Some people use the argument, "If someone is old enough to serve our country, they should be able to drink a beer," to show they are in favor of lowering the drinking age. What should happen is, people under the age of 21 who are/have been in the army should be able to legally consume alcohol. Everyone else can wait until they're 21, amirite?
The US has the highest drinking age in the world. Other countries allow drinking at 16, 17, 18, etc. There are less cases of excessive drinking in those places because it's not "forbidden", and people are exposed to it at a younger age, therefore it's not "rebellious" to drink. If it works everywhere else in the world, I should think it would work here too.
Although I do agree that people in the military shouldn't get special treatment. The law's the law.
Also, there's less binge drinking in countries with lower drinking ages.
False. Lowering the drinking age in America will not work. It will get worse.Dont you know the number one cause of death is drunk driving for teens. If we lower it the PRE teens will be the ones rebelling that's not good now is it? There is already an overwhelming amount of youngins who drink. Eventually, yes America can be like other countries with low drinking ages, but the short term effects would be drastic.
Psst! Over here! There isn't any evidence for the thing about preteens. Also, if that were true, they wouldn't be driving, so the amount of drunk driving accidents would be reduced.
The drunk driving and pre teen thing are two separate thoughts. But the drunk driving rates will lower, I can see that. And yes there is plenty of evidence that pre teen are drinking.
You said preteens will begin to rebel. That means they will in the future. Now you say there's evidence that they already do it. If that's true, then lowering the drinking age will have no affect on preteens. So, doesn't that make it a moot point?
She said There are less cases of excessive drinking in those places because it's not "forbidden", and people are exposed to it at a younger age, therefore it's not "rebellious" to drink. Thats what I was referring to when i said rebelling. The pre teens who drink now will keep doing it but I was implying that MORE pre teens might do it than they did before
And I said that you have no evidence to support the claim that more pre-teens will drink with a lowered drinking age. If you had a survey or a study that says that more would drink, I would be interested in seeing it.
Pre teen substance abuse is on the rise without the lowered drinking age if you want proof there are a few articles on the Internet that you could check out, so if that plus your common sense isn't enough evidence for you I dont know what to tell you.
But, I will say the pre teen thing I was arguing for is a bit uncessary and pointless so let's just omit that.
I don't know if this has anything to do with this but aren't the driving ages higher in different countries?
You have to take other cultural differences into account, though. The US also has the most cars / drivers per capita in the world, which is the largest danger of drinking.
Okay, I've had some time to thunk about this and in still a little skeptical about lowering the drinking age, but I think if they did this for the kids in the military all 18-20yo should be able to drink as well. I was trying to think out all the pros and cons and I got stuck on the teen thing, i kept thinking 15-16yo which is kind of stupid because they arent the ones we are talking about legalizing drinking for. So yeah... But I'd still like to hear what you have to say
I think they should lower it for all 18-20 year olds.
Lol it's weird that I was against lowering the drinking age and I'm 18.
What do you mean they shouldn't get ' special treatment' They risk their lives for a cause that keeps you safer, but they don't deserve a lil 'special treatment'?
It's not like every thing is free and easy living for them when they come back, so i think the very least we could do for those 18-20 yo is pass them a beer after they get back. A token of appreciation.
Military people should not get special treatment, and they do not to a certain extent. They ARE allowed to drink in the military. It all depends on where they redeployed.
And besides (as I said in my comment below) what about all the other people that fight for our country? Polic officers and firemen (in training of course. It's not fair that they can't drink, but military people can because they are fighting for our country!
Somebody already stated that they shouldn't get special treatment, so tell me WHY you don't agree, thats what I want to know.
I know people in the military are allowed to drink, soo... What's your point of telling me exactly?
And yes that's a very good point, the 18-20yo officers and firemen etc should be allowed to too.
Again (as I said in my lower comment) I am for lowering the age of drinking. The only reason why I am against it is because what the military does it somewhat voluntary. There isn't really any forced deployment to the wars anymore. And yes, I know they ate fighting for our country. I love them for that. But it isn't fair at all? No one here FORCED them into the war. They went because they wanted to. So why should people complain that they should be able to drink? America is known for being one of the only equal countries in the world, but this in no way is equal.
