gam@proper.UUCP (Gordon Moffett) (06/30/84)
So I see the US Senate has approved a bill that would punish
states with under-21 drinking ages and reward those with at-21
drinking ages "... in the interests of highway safety."
If a state has an under-21 drinking age limit, the Feds can
withhold ~10% highway funds for that state, and so on.
Well I'm sure that those few Senators who opposed it claiming
state's rights are being violated are being quietly or otherwise
accused of taking kickbacks from Seagram's or whoever, but I
agree with them. I am very much interested in seeing stricter
laws regarding drunk driving and raising the drinking age to
21, but not at the expense of the states right to regulate themselves.
One of the few good things about Reagan was his insistence on
decentralization of power and giving states more local control;
will he fudge on this, too? Well it is an election year and
this sort of issue (drunk driving) is really popular ...
(and isn't withholding the highway funds going to make the
highways that much less safe anyway? Politics is truly weird).
--
Gordon A. Moffett
{ hplabs!nsc, decvax!sun!amd, ihnp4!dual } !proper!gamjsgray@watmath.UUCP (Jan Gray) (07/04/84)
Rather than raise the drinking age to 21 years to remove "blood borders", why not lower it to 18? Other cutting off points to consider are 0 and 200 years. I'm fed up with stupid rules which put people into categories. An abstainer for life, Jan Gray (jsgray@watmath.UUCP) University of Waterloo (519) 885-1211 x3870
folta@yale-comix.UUCP (Stephen Folta) (07/05/84)
> Rather than raise the drinking age to 21 years to remove "blood borders", why > not lower it to 18? Other cutting off points to consider are 0 and 200 years. Absolutely!! 18-20 year-olds should not be used as a scapegoat for a problem that affects all adults. Most people don't seem to realize that the issue of having a drinking age higher than the age of majority has implications beyond the simple fact of whether those affected can legally drink or not. As a young (19) musician, I feel particularly oppressed because most clubs featuring live music serve drinks, and are not supposed to allow "underage" customers to even enter the doors. In Connecticut, there are a few clubs that have instituted "juice bars", a system whereby people without ID can get in to see the band, but anyone who wants to drink alcohol must get a special stamp (or something like that). This is obviously a good solution, but most clubs have no interest in implementing it. I no longer drink recreationally (I don't drive either), but it still seems to me that the law is giving a double message to people of my age group: "Yes, of course you're an adult, but not really." You've already heard the argument: We can vote, pay taxes, and be sent to war, but we can't drink (or go to see much live music). I would be grateful if someone could post the following statistics to the net (or just send me mail): 1. How much does the rate of accidents involving alcohol decrease when a state raises it's drinking age? Is all of the change attributable to the age change, or could other factors be involved? How does this compare with the percentage of 18-20 years olds involved in alcohol- related accidents before the change? 2. In many European countries the drinking age is lower than the driving age. What percentage of alcohol-related accidents in these countries involve 18-20 year-olds? Thank you. Stephen Folta decvax!yale-comix!folta