Old enough to kill,

[DracoPaladore 0]

Actually, Canadian soldiers in Kabul are allowed to have one beer a day. I'll have to check up on this, because I can only remember it from Rick Mercers Monday Report after he came back. I remember him saying something like that...

[SpongeBob 0]

My friend Al Coholic (not his real name) once told me "If you're old enough to stand and walk, you're old enough to stagger and fall down drunk"

I just finished reading a book about a grunt's 6 months at Khe Sahn, he was rationed one piss warm beer per day, and it didn't matter if you drank alcohol or not, when the enemy was hitting your base with 100s of arty/mortar/rockets a day, the time you spent drinking that beer was bliss.

[toadlife 3]

We in the US have conflicting laws. You have to be 16 to get a drivers license - yet at 16 you are a minor, therefore you are not legally responsible if you kill someone with your car. At 18, you have the right to vote, enter into a legallly binding contract, join the army and get killed, and consent to sexual relations - yet you can't drink alcohol until you're 21.

I think all of these various rights (especially driving) should be endacted at the same time.

Quote[/b] ]I do believe it is stupid that someone serving thier country, which means able to die at any moment, cant get a drink legally. Its one of those stupid US laws started by those evil liberals.

I'm sorry, but "liberals" is a very poor description of the people who advocated raising the drinking age. Raising the drinking age to 21 was (it used to be 18 in the U.S.) was a product of the same "citizen action groups" (A bunch of Religous Fundamentalist Soccer Moms) who brought us prohibition in the 1920's.

Here is some info:

Quote[/b] ]A Short History of Legal Drinking Age Laws (in the U.S.)

After Prohibition, nearly all states restricting youth access to alcohol designated 21 as the minimum legal drinking age. During the 70s, 29 states lowered the minimum legal drinking age to 18, 19, or 20. These changes occurred when the minimum age for other activities, such as voting, also were being lowered. The fact that 18 years olds were open to potential drafting by the US army during the Vietnam was was also a factor - "If I am old enough to die for my country in the army, and I am old enough choose the future of my country by voting, how come I'm not old enough to drink?" was a popular argument.

In the backdrop of the lowering of the legal drinking age, several studies and researches found that motor vehicle crashes increased significantly among teens in the states where the minimum legal drinking age was lowered. Armed with hard evidence that alcohol consumption by teens lead to more driving accidents, citizen advocacy groups pushed states to restore the legal drinking age limit to 21. As a result of such campaigns, 16 states increased their minimum legal drinking ages between September 1976 and January 1983. Resistance from other states, and concern that minors would travel across state lines to purchase and consume alcohol, prompted the federal government in 1984 (under President Reagan) to enact the Uniform Drinking Age Act, which reduced federal transportation funding to those states that did not raise the minimum legal drinking age to 21. The legislation was quite effective: by 1988, every state had a minimum legal drinking age of 21.

The sob-story arguments for a higher drinking age are compelling, but to me, they contradict the notion that when you turn 18, you are responsible for yourself.

Here is a typical quote from the anti-drinking standpoint...

Quote[/b] ]"The problem with the arguments for lowering the legal drinking age is it is simply not in the best interest of the public's safety to do so. Teenagers who drink are a danger to themselves and others -- especially on the highways."

My question is, why on Earth do we allow 16 year olds to drive in the first place? The fact is 16-17 year olds cause more deadly accidents every year in the U.S. than any other age group. If we raised the age you can get a drivers license to 18 or 21, I guarantee fatal accidents would plummet.

I say either raise the age that you become a legal adult to 21 or lower the drinking age to 18.

[Postduifje 0]

My question is, why on Earth do we allow 16 year olds to drive in the first place? The fact is 16-17 year olds cause more deadly accidents every year in the U.S. than any other age group. If we raised the age you can get a drivers license to 18 or 21, I guarantee fatal accidents would plummet.

I say either raise the age that you become a legal adult to 21 or lower the drinking age to 18.