And my point in telling you that they can drink in different countries was that what you were saying is redundant. They already CAN drink, so why they have the right? It was implied.
Ohh ok well I see we werent on the same page, that comment was just a rule suggestion (given that the law would change) for those 18-20 yo to control the amount of alcohol intake, it was only hypothetical.
Going into the military is a job just like any other (police, firemen etc) and yes there are risk and conditions, I get that. Equality blah blah I've already mostly agreed with you so why are you still arguing?
Because I am
Very passionate about this topic. Let's just leave this debate at that, okay? Agree to disagree to an extent?
bullets aren't usually good for peoples brain cells either
Ok, I think we've come to two safe conclusions here. People want Alcohol, and bullets hurt the brain. I think we can address this to the Supreme Court.
Yeah but if they are going to risk their lives on a day to day basis at least let them have some fun...
Not everyone in the military has a combat position or will even be deployed, do they still get to drink underage? Or only the ones who's lives are in any danger? How would they prove that when buying the alcohol?
ehhh... how bout just lowering the drinking age to 18 for everyone?
I'm Austalian and that's already our drinking age (as well as most other places in the world). I think America's is too high, but if they were to chane itit should be gradually.
"Yeah we're shitfaced let's go bomb ppl!!!".
It does not work that way now so I dout it would work that way in the military if the law were to change. They could drink when off duty/not on ture, with stricter rules like a lower abl ratio
(there are you happy anonymous)
Why don't you learn some grammar etiquette yourself bitch! lrn2spell, the fuck is that? You didn't even capitalize the L. It should have been: Learn to spell. If you're going to tell somebody to learn to spell at least spell out all the words, and don't use the number two in place of t-o.
Also next time instead of just pointing out that I spelled something wrong, tell me what it was I spelled wrong.
ok iz lyk bttr 4u?
Whatever I had spelled wrong probably wasn't spelled wrong on purpose, and it's a little to late for me to fix it sooo...
That's like saying people would get married just to have sex... we all know that doesn't happen
That was my initial thought when reading this. Joining the army should be about so much more than the opportunity to drink before you reach the legal age.
The argument isn't that they deserve to drink based on merit. It's that society deems them to be responsible enough and smart enough to fight for our country, but they aren't responsible enough to consume alcohol and decide what happens to their bodies.
this guy knows what's up
That is a false analogy. Child prodigies may be smart, but they are nowhere near mature enough to join the army or drink. A college student would most likely be 18 so ALL of them would be able to anyway.
Your original post said responsibility and intelligence, nowhere did it mention maturity.
Alright, children are not responsible enough to be in the military. Are you happy now?
I never said anything about kids joining the military, I said that some kids have advanced brains, maybe that of a 18 year old that can choose to be in the army, and with the logic you originally provided, this kid should e able to drink.
Explain the fault in my logic, because if I'm wrong, I want to know why.
"responsible enough and smart enough" is exactly what it said. Are you going tell me that she wasn't talking about intelligence and just added the word smart for no reason?
You really can't take anything into context huh?
You must be one of those people who are like "No, it's 4:58, not 5!"
Please, keep ignoring the "responsible" bit to continue your argument. They said responsible AND smart, not OR smart.
Intelligence does not equate to responsibility.
I think that the drinking age is high because of the effects it has on a younger body, not because someone is too young for the right, if that makes sense
I agree except for the "effects it has on the younger body" part. The effects at 18 aren't much different from 21. I think it's more about the fact that the # of drunk driving cases goes down exponentially with a higher drinking age.
well I'm no expert on the brain, but I've heard quite a few people say that there is quite a bit of brain development between the ages of 18 and 21. Dartmouth did research on this and found it to be true as well.
See, it's all about drunk driving
There is stuff about the brain though that effects it. The frontal lobe of the brain doesn't tend to be completely formed in the male until about the age of 21. This lobe is what helps us determine right from wrong. Thats one of the reasons the drinking age is what it is. You can look up court records that prove it.
