Age: how important is that number?

[Dibley]

The extremely high (one of the highest in the world) drinking age in America is largely due to historical reasons. The driving force behind the increase of drinking age was MADD, which as it progressed became more and more extremist. Currently, one of their major goals is to maintain the 21 limit, with the occasional push towards various forms of prohibitionism, like mandatory breathalysers mounted on car ignitions, so that cars would not start if the driver had any alcohol in him (or if the delicate device broke, unless someone just got sick of it and removed it). Although they seem in some ways (like the acronym) to focus on drunk driving, much of their emphasis is against any drinking whatsoever.

It is unfortunate that the issue was placed in their hands, but they are well funded and influential. It seems unlikely that the law will ever be amended to 18, where I feel it belongs. It seems absurd that legal adulthood does not extend to drinking.

Personally, I feel that legal adulthood (especially age of consent) should not be at 18, there is the obvious problem of where to put it. I think I was mature enough to handle most of the responsibilities by 15 or 16, there are plenty of people that aren't.

[Jach]

Honestly, I don't really care about the legal limits for tobacco and alcohol. Probably because I've tried various beers and wines, and decided that the flavor is nasty; also, my parents drink, and I really don't like the prospect of looking like a retard. As for smoking, I see no health benefits, I see no reason to do it, and growing up in a smoke-filled environment I hate the stench of cigarette smoke.

Sex...Well, I'm mostly of the opinion that "Meh, I haven't found any nerdish girls into programming around my area, and those (or other obviously intelligent girls) are my type and the only ones I'd consider sex with. And any girls I do see that meet my criteria are already taken or obviously not interested in a relationship, especially a sexual one." (And I'm not really keen on spending money on flowers or movies or what-have-you when it could be spent on me. ) But I think if two teens want to have sex, they're going to have sex. Putting an age restriction just seems silly, unless of course you're talking about semi-consented sex, as in a parent 'convinces' the child to have sex, even though the child can't really make a logical or intelligent decision themselves. Hence a decent restriction would be 13, about a year after puberty.

The real stickler for me is the legal age for working. I see a sign at a gas station that says help wanted, think 'Hmm, that might be a fun part-time job.' yet underneath it states: 19 or older. I'm only three years younger than a potential applicant, and probably just as able as them to complete the job, yet I must have the magical number 19 or else it's too bad for me. I know that some places offer jobs for minors (I so did not type 'minions' the first time...), but those are few and usually taken already. Well, that's the environment around here at least.

As for voting age, I think a test might be to watch some random president's speech about whatever and make an intelligent reply to it. Pass, go vote; fail, learn some politics.

[Jauss]

Hmm.

I understand the reasons for arbitrary age restrictions, but I disagree with them on principle. They're also often ineffective and can be detrimental by blowing things way out proportion, like charging a 15 year old taking pictures of herself with making kiddy porn or sending a 20 year old to jail for sleeping with their 17 year old SO or getting someone in lots of trouble because they threw a party and some 18 year olds had a few drinks.

I had the first drink that I can remember when I was 7. My family was having a bit of a get-together and I asked to try some wine so my mom poured a little in what looked like a miniature wine glass. It was a sweet red wine and I liked it. I'd have a few sips of my parents drinks every once in a while after that.

When I was in double digit years I'd occasionally have a partial glass of wine with meals and as teenager I'd go pour myself a full glass or have a bit of Irish cream or snag a cooler. It wasn't a big deal in my family -- none of that forbidden fruit stuff going on, just a regular part of life -- and unlike many of my acquaintances who weren't allowed to drink at all I didn't get shit-faced at every stolen opportunity. In fact, I didn't get drunk for the first time until several months after my 21st birthday.

I think that was a good way to be.

[b0b]

I think drinking should be universally discouraged, as it works against your own self interest. Age is not a factor. People shouldn't drink alcohol. It harms your body and in many cases causes premature death.

I'm not one to promote laws against stupidity or ignorance, but anyone with half a brain should consider the facts. Drinking has no substantial benefits to a human's well being when weighed against its detrimental effects.

Except what you're saying isn't backed up by science. Drinking too much has negative health effects. But so does eating too much food (any food).