Not really solid. In every country the category of people in their first 5 drivingyears causes an abnormally large portion of the accident, it's more the fact that they're beginners than that their young.

Nevertheless, I totally agree with you. 16 is a ridiculously low age to start driving, as is 21 a ridiculously high age to be able to drink.

[m21man 0]

And there's talk of raising the drinking age to 24 . So an 18 year old can own a Barret M82, drive a truck, and vote in elections, but he can't drink. I hate political posturing.

Edit - I think 18 is also the age limit for wearing body armor.

[toadlife 3]

Not really solid. In every country the category of people in their first 5 drivingyears causes an abnormally large portion of the accident, it's more the fact that they're beginners than that their young.

Nevertheless, I totally agree with you. 16 is a ridiculously low age to start driving, as is 21 a ridiculously high age to be able to drink.

True. If the drinking age is 18, a bunch of 18 year olds will die in car accidents. If the age is 21, a bunch of 21 year olds will die in car accidents. Raising/lowering the drinking age is akin to delaying/expediting the innevitable, the innevitable being that a certain amount of people will abuse their newly gained rights.

Question for non U.S. people: Is the drinking age, and age of "adulthood" the same in your country?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

We went over this back in the '70s. Yes, it's reasonable to assume that an 18 year old should have access to all the benefits of adulthood, but the fact is that our society in the US has been ingrained with all these wierd mores and attitudes regarding alcohol- Prohibition, Temperance, all that moral crusader crap has left alcohol with an indelible stigma that, ironically enough, has made it a rite of passage for teenagers all over America. Hell, in my city underage drinking is our unnofficial pasttime; I don't binge drink and I stay away from whiskey most of the time (never more than two shots), but I do enjoy a good beer or three now and then. Unfortunately, most of my peers don't share my moderation; getting plastered is so easy even without the drinking age limitation, and legalization would be like Christmas, Thanksgiving, and St. Paddy's day all rolled into one for them. Like it or not, lowering the drinking age will cause alcohol related deaths (not to mention alcoholism) to skyrocket... at least in the short term. Eventually, after a decade or two, alcohol will have lost its attraction as a rebellious activity, and those numbers will taper off. However, there is no way in Hell that the American people (or at least their holier-than-thou elected officials) will tolerate 20 years of even more teens dying than usual.

So, what that means is that our society has made its own bed in regards to alcohol, and now we have to sleep in it. In addition, our political system and deeply divided constituency make any kind of social engineering on the level necessary to ameliorate this problem completely impossible.

[joltan 0]

Question for non U.S. people: Is the drinking age, and age of "adulthood" the same in your country?

Not for 'soft' stuff in Germany, only for 'hard' stuff. Beer is legal to buy and drink by the age of 16 (12 or 14 I think if in company of your parents), and you're considered an adult by the age of 18 (by which time you're allowed to drink whatever you want and go voting afterwards). You may drive a small motorcycle (limited to 80kph) by the age of 16, cars by the age of 18 and trucks by the age of 21. In some cases you may be considered still a minor in court even when over 18 (but not when over 21) - that depends on the charges against you.

But don't ask me where the exact limit between 'soft' and 'hard' drinks lies - I'm way too old for having to worry about that - and far too young for having to worry about my kids.

[Frisbee 0]

I believe (<= stress this part) that in Belgium, you can't enter bars without parental supervision if you're younger than 14.

You can, however, if I'm not mistaken buy alcohol in a store without a problem before that (though they probably don't sell serious liquor to 12yr olds).

I had my first beer when I was...14 iirc, and I started to drink it regularely when I started going out, 15-16-ish.

It's funny though, with breezer and all those alcohol pops there are 11-12yr olds getting plastered drinking that crap (some even getting into a coma)

Imho this is a much worse problem, teens will drink it anyway just to be rebellious, as pointed out above, but 12 yr old and younger are still kids. (yeah, I realise, to many I myself am still a snotty nosed brat but hey )

[toadlife 3]

Not for 'soft' stuff in Germany, only for 'hard' stuff.