Not that people don't drink and drive before they legally can, maybe they wouldn't so much if they could drink legally?
sure there's going to be kids who drink and drive before they legally can, but the statistics show that drunk driving decreased in america when the drinking age rose.
see chart halfway down: http://currentevents002.wikispa...M.A.D.D.+Group
That's just not true. My friends and I were all drinking before 18, but none of us ever went driving after because that would be stupid. Just like when my friends and I used to get high, I'd never drive with someone under the influence. Doing something illegal doesn't automatically make you stupid.
No, people who drink and drive aren't thinking at all, they're dumb as fuck. Doing something illegal doesn't mean you'll do more illegal things. By your logic, people who roll through stop signs are more likely to run people over and drive away. I doubt that lowering the drinking age will cause more kids to drink and drive.
Not commenting because all my reasons have been stated.
Except you commented...
Except it's not about the subject of the post..
It's a comment that people can easily disagree with, just because not everyone in the world shares your thoughts, doesn't mean they are " retards"
It's a comment that people can easily disagree with, just because not everyone in the world shares your thoughts, doesn't mean they are " retards"
Why are you saying " he" , you're the one who said it, you don't need to talk in the third person . And there's definitely no proof that that is a fact
I'm so confused right now... Who the heck is "he"
Well that's not the comment I'm talking about... So whatever were arguing about two different things
OHHHH! I get it ! You said that " whoever downvoted this comment " one about the comment made by Albert Einstein and I just saw that comment and it was right below you're comment that had down votes on it. I get it now,I just completely misunderstood! My bad, let's forget this happened:)
The only people that want to lower the drinking age are under the age of 21
I'm under 21 but I like the drinking age just the way it is.
And greedy corporates that would try make money of off your momma's chest hair if they could.
I don't want people joining the military so they can get legally get booze...
Well you will have the issue of 18 year olds buying loads of liquor for other kids his/her age that havent served in the army.
We can also vote on the people who run our country before we can drink, really if they wanted it changed I believe that it would be possible to band enough people together to get the age lowered
Never too young to make a difference in your country ( army, voting) ... But you can be too young to act like an idiot and get drunk
I no wayed because of the stupid idea of Americans to not discontinue the entire draft possibility. Because now, everyone has the potential to go to war without consent, and since the government can just pull you to go, you're basically waiting to be deported.
My point is that since, as I said, you're basically waiting to be deported; you're sort of like part of a militia - which is similar enough to an army to qualify as one, at least in my opinion.
when you get "deported" let me know, then I'll take back my negative vote on your comment
I know we haven't had one. But the thing is, there's still the possibility of having one. As opposed to all other countries where they don't have even the possibility.
Good thing that didn't have one single thing to do with the post ...
I actually had a debate on this in English class. I am for lowering the drinking age. You should be able to drink at 18, as you are a legal adult. America is pretty much saying, "Okay, you can fight for our country, you can smoke, you have to pay taxes and you can vote, BUT GOD FORBID DRINKING?! No, you aren't 'adult' enough yet for that!"
Now when it comes to drinking in the military. Military people shouldn't get special treatment just because they are in the Military. Yes, I know they are fighting for our country, but what about the people that actually LIVE in our country that fight for us, like firemen and policemen? Should they be able to drink?
And lastly, the reason why some people have the right to drink in the military is because they follow the age of the country they are in. It is perfectly legal for them to drink there if the age to drink is 14. Why should they be left out?
I don't want my soldiers to legally have the right to expose their brains to alcohol before the brain reaches maturity (more than they otherwise would, at any rate) and then go handle any sort of machinery. Impaired judgement of any kind is not acceptable when it comes to killing others, even in the name of war.
Besides, in countries in the Middle East like Afghanistan where most American soldiers are, alcohol is illegal for both the citizens and soldiers, so this is a moot point.
I can see it now:
"Join the army! Defend your country, and get drunk"
More like "get crunk"!