In addition to alcohol, many foods have detrimental effects on the body in any quantity. People who don't overeat can still have have food-related health problems. People who don't drink to excess can still damage their livers, and many who try it risk addiction.

Alcohol is a poison that must be processed by the body. What is your good reason for ingesting poison?

The so-called "health benefits" of red wine are greatly overrated, thanks to the wine industry. In fact, the medicinal usage of wine to relieve arterial stress can be achieved without the alcohol component of the substance.

[zenten]

Alcohol is a problem large enough to have laws. Bleach is not.

Glue and paint sniffing then?

[zenten]

Enforced bedtimes might work if they only made it illegal to drive while in such a state, similar to current drinking laws.

It is illegal (at least where I am) to drive in such a state.

Also, I just realized why are we talking about driving in regards to people who can't legally drive?

[Thematic-Device]

There are numerous studies that have proventhat if you drink the equiv. of one ounce of alcohol each day, then it increases your life expectancy. Now keep in mind, that's something like 2 shots of liquor, a glass of wine, or a beer.

In children?
Because the whole a glass of wine a day is good for your heart or whatever I've heard before, but that's typically in adults. It also damages your liver, because that's what alcohol does, but the overall effect is probably positive.

The liver is incredibly regenerative. Unless you are a heavy drinker it is largely unaffected.

A slow intake of small amount of alcohol won't harm ones liver. The problems for the liver start when there is so much alcohol that its other functions are impaired. If the amount of alcohol is below its capacity it is largely unaffected.

Most people can handle a single glass of wine, glass of beer, etc. especially if they drink it slowly over the course of a meal. Shots of alcohol on the other hand probably aren't good for you.

[Chocceh]

Glue and paint sniffing then?

I only meant that as the reason there aren't laws. People shouldn't be drinking bleach or sniffing glue or paint even if there isn't enough cause to put it into law. I don't know what is and isn't illegal about those activites because I've never had a reason to (I don't drink bleach or sniff glue or paint).

[zenten]

I only meant that as the reason there aren't laws. People shouldn't be drinking bleach or sniffing glue or paint even if there isn't enough cause to put it into law. I don't know what is and isn't illegal about those activites because I've never had a reason to (I don't drink bleach or sniff glue or paint).

I brought it up because in some places (northern Canada for instance) glue and paint sniffing is a serious health issue among youths.

[Chocceh]

In fact, the medicinal usage of wine to relieve arterial stress can be achieved without the alcohol component of the substance.

This statement alone convinces me that alcohol of all forms is pointless.

I brought it up because in some places (northern Canada for instance) glue and paint sniffing is a serious health issue among youths.

Well sure, I'd say that if it was a problem, it should be treated as such. Anyway, I fear we've already gotten too off-topic.

[hellmitre]

Bump.

[Djsavestheday]

In fact, the medicinal usage of wine to relieve arterial stress can be achieved without the alcohol component of the substance.

This statement alone convinces me that alcohol of all forms is pointless.

Pointless? Without health benefit, sure. Abusable, yes.

But pointless? I can tell you right now that it's certainly not pointless if people enjoy it, responsibly or not.

[b0b]

Pointless? Without health benefit, sure. Abusable, yes.

But pointless? I can tell you right now that it's certainly not pointless if people enjoy it, responsibly or not.

And what would that point be?

It seems to me that any activity which I perform entirely for my own enjoyment is ultimately pointless. If there is no benefit beyond my own temporary satisfaction, I have wasted my time. There is so little time left ... I feel foolish for having squandered so much.

[Jesse]

Pointless? Without health benefit, sure. Abusable, yes.

But pointless? I can tell you right now that it's certainly not pointless if people enjoy it, responsibly or not.

And what would that point be?

It seems to me that any activity which I perform entirely for my own enjoyment is ultimately pointless. If there is no benefit beyond my own temporary satisfaction, I have wasted my time. There is so little time left ... I feel foolish for having squandered so much.

Yeah, I sure hate being satisfied.

[b0b]

This drinking age map might be somewhat relevant.