LOL. That's kinda funny. Like saying you can buy a 9mm pistol when you're 16 but have to wait until your 18 to buy a 357 magnum.

[joltan 0]

Not really - half a litre of beer (~4.5 - 5.5 %vol) won't do a 16 year old much harm - half a litre of 45%vol Schnapps may well land him in the hospital... it's really hard to get a alcohol intoxication on beer only. ;)

Now what's dangerous are those 'alco-pops' - lemonades mixed with hard alcohol that have a comparable low alcohol content (that's why they may be sold to minors), but where the kids don't taste the alcohol and gulp it down like any other soft drink - with the expected results. These mix drinks have become very popular with teenagers in recent years and selling/buying them will probably become illegal for minors (or is it already? not sure).

[toadlife 3]

Not really - half a litre of beer (~4.5 - 5.5 %vol) won't do a 16 year old much harm - half a litre of 45%vol Schnapps may well land him in the hospital...

Uh yeah. If a 16 year old doesn't realize that Schaaps is 5 times more potent than beer, then perhaps they shouldn't be touching alcohol at all.

[Frisbee 0]

Uh yeah. If a 16 year old doesn't realize that Schaaps is 5 times more potent than beer, then perhaps they shouldn't be touching alcohol at all.

Of course they realize it's more potent, they just don't know by how much.

Most try it, get sick, throw up, have a hangover, and the avoid it like the plague.

Some just keep drinking and pass out, they're the idiots.

But as joltan repeated, the alco-pops are a bigger problem.

[joltan 0]

If a 16 year old doesn't realize that Schaaps is 5 times more potent than beer, then perhaps they shouldn't be touching alcohol at all.

The thing is that at some point the soon-to-be adults have to learn to handle alcohol. They learn it by trying (and usually at least once drinking way too much). If they learn it with softer stuff like beer it's less dangerous than if they can try the hard stuff right away.

Also one big difference with beer and hard alcohol is the time it takes to get all that alcohol into your body: you have to drink 9-10 beers to get the same amount of alcohol than you get in a similar glass of Schnapps/Vodka/whatever. That takes time. With hard stuff the full effect of the alcohol only hit's you when it's already too late.

Edit: another example. What do you think is more appropriate to learn driving a car - a formula 1 race car or your dad's old Chrysler?

[Certa 0]

There are many strange regulations in the western world applying to so called free individuals.

You may drink alcohol but not smoke cannabis. You may be forced to do national service, handle loaded weapons and learn to kill for your nation while still not being mature enough to have a drink.

But when one sign up for a professional army/navy, like the British, Canadian or American, one also gives away many individual rights by contract and normal freedom no longer apply.

[bmgarcangel 0]

hey

I got one thing to say....

I live in Washington State in the good old united states of america, smack right next to the pacific ocean.  But 30 miles away from the Canadian border Marijuna is always coming down and crack going up.

I know so many repectable people at school who have a tiny bit of marijuna in their packs everyday, guess they just can't help being bad.

But hell, I drink sometimes, I like wine the best and Guiness beer.  I'm but only 17 years of age my friends but I don't drink alot so its not any big deal.  So don't think about legalizing alchol around here to people my age and younger, for if you do then we'd get into more and more accidents then must people would have ever thought possible!

Its the way us youngings are, I have 1997 Blue Civic that i've beefed up over the past month, lowered a little bit to the ground and turbo and nitro put in, I drive fast all the time, but I don't even dare to havea sip of alchol in the public arena unless its at a friends house or my place....

imagine if they legalized it to people our age......people would start driving and drinking and since we drive fast it would be a disastor..........