More like "Get in the trunk!"
More like, "get in the bunk...er!"
I just don't think soldiers should get special treatment.
This comment is simple and yet it's the only counterargument needed for this illogical post.
I think you're right because drugs are illegal to sell anyway, so a dealer would have no problem selling to a minor.
I think that's true in the U.S. too.
The biggest problem with the US's drinking age that nobody seems to know about is that there is no actual federal drinking age. The Federal government has no Constitutional authority to pass such a law. However, the government found a way to cheat the Constitution. They threatened to take away 10% of any states' highway fund were they to pass a minimum drinking age below 21. This is why the federal government has no business providing money to states. They basically steal money from the states and then threaten not to give it back unless they surrender themselves to Uncle Sam's will. People don't realize how much the Federal Government overreaches on their power.
I actually learned that in debate class this year and thought it was seriously messed up.
Yeah. And that's not the only thing the Federal Government does it in. That's their loophole. It's ridiculous. Federal grants-in-aid need to end
I learned that NY's drinking age was changed to 21 before NJ's and CT's, but on the weekends all of the NYC kids would drive to either of those states to get drunk, and theu would try driving back to NY, but it caused so many accidents on the weekends that NY made some kind of a deal with NJ and CT to raise their age. I vaguely remember my gov teacher telling us that.
The method they used to enforce the minimum drinking age doesn't seem right, but I'm glad that they did so.
You may like that, but there's sure to be several things they do through this method that you hate.
Am I favvkes yet?
I do it out of love.
you're getting there
They should be the same age. You shouldn't get special treatment just because you're in the army. If you are supposedly mature enough to decide whether you want to risk your life for your country then you are old enough to decide what to do to your body.
I think both should be 18. Finding an 18 year old American who hasn't drunk is rare anyway and I think as legal adult you would have the right to make decisions in your life. State control needs limits.
Actually, most 18 year olds in the US have not "drunk."
Mmk, I No Wayed this because I believe that we just have a silly way of dealing with alcohol. And anything else somewhat controversial. How about we teach that (almost) everything is alright in moderation, not put a limit on what age you can start being stupid.
Don't argue about 18 not being much different from 21, and then asking why our drinking age shouldn't be lower/higher. You have to put the cut-off somewhere, and if you kept saying things like, "Well, what's the difference between 17 and 18?" that will turn into 16 & 17, and so on.
You really have to draw the line somewhere, and it has been drawn.
TBH the worst binge drinking I've seen were in the countries who enforced the drinking age...Once you start drinking when you're 14 you get over drinking-being-a-big thing by the time you're 16.
European drinking culture ftw?
I've had alcohol around me in moderation my whole life. My parents had a glass of wine with dinner, that kind of stuff. When I was 15 or so they let me have a glass (I also at one point when I was 15 got hammered for the first time, and I've only gotten that drunk maybe twice since then). I learned that alcohol is the same as anything and should be indulged in in moderation. So when I turned 18, the novelty had worn off and I didn't care to get shit faced and puke everywhere. The same can be said for most of my friends. That said, the few people I know who had never been drunk until they were 18 went fucking nuts on their birthdays. I've never seen people get that fucked up. Maybe this is just relevant to my group of friends, or maybe it's suggestive for the general population, all I have is my experiences so I don't know. My point is that if you learn about booze before you're legally allowed to drink, you're probably gunna understand it better and thus not abuse it so much.
tl;dr? I agree with you.
It would be unfair. It's basically saying that if you want a small reward, you have to take a great risk; not unlike going bungee jumping for a Twinkie. I say remove the minimum drinking age altogether.
In some countries, there is no minimum drinking age. I think that is good because it teaches kids and parents alcohol responsibility early on and it takes away a rite of passage. You wouldn't constantly hear about kids binge drinking on their 21st birthday because they weren't sheltered from alcohol all their lives.
Bungee jumping isn't that dangerous if you do it right, and Twinkies are delicious. Your argument is invalid.
