quote: Steve Kraus

---

Are 18, 19, and 20 year olds more likely to abuse than say, 24, 25, 26 year olds or 40, 41 and 42?

---

quote: Robert L. Fischer

---

OK, I've sobered up now, and in retrospect: I immediately regret that decision.

---

Me too, I've always regretted being sober.
 

---

Posted by Jason Burroughs (Member # 68) on 08-01-2004, 12:24 PM:
 
I think Steve is correct in that all states now have a minimum age of 21. The states were strong armed into adopting that age by the federal level in that if they didn't have that minimum age the would receive no federal highway money.

If I remember correctly Louisiana was the last state to adopt the 21 minimum age requirement.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-01-2004, 02:54 PM:
 
The US principle would appear to be a bit different from our law. Here, the legal age for buying alcohol is 18 (as it is in most Western European countries). Below that age it is an offence to attempt to buy it. It is also an offence to sell booze to an under-18. But an adult providing alcohol to someone under 18 (e.g. allowing their teenage offspring to have a couple of glasses of wine with dinner) is no problem. Of course, if they allow said offspring to get pissed as a newt, cause problems as a result thereof and/or suffer alcohol poisoning, then they can be done for child abuse, public order offences or whatever. But simply providing alcohol to someone who is below the legal age for buying it themselves is not a crime.

P.S. I'm now on my second G & T of the evening (which, given that I'm driving first thing tomorrow, will be my last), but wouldn't describe that as 'drunk'!
 

---

Posted by Ryan Luby (Member # 2520) on 08-01-2004, 03:49 PM:
 
Wisconsin is lobbying for lowering the age, I hear, and bypassing the federal highway money or whatever.
They already have 5 of the 10 highest bars per capita in the country (My school, Eau Claire, being the #1 in the world, I hear). It also helps that they have a brewery withing 20 miles of every major college in the state.

Also, people are allowed to drink at bars as long as their parents are present. I'm not sure if there is an age restriction for that (I would think 18-19 but not sure). I know a couple kids from school whose parents took them to Water St for their 20th birthdays.
Hmm..Wisconsinites drinking..imagine that.

A friend and I went to Iowa to visit his sister on Halloween and you only have to be 19 to get into bars there.

But otherwise I believe every state is 21 now.
 

---

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 08-01-2004, 04:10 PM:
 
Sung to the tune of "Happy And You Know It"

If you're DRUNK and you know it, Drink A Beer
If you're DRUNK and you know it, Drink A Beer
If you're DRUNK and you know it, And Your Really Wanna Show IT
If you're DRUNK and you know it, Drink A Beer
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 08-01-2004, 05:51 PM:
 
Steve, the younger a person is, the more likely they will be under the impression that drinking makes them cool. I mean, just look at Richard![av=n]


 

---

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 08-01-2004, 07:34 PM:
 
I have too much coolness to think drinking makes me cool. I am the awesomeness of coolness...Like totally!!!


 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 08-01-2004, 08:03 PM:
 
I rarely drink, but I am as cool as the other side of the pillow.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-01-2004, 10:19 PM:
 
OK, if everyone wants to get a little buzzed that's fine but if they start peeing on the side of the forums then fun and games are over!
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 08-02-2004, 03:40 AM:
 

quote: Ryan Luby

---

My school, Eau Claire

---

Wait, you go to UWEC?!

We'll have to hit Water Street together some night, or a house party if you aren't 21 yet (and don't have a fake ).
 

---

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-02-2004, 03:51 AM:
 
Jason Burroughs is correct, Congress passed a law witholding federal highway money from states which did not raise the dinking age to 21. It was blackmail; even the bill's proponents called it that, but they didn't care if it acheived their ends.

Personally, I think it's one of the stupidest things done. The impact was minuscule on highway safety, it's bigoted in its viewpoint of 'It was OK when I drank at that age, but we were somehow more different than you little rapscallions', & it's brought about destructive social changes.

I've noticed a HUGE change in drinking behavior in young people since the drinking age was raised to 21. Instead of hitting 18, going to a club & having a drink to loosen inhibitions & refine social skills, now the point is to just get drunk. Learned at a club, since the primary objective was socializing, folks didn't get so damn drunk because they lost ability to socialize & achieve their objective.

Now, like in the days of prohibition, there's a 'find booze & drink to intoxication' objective. Drink while ya got 'em.

It's stupid to think young folks won't be looking for alcohol. In moderation, which they're not learning now, it's never more enjoyable than when you're 18 - 21. There's little that can compare with a social drink at that age in a club, or splitting a couple of beers or bottles of wine while sitting at the beach with friends at night watching the stars & stuff. By about 21 - 22, it's really more of a learned custom.

The drinking behavior that's learned at that age continues afterwards. 22 & 23 year-olds are now still getting overwhelmingly plastered while drinking, & doing it more often since they can then get alcohol more easily (legally). It's like the aftermath of prohibition, when for decades after the adult population had a much larger, unsurprisedly to all, population of drunks that couldn't moderate at parties, had their problem exacerbated into showing up hungover & plastered at work, etc.
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 08-02-2004, 04:22 AM:
 
i very rarely drinkk, but this htread has insprired me!
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-02-2004, 04:25 AM:
 
We've seen a similar thing happen here, though I'm not sure that it's entirely age-related. The way alcohol is served in public seems to be more geared to getting pissed quick than to having a drink or two as a social activity. Chain pubs with a large floorspace (basically, aircraft hangars with a bar at one end) but very few seats and tables are opening up all over the place and most of them run 'happy hour' promotions. While the Brits have always traditionally drunk beer in pints, it has until recently been home-grown stuff with an alcohol content of 2-3%. Over the last 10-15 years European lagers of 5-7%, also served by the pint, increasingly became the young thug's beverage of choice (hence the term 'lager lout'): even though if you go to their countries of origin you'll find that they're hardly ever served in quantities larger than a 330cl bottle. And finally, there is the 11pm mandatory closing time, which encourages those who don't know better to get as pissed as possible before the deadline.

There are some well-run pubs, which have plenty of tables, the day's newspapers, quiet music if any and an atmosphere which encourages having a drink as one part - but not the only part - of going out in the evening or a weekend lunchtime, but they're increasingly becoming the exception which proves the rule. Unless we can start to convince teenagers away from the idea that the only justification for having a drink at all is to get totally and utterly trollied, then it really doesn't matter what we make the legal minimum age: alcohol abuse will continue to be a major social problem.
 

---