Even though, fact is we still drink, no matter what they say, but we don't drive and drink.....yet

~Bmgarcangel

[Asmodeus 0]

@ bmgarcangel

Please, NEVER drink a lot (or even more than 1 beer per hour) and drive. Being older doesn't help in that arena. It just shouldn't be done IMO. (I know a guy that's been in jail for 8 years, he killed an entire family while driving drunk)

As far as the situation with not being able to drink in a warzone...

From a personal standpoint I think people should be treated like adults and trusted to know what their limits are and what situations warrant what behaviour.

However, from an authoritative standpoint... You can't trust people to act like adults with controlled substances in a warzone and must enforce rules to keep everyone at peak performance and readiness.

About the Canadian soldiers not being able to drink in an American base...

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do."

However, I think it has been established that this base isn't considered American soil, but Iraqi. If that's the situation, Iraqi laws should apply, but the Army can supersede these laws anyway.

Also, IMO my government (USA) will change the rules to fit their needs whenever a loophole can be found. And they design the loopholes!

Asmo

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]imagine if they legalized it to people our age......people would start driving and drinking and since we drive fast it would be a disastor..........

You'd have a rapid encounter with Darwinism, and your genes would be permanently removed from the gene pool. As long as the intoxicated teenagers only kill themselves, that's fine with me.

[SpecOp9 0]

If I can get tried as an adult and go to an adult prison when I'm only 17? Why the F*CK Can't I get a pack of cigs at the store?

I hate people.

[Apollo 0]

Here in Belgium i'm allowed to smoke pot or drink beer at any age.

Drank my first beer from age 5 (table beer ,"only" 1.5% alcohol) and my firts regular beer when i was about 11-12 (5.5% to 11% (mmmm duvel))

Personnaly i like our laws better.Belgium actually has less alcoholists percentage wise than other country's.Here in Belgium people are learned the effects of alcohol very young ,so they know from then what effects it has.Belgium are big movers of beer ,but they know how to handle it most of the times.

In country's like England you have to be 19 i think.This can have it's bad effects ,when people are suddently allowed to drink from day to day some tend to drink a lot at once because it's new.

My hometown Ypres has a lot of English tourists from age 13-16.When they are left free to run around in town after the historical venue's the first thing they do is search a "youth-cafe" (such concept exists here) and drink till Kingdom come.They will be very surprized if they see a 13 year old order a beer of an alcohol percentage 3x higher than their heaviest local brand.However these English students will drink themselfs drunk because it's theyre only chance to do so ,while that 13 Belgian kid will drink 2 beers and some cola between it.

In Belgium we drink beer mostly because in Belgium beer is like very tasty and good ,rather than to drink it to get drunk.Afcourse in a country like England where te beer tastes like enhanced urine i can understand that people drink to get drunk.  

btw. im all for the legalization of Marihuana ,i always respected the Netherlands and in lesser exten Belgium from taking the decission not to prosecute people that occasionaly use pot.

Many people in Belgium prefer marihuana above beer ,because frankly it's healthier and less addicting.

The beer i used to drink from age 5 was named "Piedbouf brown beer".Now to most Belgiums of my generation this brand of table beer is a legend.I was tottaly hooked on the brown beer ,i used to drink a liter of 2-3 every day even at that age.At first this sometimes left me tipsy but you get used to it fast ,that beer is so fooking good that i call it child abuse when a parent doesn't allow it to his kid ,shure as hell is healthier than coca cola.In addition it made me so resiliet to beer that i could drink most foreigners under table from age 6 onwards. (theoreticly)

Now i'm so resilient against beer that its hard to get drunk.I can hose 10 beers and still feel pretty normal ,i know people out here that can hose a crate of 24 pint's by themselfs and still feel normal.

Once on camp in England ,we had our own beer with us.We started a drinking contest against brits withought them knowing we were Belgian.Most of those Brits were drunk after 1-2 beers ,while with 6 we drank another 2 crate's and were still pretty sober.

Or to quote Father Jack: DRINK! DRINK! gobshite DRINK!