Not a good idea. In my opinion, the US has existed with this law for too long to turn back. While I get that countries that don't have regulations exist fine, it's because everyone has been living that way for their whole lives. In the US, there are too many kids that abuse alcohol illegally that making it legal would only hurt them more. The rite of passage would be the day the law goes into action, and boom, binge drinking everywhere.
It would be the last of the binge drinking. One of the plus sides of having a minimum drinking age is that it allows for binge drinking. Binge drinking is simply natural selection doing its job.
First of all, that would most definitely not end binge drinking. It doesn't just happen on people's 21st birthday, people drink heavily all the time. Second, are you saying that by binge drinking being natural selection, anyone who doesn't have the self control not to overdrink fully deserves whatever consequences they get?
Binge drinking won't go away, I know this. It will be reduced. And yes, if you play with fire, you will get burned. You can either accept that or not play with fire.
Drinking has consequences. I have absolutely no sympathy for someone who drinks in excess and gets hurt.
What about young people who start drinking in their teens and then get addicted? Teens' prefrontal cortex's aren't fully developed, so should they still suffer all the consequences of their actions?
Exactly. Generally, kids learn early on the dangers of alcohol abuse so, usually, they are aware of the potential consequences.
If we were to do that, it would be best to gradually lower the drinking age. 18, 16, 14, 12, none. I personally think that the drinkin age should stay right where it's at. It wouldn't affect me either way because I have medications that don't mix well with alcohol, but I still care about other people's safety. I just believe that the age is fine this way.
I think that it should be 19. I would say 18, but there are people that are still in high school when they're 18, and some of them would probably show up to school drunk. You're seen as an adult when you're 19, you can vote, fight for your country, and be charged as an adult. If you allow people to do all of those things that show responsibility and maturity, you should be able to legally buy alcohol.
Kids show up drunk to school anyway.
People will be smokin weed in their cars in the school parking lot.
And it's not like the administrators can do much about it, they'll just drive away.
Kids are still in high school at 19 too. And don't act like 16-year-olds don't show up to class drunk, it happens.
When people use that as an argument they are saying that if someone has enough responsibilty to join the military then they should have enough responsibility to just have a drink. They're not saying that being in the military means you're suddenly capable of consuming alcohol.
Oh, and inb4 people complaining that it's hard to make witty comments on a serious POTD.
I don't really feel like going through all the comments so if this has been said already, I apologize in advance. The point of the statement isn't about joining the army, it's saying if they're giving you the responsibility at 18 to choose whether or not you can go and put your life on the line, then you should also be responsible enough to consume alcohol.
Aaand now I see that it's been said.
Honestly, I don't think it really matters in the end. The law isn't really stopping teenagers from drinking regardless.
It's debates like this that make me even happier to be Canadian.
toddlers should be walking around with a 40oz amirite?
Raise the recruitment age. Problem solved.
What I don't understand is why an 18 year old is allowed to start in porn but not drink. It's like, "Hey, you're old enough to expose your body and have 40 year old men fap to you, but you cannot drink. Sorry bro."
which one has caused more deaths?
eh don't answer that
That makes sense.
That's what already happens in the US. If you're in the military, you can drink on base, even if you're only eighteen.
I guess you've never heard of the term "equal rights".
I thought you could purchase alcohol with your military I.D. no matter what age you are.
hAHHHAHHAHAHHA, you simply could not be more wrong, could you
It used to be this way but they stopped it in the 70s. someone may have said this already though
In Australia the legal drinking age is 18, but we still have 'rebellious' teens who drink at 14, 15, 16. Regardless of the legal age, there will always be people who don't abide by the laws, so it doesn't make a difference whether it's 18 or 21 years old. People are going to drink when they feel like it, not when the law dictates they can. Personally though, i think drinking alcohol any younger than 18 is fucking stupid, even 18 is a bit too young.