[22/7]

This is just a personal opinion based on personal experience but here goes. I spent a semester in Australia (Perth) where the drinking age is, indeed, 18. It was really nice for the other people in my group who were not 21 but were still able to go out to the bars and whatnot with us, but I had 1 issue with it. That being that there is a major maturity gap between most people at 18 and 21, and it becomes even more evident when you put alcohol in them. It was my experience that the people who were 18 and 19 who you would find at the bars were, by and large, lounder, more obnoxious, and they started more fights. I know this is anecdotal, but it was my experience and it was frustrating. When I got back to the states, it was nice not having the 18yr old crowd in the bars and pubs.

Again, this was simply my experience.

Another note about my time spent in Australia, I met a number of Australians who were not particularly phased by, excited about, etc. alcohol, much like I'm sure many people in countries without a drinking age are (as has been said in this thread). However, I also met a number of Australians who were basically functioning alcoholics. I know a few American alcoholics too, and I'm not saying that all Australians are alcoholics, but what I am saying is that the alcoholism I saw there did not seem to bother people as much. Certainly it was not made a big deal of.

Anyway, again just my experience.

[Princess Marzipan]

22/7, were the rowdy 18-20 year olds from America?

If so, their attitudes were still mostly based on the America cutoff of 21. It was legal where they were, but not for the society in which they were raised, and so there would still have been that (stupid) rebellious slant to the activity.

[Yakk]

The min. ages for most actions are set very young. Voting, Drinking, Driving, Killing and Sexing. Boost them all by 50% to 100%, and we might be in a "the majority is ready for it".

There are people who are younger who can handle it.

We don't have the luxury to wait, and the youngsters would get angsty.

So instead they are set ridiculously low, to ages where people aren't mature enough to handle a credit card, let alone a half-tonne weapon of death, recreationa use of deadly chemicals, risky sexual activity, picking economic and political policy of the nation, or signing up to go to war.

So we pick the point of physical maturity (16 to 21), and pretend that the people who pass that theshold are mentally adults.

So why isn't it illegal for a 10 year old to drink bleach?

It is illegal to feed or provide a 10 year old with bleach to drink.

Second, bleach drinking habits solve themselves, and/or are delt with far more harshly than a 10 year old drinking liquor.

I don't share the same values as most 30+ who think about mortgages, who have a fairly fixed career path, who have too much to lose, but I'm skeptical about them if they haven't: why haven't they gained a wisdom in 10 years that makes me seem childish? I hope to grow enough as a person in ten years that I'm a world away from recent graduates as much as I am now from high school sophomores.

Maybe you are childish. You haven't done what it takes to have something to lose. You haven't grasped what it means to have constant obligations.

Most of your life, your financial needs where short term. Your planning horizons where short -- at most on the order of a decade. The capital -- career, financial and social -- you where risking was the matter of a handful of years replacement cost.

Choosing to do what it takes to have something to lose is a matter of maturity. Having not done that yet, you are indeed a child.

This isn't a bad thing -- being a child just means you are on the left hand side of a graph that people tend to move right on as they age. :)

[22/7]

22/7, were the rowdy 18-20 year olds from America?

If so, their attitudes were still mostly based on the America cutoff of 21. It was legal where they were, but not for the society in which they were raised, and so there would still have been that (stupid) rebellious slant to the activity.

Nope, local Aussies. Also some of the same age from Indonesia, Zimbabwe, Mauritius, and a couple other countries. I guess what I'm saying is that I think there's a BIG difference between the maturity level (regardless of drinking age) of an 18 yr old kid and a 21 yr old, and that becomes more evident when alcohol is added to the mix.


Speaking of beer, what's this I hear about you not finishing your beer? We may have to stop communicating if this behavior continues.

[22/7]

In fact, the medicinal usage of wine to relieve arterial stress can be achieved without the alcohol component of the substance.

This statement alone convinces me that alcohol of all forms is pointless.

I'm sorry, but we can't be friends anymore.
//cries inside

[Keroppi]

Although I have long considered among the 'young, but mature' individuals that populate this wonderful earth, I have never had a problem with restrictions based on age. There really is nothing else people can do, except give subjective intelligence tests that are sure to cheat people of quite a few rights.