[Vognsen 0]

In denmark the legal age to drink is 15, and the legal age to drive is 18. This works great

[Postduifje 0]

I live in the Netherlands, and so am by legislation allowed to use marihuana. But I must say, it's utter crap. It just makes you sleepy, and when legal there's nothing excited about it. I know fairly little people who actually use it. When at the age of 15-18 it might hold some excitement, but it'll grow off very fast. For some people it seems to work tho, and it gives them a better effect than alcohol. I couldn't care less if it's legal or not, but it's fun to watch to crazy english and french tourist thinking they are hallucinating

What I was trying to say is, the same goes for alcohol at young age. When not illegal, it's not excited to do so. You'll get usage, but with proportion.

[ozanzac 0]

I can legally pilot a boat from the age of 12. Anything from a little Dingy to Sir Malcolm Campbell's Bluebird.

I can bring about new life, drive, and ride motorcycles from the age of 16. (It was 15 in New Zealand, but legislation probably changed that)

Yet to buy alcohol, buy tobacco products, access pornography, enter a simple legal contract, and/or vote, I have to wait until I'm 18.

I accept that these are the rules. That doesn't mean I disagree with them, and doesn't mean I don't bend them, and that I haven't in the past and won't in the immidiate future.

What I do disagree with, is the lack of commonality between them, and that they govern social behaviour simply on the digits of your date of birth, and not your competency, or maturity.

I was riding motorbikes and paddock bashing 4-wheeled machines since I was five. I was operating Bobcats at the age of 8, Backhoes by 9 and Forklifts by 10. Not once have I made a serious mistake whilst operating/driving and riding machines. I knew the rules of the road by the time I was 11 in both city and country conditions, and it probably was a safe bet by the age of twelve, I had gotten over the 'speed' factor of driving, and would have had the senses, and been more than competent enough to have a full licence by 13.

Today, I witnessed a learner driver get rear ended because she stalled at the wrong end of a busy, and fast flowing intersection. She got her permission to drive from the government, not by her competency, but by her ability to answer 85% of a 30 odd question, written exam. It was whether she could tell which gear she was in that caused an other wise avoidable accident.

I'd pass blame to the accident equally on 4 parts. The government for not having competency based licensing, the Learner driver, the learner drivers supervising driver, and the driver of the other vehicle for not taking the intersection at a safe speed when his ability to see upcoming traffic was impeded by the truck in the next lane.

People are permitted to do things, even if they are incompetent at doing them, and are not permitted to do things, even if they are.

If I had an influence in government. I would introduce competency based legislation for the driving of vehicles, drinking alcoholic products, the entering of legal contracts and the smoking of tobacco products.

In a very ideal world, I'd also prevent some people from becoming parents, and prevent people who want the liberty to smoke, to also have free access to the publicly funded health system for smoking related illness. Likewise for alcoholic related illness. And any problems arising from being affected by alcohol.

Maybe it's just me, but a few digits doesn't do good enough as to what does and doesn't designate people as responsible enough to participate in certain activities. I don't hate the system, but with the way the system is set up to be so invasive anyway, this would prevent some individuals problems from ever becoming the publics problem.

[hellfish6 7]

Maybe somewhere, someday a government will realize that age is relative to experience and that it is better to have a smart 15 year old vote than it is to have an idiotic 25 year old. Personally, I think that in order to drink, vote or drive you should have a high school degree (or GED). Once you've completed the basic educational requirement our society demands, you should be rewarded.It'd keep kids in school, methinks, at the very least.

[Postduifje 0]

Maybe somewhere, someday a government will realize that age is relative to experience and that it is better to have a smart 15 year old vote than it is to have an idiotic 25 year old. Personally, I think that in order to drink, vote or drive you should have a high school degree (or GED). Once you've completed the basic educational requirement our society demands, you should be rewarded.It'd keep kids in school, methinks, at the very least.

But than again education is relative to being "smart"