What concerns me the most about lowering the drinking age is the period between lowering the drinking age in America and the period where society/young kids are accustomed to it and view drinking like teenagers in other countries (with no drinking age or a very young one, like 14) do. That may be an entire generation or two. It would be complete chaos, and drunk driving accidents, property vandalism, injuries due to intoxication, etc. would probably increase exponentially due to all the 18 year olds who were expecting to have to wait 3 more years but can suddenly go to bars at 18.
Believe it or not, this USED to be the law. In the days of the draft, if you were in the army, you could drink on base at least if you were 18. I guess they changed it when they removed the draft, so since no one is being forced to be in the Army anymore I guess the drinking age argument would still be invalid.
I don't think there should be a drinking age because performing an illegal act such as underage drinking makes a great form of "rebellion" for teenagers and very appealing. I mean teenagers do it anyway no matter if it is illegal or not so maybe eliminating a drinking age will teach kids to drink in moderation and not binge.
Just because it's the first one you've seen doesn't mean there haven't been negative ones before...
We should get them a time macne so they can see the other ones.
just use your military ID which doesn't have your age on it, and you're good
Wasn't this just homepaged today?
k i thought so, thanks. btw... congrats on POTD
hurrrrrrr I'm OP
How is this a POTD?
I don't see how you can enforce it. How do you prove to someone you're in the military? Do you have to be in uniform? or produce some certificate? then people just fake these and it leads to more underage drinking. Then why should only those in the military be allowed to drink? why not parents under 21? or those working full time?
If you're in the military you have a military ID. What you're saying about how people will "just fake these" is stupid, because people would just get a fake regular ID if they wanted to drink.
my question is why is this POTD...
Controversial Anthony took over regular old Anthony.
First, it's already been said.
Second, because controversial POTDs are better because it a) increases your intelligence on various subjects, b) you get to debate and c) it's nice to change it up
Finally, this was magically chosen as POTD.
Good enough reasons?
The drinking age should be lowered, the driving age should be raised and public transportation should be improved. Also, if anyone is caught driving drunk, revoke their license for a year. If it happens again, revoke it for life, with no exceptions.
Not sure how to vote on your comment because of the mixed feelings I have with your suggestions.
-Lower drinking age: Has its ups and downs. Lowering it means that college kids won't drink illegally, but it also means they're legally obligated to drink. So I'm half-and-half.
-Driving age raised: No. Now, this will sound biased (because it is) but taking Driver's Ed in Sophomore year is fine. It means that majority of the Sophomoers will be driving by Junior year, age 17, which is the perfect age for driving.
-Public transportation improved: I don't want to be on those nasty buses with their germs.
-Revoke license for a year: Seems a bit harsh. A short suspension + fine seems steep enough.
-Revoke license for life: That's just insane. Sure, drunk driving is a serious offense, but this is just TOO much of a punishment.
tl;dr: I agree with some and disagree with others.
I'll tell you what my American friend told me when he came to Canada for school, "American college students party way harder than you guys ever do." Basically, we go out to the bars that close around 2, and we all go back to our residence (we were all living on campus at the time) and eat McDonalds and have good laughs and maybe watch movies. However (this is what he told me, I've never been to an American college party so it could be wrong), because the kids in American colleges can't go to the bars, they get booze on their own and drink all night and all over the place (as opposed to contained in a bar area) and wreck shit up. The point being that these kids are drinking regardless of legality, and they're drinking harder than those where it is legal.
Also, I fully agree with revoking a license of a drunk driver on their second offence. That's almost like walking around drunk with a loaded gun and no safety. Nobody has the right to put your or my life at risk, which is what anyone who drinks and drives does. People die WAY too often because of drunk driving and that would likely not happen so much if there were more of a punishment for those doing it.
People in the army are stupid for even signing up. Then they whine about everyone dying. Like wtf don't go if you're gonna bitch.
TROOLLL. In the dungeon.
If you're going to write (in my opinion, generalizing, judgmental, and rude) comments like this, stop doing it under anonymous.
Oh shit! I'm convinced.
You know, people rare capable of commenting without having an account.
I could gladly tear the shit out of you at the moment. But because you are a troll, i'll do this; SHUDDA FUCK UP TROLL