more conducive to studying 34%
Campus morale has suffered 32%
Enforcement of alcohol policies has become more difficult 48%
This table indicates that there have been many benefits to raising the drinking age to 21. (Wechsler) Many schools and colleges have created a zero-tolerance policy for underage drinking. A zero-tolerance policy means the school has no lenience for violating a school rule, and the student will be removed from the activity or dorm room he/she is in. (Wechsler)
D. Social Analysis
The disagreement between those who want the drinking age to remain at 21, and those desiring it to be lowered to 18 can be defined with the Conflict Perspective theory. One of the main points in this theory is that inequality in society will lead to conflict. (“Swenson, Amy. Soc Notes”) Those in the age category of 18 to 21 feel as if they’re unequal, because they are not allowed to consume alcohol. They feel as if they are missing out on drinking, because at 18, one is considered a legal adult, with all of the responsibilities, except for drinking. (Levine) Many adults feel as if the 18-21 age group cannot handle drinking responsibly, and therefore, should not be permitted to use it. (Shearouse)
The source of all social conflict is through the struggle of scarce resources. (Swenson, Amy. “Soc Notes”) The scarce resource people are fighting over is rights. It seems nobody can be satisfied with the law. There are those who are fighting for equal rights, and trying to be considered an adult on all levels. The other side is fighting to keep the drinking age law at 21 because it will keep the roads and people safer. (Shearouse)
The group in power will stay in power through force. (Swenson, Amy. “Soc. Notes.”) Most of those in power wish to stay in power, so they will target those who have the majority of the votes, the over 21 crowd. The politicians will try to run on issues they feel the majority of their voters agree with. It is similar to the Marxist Theory, which is, class inequality is the cause of all evil. (Swenson, Amy. “Soc Notes.”) The older people in power are choosing the law for young people, who aren’t able to be in power yet. People are unable to run for a position in the Minnesota State Senate or House until they are 21 years old. (Swenson, Amy. “Public Policy.”) This leaves the 18-21 group without a politician from the group being able to run on an issue that is of importance to them.
Socialization is the process by which humans learn the norms of society. The norms of society are what is and is not permitted in the world. (Swenson, Amy. “Soc Notes.”) The norms of drinking have changed over the years through organized effort. In 1919-1933, there was prohibition in the United States. (FindLaw) Candy Lightner helped bring on the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984. (Koroknay-Palicz) The laws and norms concerning drinking have legally changed over the past century. Among various cultures around the world, the minimum drinking age is different in many countries. The United States currently has the highest drinking age in the world, set at 21 years old. Three countries have set their minimum age at 20, one set it at 19, and the rest are 18 or younger. (Legal Drinking Age)
The agents of socialization also have an effect on the drinking age. Agents of Socialization are individuals, groups, organizations that influence a person’s behavior and development. There are four main agents: family, peers, school, and the mass media. (Swenson, Amy. “Soc. Notes.”) An individual’s family has significant importance in the use of alcohol. There are many families that permit their son/daughter to drink alcohol at family gatherings under their supervision. This sends a conflicting message to the individual, that they are allowed to drink alcohol as long as they are not caught by the police. The peers of an individual can have a strong influence. A person will behave according to their friends’ standards in order fit in and be accepted. If peers encourage others to drink alcohol underage, often teens will drink to feel more accepted by their peers. School can influence the individual by sending out a “don’t drink” message. Often schools have classes, such as health, which will encourage students to not drink and drive, or to say no to alcohol and drugs. (Levine) The mass media shows images and displays stories of underage drinking, which makes teens watching the programs think it is acceptable and permitted to drink underage. (Peterson) These conflicting messages are one of the reasons we have teens drinking underage.
The sociological imagination by C. Wright Mills is ability to seer the inter-relationship between the self, the historical period, and the society in which one lives. (Swenson, Amy. “Soc Notes.”) The structures of society that are involved in the legal drinking age are the economy, family, and government. The government would have to pass a law that would change the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, and put full power back into the states. (Koroknay-Palicz) The family would have to decide what would be an alright time for their son/daughter to begin drinking, and whether or not their rules would coincide with the law currently set up. The economy would be affected if the 18 to 21 year olds were suddenly able to drink. The supply would stay the same, while demand would increase as the 18 to 21 year olds would want to express their new freedom. (Koroknay-Palicz) The history of the drinking age goes back to prohibition. There were laws less than a century ago, that had to deal with public’s concern of drinking. (Koroknay-Palicz) The society we live in today is more concerned with the age of those drinking.
E. Economic Analysis
Opportunity cost is the cost associated with the lost opportunity of the next best choice. (Swenson, Amy. “Econ. Notes.”) In 1984, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act was passed so the opportunity cost was allowing 18 to 21 year olds to drink alcohol. Another opportunity cost with that situation was forcing states into enforcing the National Minimum Drinking Age Act by reducing their highway funding significantly. If the United States chooses to do away with the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, the opportunity cost will be safer roads, and an increase in the demand for alcohol in the short term.