So I say, if you're young and can't do something because you're too young, just enjoy other parts of your youth. Like, say, I'm only 18 and I've got a 'bad knee.' There are more privileges to youth than the young (and I know, I'm still one of the very young) never appreciate.

That's the real measure of maturity, I think, not how many words there are in your vocabulary, or the wisdom behind your decisions, but the ability to be patient and happy with your current lot in life--which includes age.

[Jauss]

That being that there is a major maturity gap between most people at 18 and 21, and it becomes even more evident when you put alcohol in them. It was my experience that the people who were 18 and 19 who you would find at the bars were, by and large, louder, more obnoxious, and they started more fights.

What, you mean like all the 21 and 22 year olds in the States who go stupid-crazy when they can finally legally drink? You're average 21/22 year old is often (but definitely not close to always) more mature than younger folk, but I think whatever age you set the bar at is gonna be the age where people are the most stupid about it. Same with driving. Learners are always gonna be in more accidents than more-experienced folk, not just because they're teenagers, but because they're learners. To use an anecdote of my own, you should've seen my aunt learn to drive when she moved to Florida from New York in her mid-20's. I started at 15 and was awesome.

[22/7]

That being that there is a major maturity gap between most people at 18 and 21, and it becomes even more evident when you put alcohol in them. It was my experience that the people who were 18 and 19 who you would find at the bars were, by and large, louder, more obnoxious, and they started more fights.

What, you mean like all the 21 and 22 year olds in the States who go stupid-crazy when they can finally legally drink? You're average 21/22 year old is often (but definitely not close to always) more mature than younger folk, but I think whatever age you set the bar at is gonna be the age where people are the most stupid about it. Same with driving. Learners are always gonna be in more accidents than more-experienced folk, not just because they're teenagers, but because they're learners. To use an anecdote of my own, you should've seen my aunt learn to drive when she moved to Florida from New York in her mid-20's. I started at 15 and was awesome.

Hang on, I didn't say that people don't do stupid things when they hit the local drinking age. However, there is a lot of maturing that happens in college (or after high school). So I guess my question to you is, are you refuting that your average 21/22 year old is significantly more mature than the average 18 year old?

Secondly, driving is VERY different from drinking. You don't get "better" at drinking. It's not a skill. The other thing that kills me is when people talk about how bad young people (esp teenagers) are at driving. I don't argue the fact that teenagers are statistically worse drivers. This is true. But I have had plenty of encounters with older people (people who are, say over 30) who probably shouldn't be behind a wheel either. The only accident I've ever been in was when my car was parked and a 40ish yr old guy walked past my car in a parking lot, got into his car and backed directly into mine. I've been behind much older people who stop at the end of an onramp to a highway to wait for a gap. Plenty of people in their "golden years" right now, never took any kind of driver's education, and yet are permitted to drive. And let's not forget my grandfather who drives down the highway at 45 mph (limit 65) reading a book while other people swerve around him. Think any wrecks might be caused there?

Anyway, the point is, I like the 21 drinking age, due in large part to my experiences with an 18 drinking age, driving isn't a good analogy for drinking, and so-called "experienced drivers" can be and often are just as bad as teens, even if they don't do it at 85 mph.

Note: sorry to all those not living in the US or UK. I know metric is better, but English is what I know.

[Keroppi]

That being that there is a major maturity gap between most people at 18 and 21, and it becomes even more evident when you put alcohol in them. It was my experience that the people who were 18 and 19 who you would find at the bars were, by and large, louder, more obnoxious, and they started more fights.

What, you mean like all the 21 and 22 year olds in the States who go stupid-crazy when they can finally legally drink? You're average 21/22 year old is often (but definitely not close to always) more mature than younger folk, but I think whatever age you set the bar at is gonna be the age where people are the most stupid about it. Same with driving. Learners are always gonna be in more accidents than more-experienced folk, not just because they're teenagers, but because they're learners. To use an anecdote of my own, you should've seen my aunt learn to drive when she moved to Florida from New York in her mid-20's. I started at 15 and was awesome.

Hang on, I didn't say that people don't do stupid things when they hit the local drinking age. However, there is a lot of maturing that happens in college (or after high school). So I guess my question to you is, are you refuting that your average 21/22 year old is significantly more mature than the average 18 year old?

