College chiefs urge new debate on drinking age

quote:

Originally posted by Fungo:
Parenting alone is tough but when society changes the rules it becomes tougher.

My friend Fungo...that is possibly the worst reason ever for not considering change. The biggest fear in society is change. All we want is things to stay the same, then life is predictible.

The only constant in life is change. We should embrace it. It is the essence of life.

Whether this topic is a step forward or a step back, that is the debate. But lamenting change should never enter the conversation, IMHO.

Usually the one thing that goes with drinking is a bad decision.

Some decide to drive while impaired.
Some stay out too late.
Some choose to go places they shouldn't.

The repercussions for our actions drunk or sober are the same. It just seems a shame to kick college students to the bar for the sake of lower liability.

I look at it this way, if a 'child' is still covered under a parent's medical or finacial care, they have not reached their majority (or age of consent).

College presidents and local law enforcement should not shirk their responsibility to these students.

Parents have handed their children over to the care of the college at a price. The college is usually the major source of revenue for the local government.

quote:

Originally posted by Fungo:
This brings up another point and possibly phase #2. Should we teach our kids how to ingest other substances responsibly? Maybe we could start at home with some weaker stuff so they will be ready for the "killer" stuff later on? Or let 'em light up a swisher sweet so they can appreciate a Padron or an Arturo Fuente later on.

Ah, the good ole swisher sweet. Haven't thought of those lately. Remember back in the early 70's sitting on the front of a tank smoking a swisher after coming out of the enlisted mens club at Fort Leonardwood, MO fresh from putting down a few frosties. I was 19 then and haven't touched a cigar or cigarette since I got out of that place, probably because they were so bad!

quote:

My friend Fungo...that is possibly the worst reason ever for not considering change

CPLZ,
I would consider change in many areas and do on a daily basis. In many cases I will be the first to advocate change. I do however take exception with morality issues when it comes to change. If one adheres to the belief of a higher power then one has to disagree with society legislating morality. Many consider drinking not only a legal issue but a moral issue as well. It does get complicated when we as parents use the laws to help us instill "our" moral guidance in our children and then society changes the rules and says: "Your parents are wrong, that's acceptable behavior now". Should yesterday's immorality become today's morality? I say NO! It appears as if many parents feel abandoned by the college presidents and I can see why.

By Fungo: "Maybe in your house.Not mine"

Laws of the "house" are different from laws of the state.

Alcohol abuse by college students is both an issue
and, at some schools, a national pastime.

Yet college presidents, as an integrated entity, have pretty much ignored addressing the issue for many decades.

And for a few 'stove-piped' college presidents to
be in favor of lowering the legal age limits (from 21 y/o) to 18 y/o, this is simply irresponsible, as it compounds the issues towards the High Schools.

Since most Athletic Departments and student-athletes agree to a zero tolerance policy, this may serve as a model for future collegiate presidents discussions.

Alcohol abuse by college student athletes are less of zn issue than college students, much less.

Fungo,
I can see where our thinking was not converging, as I have never considered the drinking age an issue of morality.

A long time ago, I sought counsel from a wise old fishing friend. I was new to formal religion, (about a years experience), having been unchurched, and had a dilemna. I was on a committee and felt that some of the members, who were longstanding churchgoers and looked upon as peer group leaders, were acting in their own self interest and not in a manner consistent with people of God.

My friend advised me, that my relationship with God and my relationship with the church, were entirely seperate, and I should never let anyone else tell me who God is, that's my decision. The people of the church were as flawed as the people who were unchurched and I should view religion as an assemblance of flawed people with common ground.

I've always held that sentiment dear and it's helped me understand the difference between societies laws/rules, and what's truly right and wrong. Based on my perspective, which I don't expect anyone else to have or adhere to, I would not equate drinking age laws with morality.