Incentives help to change the behavior of people, either for the better or for the worse. (Swenson, Amy. “Econ. Notes.”) The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 was passed, and refused to give money to states that did not change the minimum drinking age to 21. This was an incentive for to the state governments to change their laws. If the state government did not change their drinking age law, they would not get money from the national government. (Koroknay-Palicz)
Supply and demand would be greatly affected if the law were to allow 18 to 21 year olds access to alcohol. Demand is a measure of value, or how much one is able to pay for a product. (Swenson, Amy. “Econ Notes.”) Demand would increase, because 18 to 21 year olds would be willing and able to purchase alcohol. The supply of alcohol would remain the same. Supply is the amount provided by the producer. (Swenson, Amy. “Econ Notes.”) With an increased demand, and a supply that remains the same, there could possibly be a shortage in alcohol. A shortage is defined as highly increased prices due to an increase demand, and not enough supply. (Swenson, Amy. “Econ Notes.”) If the law is not changed at all, price will remain at equilibrium. Equilibrium is the balance between supply and demand, producing a stable price.
F. Public Policy Analysis
Many people are demanding change on the National Minimum Drinking Age Act. The people wanting to change the law are called stakeholders, or those who have an interest or are impacted by the current law or the proposed law. (Swenson, Amy. “Public Policy.”) All people between the ages of 18 and 21 are stakeholders because they are being impacted by the current law in place. Other stakeholders are those who have an interest, such as an online group, like Legalize Alcohol for All Adults. (Legal Drinking Age) LAFAA supports the idea that all people 18 and older should be able to choose whether or not they would like to drink, not to have the government regulate it.
Stakeholders also support the opposing side of the issue, to continue to keep the minimum drinking age at 21. Groups such as MADD, have an interest in keeping the drinking age at 21, because they feel that more people will not drink and drive. (Shearouse) Many of those stakeholders have become key players. Key players help to change policy. A key player in the National Minimum Drinking Age Act was one mom of MADD, Candy Lightner, who helped to raise the age to 21 in 1984. (Koroknay-Palicz)
There have been no laws placed into action in recent years to make any changes on the law that currently stands. Lobbyists for MADD currently go to Congress to try and get laws to make penalties harsher on those caught drunk driving and to attempt states to reduce the legal limit to .08 instead of .10. (Shearouse)
This is a concern at the national and state government levels. The national government passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984, and withheld money from states that refused to change their minimum drinking age to 21. (Koroknay-Palicz) The states felt it was their right to decide the drinking age and the national government shouldn’t be able to offer incentives to get states to change the law to what the national government thought was best. The power to choose a minimum drinking age is a reserved power, a power given to the state and denied the national government. (Swenson, Amy. “Public Policy.”) The National Minimum Drinking Age Act doesn’t violate this law because it doesn’t require the states to change their laws, but it offers incentives for changing the law.
G. Policy Recommendation
I believe the National Minimum Drinking Age Act should be changed to allow 18 to 21 year olds the ability to purchase and consume alcohol. At 18, one is considered an “adult.” Being an adult gives many rights and responsibilities. At 18, you are able to marry, sign legal contracts, purchase lottery tickets, purchase cigarettes, and fight for your country, but you are unable to consume alcohol. 18 years old is when you become an adult, and therefore should get all of the privileges of becoming an adult.
In order to change the law to allow 18 to 21 year olds drink alcohol, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act needs to be changed so that it allows states to lower their minimum drinking age to 18 or above. I think it is the state’s right to choose the drinking age, but 18 is more realistic minimum. Interest groups supporting my idea need to hire a lobbyist to present this idea to Congress, and get the senators and representatives interested in this issue. (Legal Drinking Age) Members of Congress will have to create a bill, and get the bill passed in both houses of Congress. (Swenson, Amy. “Public Policy”) After the bill has been passed, states will have the decision to make the minimum drinking age 18, 19, 20, or 21. The states will have the right to change the age as they see fit. This allows people to move to a state that has a drinking age law that corresponds to their beliefs.
Implementing this policy change would have manifest and latent functions. The manifest, or intended, consequences of changing the law would allow 18 to 21 year olds the ability to drink alcohol. It would also allow states more freedom, in that they are able to choose the drinking age that works the best for their state. A latent, or unintended consequence of my policy is the increase in demand for alcohol. There will be many more people exercising the freedom to drink alcohol, so the supply will remain the same, but demand will increase, causing a shortage. (Swenson, Amy. “Econ Notes”) Another latent function is driving will become more dangerous, due to an increase in drunk driving. More people will drink since it is legal, therefore, more will drive while intoxicated. There will be consequences, both positive and negative about this law, but the positives outweigh the negatives.
Changing a law will cost money. The interest groups will have to get money from sponsors and individuals in order to hire a lobbyist. (Shearouse) The government will need money in order to implement this new law. An idea would be to charge a sin tax on alcohol purchases. This increase in revenue from alcohol can help pay for the policy and law changes. (Conway) A sin tax is tax generated on an item deemed “sinful” such as tobacco. (Swenson, Amy. “Public Policy”)
H. Conclusion
I fully believe the minimum drinking age should be changed to allow states the ability to choose between the ages of 18 and 21. It allows states to exercise their rights as states, and allows those above 18 years of age to have all of the privileges and responsibilities that comes with gaining and adult status. “Carpe diem” translated is “seize the day”, there is no guarantee for tomorrow, and you must take action today. Don’t wait until tomorrow, take action and get the National Minimum Drinking Age Act changed!
Statistics: Posted by Boogerman — Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:24 pm
]]>