Secondly, driving is VERY different from drinking. You don't get "better" at drinking. It's not a skill. The other thing that kills me is when people talk about how bad young people (esp teenagers) are at driving. I don't argue the fact that teenagers are statistically worse drivers. This is true. But I have had plenty of encounters with older people (people who are, say over 30) who probably shouldn't be behind a wheel either. The only accident I've ever been in was when my car was parked and a 40ish yr old guy walked past my car in a parking lot, got into his car and backed directly into mine. I've been behind much older people who stop at the end of an onramp to a highway to wait for a gap. Plenty of people in their "golden years" right now, never took any kind of driver's education, and yet are permitted to drive. And let's not forget my grandfather who drives down the highway at 45 mph (limit 65) reading a book while other people swerve around him. Think any wrecks might be caused there?

Anyway, the point is, I like the 21 drinking age, due in large part to my experiences with an 18 drinking age, driving isn't a good analogy for drinking, and so-called "experienced drivers" can be and often are just as bad as teens, even if they don't do it at 85 mph.

Note: sorry to all those not living in the US or UK. I know metric is better, but English is what I know.

I disagree, I think that you can become more responsible with drinking, and once you're 21 and it's quite legal for you to drink, a bit of the glamour washes off and you stop being so juvenile about it.

[zenten]

Ok, how's this for an argument.

As you age, you get less able to bounce back from say having high levels of toxins in your body (we're assuming you've pretty much stopped gaining height at this point). So it's better to get all the stupidity out of the way so you can then know better when you're young.

[Djsavestheday]

Pointless? Without health benefit, sure. Abusable, yes.

But pointless? I can tell you right now that it's certainly not pointless if people enjoy it, responsibly or not.

And what would that point be?

It seems to me that any activity which I perform entirely for my own enjoyment is ultimately pointless. If there is no benefit beyond my own temporary satisfaction, I have wasted my time. There is so little time left ... I feel foolish for having squandered so much.

That applies for everyone?

I enjoy drinking. Other people may think I'm causing myself harm or wasting my money, but I enjoy it and I don't regret it. Is it really pointless? Should no one eat chocolate, candy or any other enjoyable but unhealthy food?

[22/7]

Secondly, driving is VERY different from drinking. You don't get "better" at drinking. It's not a skill.

I disagree, I think that you can become more responsible with drinking, and once you're 21 and it's quite legal for you to drink, a bit of the glamour washes off and you stop being so juvenile about it.

I understand what you're saying, I do. But it doesn't really apply to what I'm saying. Driving is a skill. Whether or not you're going to be "juvenile" about drinking is a conscious decision, not a skill. You can decide to stop being juvenile about drinking and it happens. You can't just wake up one morning and decide, "from here on out I'm going to be a driver." You can be a more cautious driver, or a more responsible driver, but not better.

Though I'm sure people will start arguing that cautious and responsible are better.

[saxmaniac1987]

I'm of the group that thinks 18 is a perfectly acceptable drinking age. However, where I live the age is 21 by law. What I don't understand is why people in college are accosted for following the law and not drinking until they're 21. Yes, it might be arbitrary, but think of it like this:

The number of people driving before 16 (or whenever your state permits)=not large

The number of people smoking before 16/purchasing before 18=also not large

But the number of people drinking before 21=HUGE.

I guess I have a problem with blatant refusal to follow a law. If you feel it is your right to drink at 18, why don't you use your newfound voting power to say that. The drinking age will never go down to 18 simply because everyone ignores the law. Do something.

[22/7]

I'm of the group that thinks 18 is a perfectly acceptable drinking age. However, where I live the age is 21 by law. What I don't understand is why people in college are accosted for following the law and not drinking until they're 21. Yes, it might be arbitrary, but think of it like this:

The number of people driving before 16 (or whenever your state permits)=not large

The number of people smoking before 16/purchasing before 18=also not large

But the number of people drinking before 21=HUGE.