Lowering the drinking age to 18 essentially lowers it to 16. I know it did in the 70's. You can probably knock two years off of any drinking age. Most 16 yo can pass for 18 but not 21. A fake ID will be easier excepted by a busy bartender.
I don't think this is a moral issue rather an issue about the judgement of young adults. The judgement of sober 21 yo's is not the best sometimes let alone drunk 18 yo's.
Why change a law to make life easier for college administrators.

Interesting discussion.

Like many of you have stated, when I was younger the drinking age was 18 (in Ohio for 3.2% beer, 21 for regular beer and harder alcohol). For discussions like this, sometimes I like to look back and think about how mature or immature I was in handling something as a kind of reference point. I can tell you that I somehow feel lucky that I 'survived' it all. There wasn't the level of 'teaching' that there is today about the risk posed with driving, for example. Like many teenagers/young adults I believe I felt somewhat invincible and wasn't the wisest guy around with risk management. I don't see my own kids as being a whole lot wiser than me at 18 either. Its sort of the way we're wired.

So upon reflection of my own 'performance' as an 18-year old with legal alcohol, I am happy that the age was raised to 21. We parents often, very much, want to make our childrens' lives better than ours. Less risk, more happiness, better success. We all want that, right? I believe the 21-law is/was a small step in that direction. IMO, its a better guideline/law than when I was young.

Now, of course, I am not a totally naive parent who thinks my kids will always obey the rules and laws. Or that other kids will either. But I do sense, from raising 3 young adult men so far, that drinking is less a part of their lives (and their friends' lives) than it was in my generation...at least at the 16-19 age group. I could be wrong, I admit that.

The 21-age law makes alcohol seem a little further away for a HS kid...a little less attainable...stricter DUI laws do too. I do believe that the 21-law discourages some percentage of youth from partaking at least a little longer and I don't think its appropriate to throw in the towel, just because another group can't hold off.

And BTW, I don't get the linkage to military service or voting at all. I think Fungo explained views very similar to mine on that issue, so I won't repeat them.

quote:

There wasn't the level of 'teaching' that there is today about the risk posed with driving, for example.

Drinking until you are drunk or impaired is not a good thing no matter how old you are, or what church you attend.

And, it doesn't take as much to be impaired, as many of us think.

Or, to kill you from alcohol poisoning, or an accident.

Here's some data.

Blood Alcohol Content

Educate yourself about how much you can handle.

Educate your kids about drinking.

Don't mix drinking and driving.

It is just a recipe for disaster.

Many schools now require an alcohol awareness class.

quote:

I do believe that teh 21-law discourages some percentage of youth from partaking at least a little longer and I don't think its appropriate to throw in the towel, just because another group can't hold off.

I totally agree...as a college freshman i don't think i can deny that the law has detered me and a lot of my peers from drinking on at least some occasions..in my opinion the law does what its supposed to do--at least somewhat stop some young adults from drinking. Its just common sense that more people 18-21 would drink if the age was lowered to 18.

It really doesn't matter what the age is because you have under 18 years old who can handle drinking and make smart decions and you have over 18 years old who cannot make smart decions. The biggest problem associated with drinking is driving under the influence. It kills way too many people every year and it's something that, on the surface, should be an easy fix - don't do it.

I don't have an answer to the drinking age issue but I do hope college presidents don't end up making law. I want to be able to make that law or at least be able to provide my opinion on the subject.

When you throw in the "it's crazy to let 18 year olds vote and serve in the military and not drink" argument lawmakers have a tough job. I agree it does seem silly to allow these things and not allow them to drink but there are many more issues at stake here.

A vote is a personal choice (hopefully an informed one).

Serving in the military is a personal choice.

Getting killed by a drunk driver is not a choice.

Lawmakers have to balance the right of someone to be able to do something versus the right of others to not be hurt / killed by those actions.

If you compare the number of vehicles on the road in the 1950's / 60's to today it's not close. I don't have actual figures to draw from but overall there are WAAAAAYYYY more vehicles on the road today than back then. This increases the odds of having drunk drivers and fatalaties. Another thing that makes matters worse is looking the other way on current laws in place to curb irresponsible drinking in public. The absolute worst thing that makes matters worse is lax drinking and driving laws and judges who don't enforce them.

