🚀 go-pugleaf

merrell@eng.umd.edu (Brian C. Merrell) wrote:
>>>It is illegal, but the law is unjust. 
>> So, is there anyone who didn't see this one coming?
>While it may a predictable response, I must agree that the law is somewhat
>unjust.  

Hmmm.

>It *is* one group forcing a law upon another without making it 
>apply to itself, 

This isn't a valid line of reasoning.   For an extreme case of "one
group vs. another) onsider, say, property rights framed in that
context. Or national sovereignty.

Or are you thinking more along the lines of crime?  How about jailing
felons (one group -- that being non-criminally-engaged society --
forcing a law upon another -- like outlawing mail fraud)?  Or
something more traditional ( telling good ol' boys they can't have a
few six packs on their long drive back from fishin' )?

>it *is* rather silly, and it *is* rather ridiculous     
>that legislators (who are all over 30; never trust anyone over 30 :) can
>arbitrarily say that people from 18 to 20 (who can vote for our national
>leaders and go to war) cannot make responsible decisions about alcohol.

Did you miss the last few weeks of news reports on those idiot
embarassments who populate some campuses?

The evidence is on the side of those who believe that 18-20 year olds
apparently *can't* make responsible decisions about alcohol.  They not
only can't handle the responsibility, but they're damn close to
throwing riots and running out of control because of an addiction.  

>And, just to point out something, the law doesn't apply to you, so your 
>input has a certain bias. :)  

The law doesn't apply to me now, but it applied to me at a time not so
far back.  No matter how the under-21 crowd wants to try and frame it,
it's not a rights issue any more than being allowed to posess firearms
or marry under age-10 are rights issues for children.  

Is 21 arbitrary?  Absolutely.  Any age would be arbitrary.  

But: 21 works.

>But really, other countries have lower drinking ages and it does NOT increase
>drunk driving(/rape/murder/other-crimes-here).  I agree that perhaps no 
>drinking age might be irresponsible, but at least it should be lowered to the
>age of majority, 18.

The United States isn't other countries. In particular, to be 18 in
many countries is to be an adult, with adult responsibilites (working
full time or fully supporting oneself, etc.).  Far cry from here.

The real problem is that the people who are most insistent that they
can "handle" their drinks are those who are the least responsible. 

Really, who are we kidding?  College kids want to be able to drink
because they like getting a buzz or going all the way to plastered.
It's not for their health, it's not for the "calm, relaxing
atmosphere" or to relieve stress (not in any healthy way, that is) or
because they enjoy a glass of vino with their meal (thought I'd head
that one off).  It's because boozing is fun _specifically_ because of
the lack of self-control that it involves.

At that point, the whole rights/oppression issue is right out the
window.