I guess I have a problem with blatant refusal to follow a law. If you feel it is your right to drink at 18, why don't you use your newfound voting power to say that. The drinking age will never go down to 18 simply because everyone ignores the law. Do something.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I"m pretty sure the reason the drinking age is 21 (in athe US) is because the federal government threatened to withhold funding for roads, etc. if a state didn't change it from 18 to 21 (as drinking age is technically a state decision). I've also been told that LA's stubbornness in this issue is one of the reasons the roads there are so bad.

[zenten]

The number of people smoking before 16/purchasing before 18=also not large

Definitely not true in my experience. I'd say (from my experience, most of the studies seem biased one way or another, and I haven't had the inclination to sort them all out) that proportionally there are more 14 year old smokers than 18 year old.

[saxmaniac1987]

I'm of the group that thinks 18 is a perfectly acceptable drinking age. However, where I live the age is 21 by law. What I don't understand is why people in college are accosted for following the law and not drinking until they're 21. Yes, it might be arbitrary, but think of it like this:

The number of people driving before 16 (or whenever your state permits)=not large

The number of people smoking before 16/purchasing before 18=also not large

But the number of people drinking before 21=HUGE.

I guess I have a problem with blatant refusal to follow a law. If you feel it is your right to drink at 18, why don't you use your newfound voting power to say that. The drinking age will never go down to 18 simply because everyone ignores the law. Do something.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I"m pretty sure the reason the drinking age is 21 (in athe US) is because the federal government threatened to withhold funding for roads, etc. if a state didn't change it from 18 to 21 (as drinking age is technically a state decision). I've also been told that LA's stubbornness in this issue is one of the reasons the roads there are so bad.

Yes, you are correct. When i said arbitrary, I meant the fact the feds had picked 21 instead of 20 or 22 or 19 or 40.

Definitely not true in my experience. I'd say (from my experience, most of the studies seem biased one way or another, and I haven't had the inclination to sort them all out) that proportionally there are more 14 year old smokers than 18 year old.

Really? I've definitely found the opposite in my experience. Although that is certainly something that varies for a large number of reasons.

[22/7]

I was commenting on the arbitrary bit, I agree 21 is (at least semi-) arbitrary, but what I meant was that you're not going to be able to change it. Even with voting power. Obviously ideally you could, but... yeah.

I've read a survey/report/study (though where eludes me at this moment) that says that if you make it to 18 without smoking the odds that you will start (at 18 or older) are something very low like 2%, and that the 2% (or whatever it is) are comprised mostly of people in the military who take it up when they get stationed somewhere.

Anyone else heard this or did I dream I read it?

[noonie]

Everything that depends on age should be based on individual tests. Right off the bat, that's all I have to say on the subject.

There really is something to be said of the general maturity difference between someone who's 10 and someone who's 20, but the whole point of individual testing is that everyone is different.

let's not do that please because i really can't afford to get taxed more. lots of things SHOULD be based on individual merit but that's pretty unfeasible.

Although they seem in some ways (like the acronym) to focus on drunk driving, much of their emphasis is against any drinking whatsoever.

baby + bathwater

general response:
drinking isn't bad. nothing's bad or good, it's how it's used. there are a lot of people that generally suck at handling themselves with alcohol. there are probably more that suck at it than don't from what i can see at a bar on a friday night.

age restrictions are arbitrary, like in nebraska the age for adulthood is oddly 19 and not 18 like most places in the us. or maybe it's the age of consent, whatever. as long as it's the law and it's not unreasonable (which it isn't) it should be followed. if for no other reason than it won't really change a damn thing either way. if you're determined you'll find away.

i was also told when i was younger that the reasoning behind the 21 limit in my state was because, you could continue to go to highschool until the age of 21 at which point you had graduate or you got kicked out. it would make sense not to have legally drunk highschoolers. however i can't recall if the limit is federal or state when it comes to drinking age.

[22/7]

i was also told when i was younger that the reasoning behind the 21 limit in my state was because, you could continue to go to highschool until the age of 21 at which point you had graduate or you got kicked out. it would make sense not to have legally drunk highschoolers. however i can't recall if the limit is federal or state when it comes to drinking age.

Certainly some states already had a 21 drinking age when the fed "convinced" the states to change all those that were not 21 to 21.

nothing's bad or good, it's how it's used.