If people were responsible with drinking then we wouldn't be having this discussion but the fact of the matter is we have morons in society. I hate going to NFL games because of the drunk fans. MLB games aren't as bad but there are drunks at those games. Colleges same thing. The NFL has passed a good conduct policy for NFL fans at games. In my latest Sporting News a person writes in ridiculing the new rule because everything they are outlawing happens every two minutes at a game. He's right those things do happen every two minutes - that is why they have to do something. Irresponsible people are the problem.

My solution is create the laws and enforce them severely. I don't drink and probably never will but I don't have a problem with those that do responsibly. If you act maturely no matter the age then everything is (usually) good to go but if you act like an idiot then you deserve to be nailed to the wall.

a few observations:

It seems that the message those Presidents are trying to convey - -

A) again (as in "time after time" )
big government's attempts to solve a perceived problem has caused "unintended consequences" worse than the perceived problem

THEY SAY - 25 yrs of the "age 21" experiment w/statistics show 2 basic scenarios

1) "young adults" who want a beer, sitting in a state/city regulated bar listening to music w/friends & a 275lb ft-ball lineman/bouncer monitoring their social behavior and sobriety

or

2) "young adults" who want a beer, binge drinking in their cars and/or unsupervised house parties w/25 kegs & prolly alot of other stuff available


seems like a no brainer to me too, but I was sitting peacefully in a Kent bar listening to Joe Walsh/James Gang while many of today's policy-makers were burning campus buildings

Bee>,
That was very funny.

dated June 7, 2004

In August, our children will begin another year at the ***X University and college life. The opportunities our children will have for personal growth and athletic development are limitless. Most will be offered new freedoms and, equally important, the perils and responsibility of that freedom.

I am writing to you about one peril—drinking and drugs—and in particular what is now termed “high-risk drinking.” Nationally, there is an alarming incidence of abusive drinking in college. Recent nationwide surveys indicate throughout freshman through junior years, 80 percent of students drink and 68 percent drink abusively before the end of their college years. Half of the upperclassman students continued to drink abusively upon leaving campus say they were exposed to consumption of alcohol within days of arriving on campus. One study concluded the introduction to alcohol is often as part of peer pressure, entertainment, drinking games or ‘shooter’ contests. The results of such alcohol abuse are violence and incidents including rape, robbery and assault. Alcohol abuse has serious consequences that are detrimental to every student athlete and the campus life at the University.

I feel fervently about the risks, which alcohol and drugs poses to health and happiness in college and in life. Alcohol is a drug, a lethal drug when abused. To abuse alcohol is a serious threat to all students and careers and life beyond. Academic and social problems all too often have their origins in alcohol abuse. Abusive drinkers that begin in high school and college are at particular risk to develop alcoholism.

The ***X University and the (*** Conference)has observed the existence of a direct relationship between alcohol consumption, increased drinking and lower GPA’s. Moreover the conclusion includes high-risk drinkers have a negative impact on the academic performance of their non-drinking peers. Second-hand effects are also observed from results of one’s sleep or studying interrupted. As a result policies will be designed and implemented to assure responsive action in the event of a finding of abusive drinking. There is also concern about the increase of marijuana, cocaine and other controlled substance use among young people nationwide.

***X University and the (***) Conference is taking the problem of alcohol abuse seriously. May I assure you, the ***X Baseball Program will also take steps to address alcohol abuse. It is up to each parent to determine whether they wish to provide personal responsibility and guidance to each student. If alcohol and drug abuse while at the ***X University is observed and reported, the student will jeopardize his academic career. The ***X University and the Athletic Department wants to say the ***X Baseball team is free from alcohol and drug abuse. That is not the case. There is a subculture within the players of the ***X Baseball Program that encourages abusive alcohol consumption. Many parents are beginning to discuss this subject within family.