Gotta disagree. Some things are inherently bad. UNLESS, you would consider something like rape to be a "use" of sex, in which case I can agree (at least for everything that comes to mind at the time).

[noonie]

nothing's bad or good, it's how it's used.

Gotta disagree. Some things are inherently bad. UNLESS, you would consider something like rape to be a "use" of sex, in which case I can agree (at least for everything that comes to mind at the time).

sex is the act, rape is the perversion of it. rape is still under the category of sex. i mean i honestly can't think of any one thing that's bad for you that doesn't have an alternative that's helpful. and i'm really trying here.

maybe swallowing a mousepad or something. but then again the act of swallowing isn't bad, neither is the mousepad, it's just the misuse of the mousepad.

and now that i've said that i think i'm going to stop thinking...

[22/7]

maybe swallowing a mousepad or something. but then again the act of swallowing isn't bad, neither is the mousepad, it's just the misuse of the mousepad.

That sentence brought quite a mental image and for that I am thankful.

Yeah, I can agree with that breakdown and the lack of natural evil.



Except when it comes to Harry Potter. No good can come from kids learning to be witches.

[Keroppi]

Secondly, driving is VERY different from drinking. You don't get "better" at drinking. It's not a skill.

I disagree, I think that you can become more responsible with drinking, and once you're 21 and it's quite legal for you to drink, a bit of the glamour washes off and you stop being so juvenile about it.

I understand what you're saying, I do. But it doesn't really apply to what I'm saying. Driving is a skill. Whether or not you're going to be "juvenile" about drinking is a conscious decision, not a skill. You can decide to stop being juvenile about drinking and it happens. You can't just wake up one morning and decide, "from here on out I'm going to be a driver." You can be a more cautious driver, or a more responsible driver, but not better.

Though I'm sure people will start arguing that cautious and responsible are better.

I agree with you, I never meant to imply that people become more responsible with drinking the more they drink, just that, at certain (older) ages, people are more likely to drink responsibly. However, I do think that in some cases, the bad consequences of irresponsible drinking sometimes scare people into drinking more responsibly.

[dontiego]

I don't think drinking or smoking or having sex should be illegal at any age.

children drinking alcohol is incredibly detrimental (aswell as smoking) and the same is true of having sex when you are too young. What possible reason is there to not forbid these things?

Nah, I don't know about sex. This depends on which culture you live in. While some think that it's a big no-no before marriage, I think that 2 young teens who want to play a bit... well, why would it be such a big deal?

(Of course, a problem is disease and pregnancy, but with education...)
Forbidding. Someone has to decide, but on which basis? Your personal belief that sex before 18 is bad? Everybody has different opinions.

I'm not being anarchist, but I'm really confused when it comes to decides rules. It always ends up with "who are you to decide? How do you know you're right?".

Today you think you're right, what about tomorrow?
Crusaders were REALLY SURE they were right when they went and killed infidels. Well now I think they were wrong. See what I'm aiming at?

@OP: I agree that the frustration of not being able to get any alcohol while too young causes kind of an explosion when you finally get old enough. You have to be 20 to buy alcohol in Sweden and well... when people do turn 20, you can guess how drunk they get.

[Thematic-Device]

I guess I have a problem with blatant refusal to follow a law. If you feel it is your right to drink at 18, why don't you use your newfound voting power to say that. The drinking age will never go down to 18 simply because everyone ignores the law. Do something.

There have been several notable cases where blatant disregard for particular laws have resulted it them becoming null and void. I'd propose doing similar with drug laws.

[zenten]

I guess I have a problem with blatant refusal to follow a law. If you feel it is your right to drink at 18, why don't you use your newfound voting power to say that. The drinking age will never go down to 18 simply because everyone ignores the law. Do something.

There have been several notable cases where blatant disregard for particular laws have resulted it them becoming null and void. I'd propose doing similar with drug laws.

The big argument used in Canada for legalizing marijuana (and this is actually looking like it has a reasonable chance of working in the next few years) is the fact that most people do it anyway. And no, I don't have a source for the amount of people who smoke marijuana, but the perception that most people do is what's important, right?