The changes that will take place at the ***X ****** is the ***X Baseball Team will suspend any student for possession of alcohol, marijuana or controlled substances and expel any student for trafficking of drugs. The ***X *********, the Athletic Department, and the entire Administration will agree that they cannot educate minds that are chemically altered. Bottom Line: The student athlete should not come or come back to the ***X University if there continues to be use of illegal substances.

signed,
President of ***X *********

When I was 18 It was illegal to drink and vote. We did have the draft at 18. Perhaps if they had raised the draft age to 21 the voting age and drinking age would not have been lowered. but they did lower it and after a period of time the drinking age was again raised to 21. Why? I believe statistics showed there were more alcohol related accidents. Why lower it again? I don't see the point?... because they are going to do it any way? not a good reason

I am a European now living in America and am amazed that the drinking age is 21 - we learnt to drink responsibly at a very early age - watered down wine at school for lunch when I was 10. It is the norm to have wine with our dinner and it is the norm not to get drunk for the sake of getting drunk. We just spent 3 weeks in Italy, where the legal age is 16, and in 3 weeks we did not see any drunken teenagers in the evenings when we had dinner out late and walked at night, which is what everyone does. I know that some countries have a problem with binge drinking (England for one) but on the whole Europe does not have the problems we have here. In Norway they have extremely strict drinking and driving laws (your license is removed on the spot if you are stopped) Perhaps this is what the US should do. I believe that teaching your children to drink responsibly early on and it becomes a social activity rather than a drinking binge is much better. My children were horrified when they went to college at the amount of binge drinking - it was completely against everything that they had witnessed before.

I think they should raise the voting age. I don't think you should be aloud to vote until you have an eighteen year old.

re: "until you have an eighteen year old."

mmmmmmmm....

Personally, I'd just be happy if half of U.S. voters could name the three branches of the federal government.

Why not lower the drinking age to 18, but make it so you still have to be 21 to buy? Make it legal for 21 year olds to buy for 18-20 year olds. That way kids in college could legally drink and kids coming back from a war could drink, etc..but it would still be just as hard for high school kids to get alcohol.

quote:

Coffeyville student found dead in a dorm bathroom

Updated: Aug 18, 2008 12:19 PM CDT



After one day of classes, and what authorities say was too much alcohol, a freshman student turns up dead.

Police do not suspect foul play.

Emergency responders were dispatched early Friday morning to Coffeyville Community College after a report of an unresponsive male in a dorm bathroom.

Authorities pronounced Austin Slanker-Wilson, 18, dead at the scene. Police believe alcohol was a contributing factor in the man's death.

An autopsy is scheduled in Topeka.

I had not heard this until now.
My heart hurts.

In today's paper:

"There are other arguments for lowering the age. Maybe the most popular is that if you're old enough to join the Army and die for your country, you're old enough to buy a beer. But there is good reason to avoid such blind consistency. Among the qualities that make 18-year-olds such good soldiers are their fearlessness and sense of immortality -- traits that do not mix well with alcohol." ---- Steve Chapman in Chicago Tribune

quote:

"There are other arguments for lowering the age. Maybe the most popular is that if you're old enough to join the Army and die for your country, you're old enough to buy a beer

I think you may have missed some history classes ... many states already had their own long-standing legal age requirements for alcohol at 18,19, or 20 yrs and it worked for them

in '84 a charge led by Fed Transportation Secretary Liz Dole blackmailed the states w/u21 laws by demanding they conform to "age 21" or they'd be punished by her. It was P/C so they did it

the university Presidents are merely calling her out w/24 ys of statistics.

aka: "step off Liz"

Let me get this straight, if we use the argument that 18 year olds make good soldiers because of their fearlessness and sense of immortality then the logic follows that as these feerless young men age the more fearful and more aware of their mortality they become, hence becoming less qualified to be soldiers. Should the age be limited 18-20 year olds? Should we start allowing 16 and 17 year olds in the military because they are more feerless?