Repeal the Drinking Age

http://mises.org/daily/4559

Quote :

On college campuses, the industry of the fake ID thrives as never before. It seems nearly true that almost every student believes himself or herself in need of getting one. Do the restaurants and bars know this? Of course they do. They have every interest in having these fake IDs look as real as possible to give themselves some degree of legal immunity if someone gets caught. The whole thing is a gigantic fakeroo, a mass exercise in open but unspoken hypocrisy, and everyone knows it.

Quote :

Digging around for explanations about these silly laws, there is one overarching argument: driving. We don't want drunken teenagers on the road. These laws have saved thousands, millions, of lives, and the desire to change them is the equivalent of harboring a death wish for a generation. Now, one libertarian response might be: then get rid of the public roads and let road owners manage whether and to what extent its drivers drink. That's a principled position but a bit impractical. The biggest problem with that response is that it concedes too much.

The closer you look at these studies, the fishier they appear. It turns out that most of the declines in binge drinking among high-school kids, according to a trends in drug use report,Download PDF took place before the change in the law, and, according to researchers Jeffrey A. Miron and Elina Tetelbaum, the changes in trends after are heavily biased by data sampling from a single state. Therefore, data on drunk driving, whatever the trends, cannot be statistically attributed to the national minimum-drinking-age law.

Quote :

Only the overt commission of a crime should be illegal, and the way to combat crimes committed under the influence of alcohol is to be more diligent about the crimes themselves, not to outlaw the alcohol. And this would have the further beneficial effect of reducing crimes not committed under the influence of alcohol.
Murray Rothbard

same could be said about drug laws

Yonni wrote:

same could be said about drug laws

I concur!

So what point are you trying to make? Repeal all drug and alcohol laws?

BERG wrote:

So what point are you trying to make? Repeal all drug and alcohol laws?

Yes and the quote pro used to explain why, was perfect... I will change one word

Quote :

Only the overt commission of a crime should be illegal, and the way to combat crimes committed under the influence of drugs is to be more diligent about the crimes themselves, not to outlaw the drugs. And this would have the further beneficial effect of reducing crimes not committed under the influence of drugs.
Murray Rothbard

There are many other reasons, but the way it is explained by Murray Rothbard makes perfect sense, atleast to me anyways.

I think that you're both off of your rocker, if you think that repealing these laws is good for anyone. I will write more about this issue later. Right now, I need to get some work done. WTH, Friday isn't supposed to be this busy.

BERG wrote:

I think that you're both off of your rocker, if you think that repealing these laws is good for anyone. I will write more about this issue later. Right now, I need to get some work done. WTH, Friday isn't supposed to be this busy.

I'd love to hear what you have to say about it.

Yep I'll get back to it.

I dont think they should repeal the drinking age but I do think they should scale it back to the age of 18......... At 18 you can die for this country but cant have a beer WTF...

plottrunner wrote:

I dont think they should repeal the drinking age but I do think they should scale it back to the age of 18......... At 18 you can die for this country but cant have a beer WTF...

EXACTLY!!

I concur 100% with repealment of every drug law. The article was spot-on. Berg, any argument for keeping these laws on the books is an argument against personal liberty.

Again, I feel like I'm in an alternate universe agreeing with pro so often.

fatbass wrote:

I concur 100% with repealment of every drug law. The article was spot-on. Berg, any argument for keeping these laws on the books is an argument against personal liberty.

Again, I feel like I'm in an alternate universe agreeing with pro so often.

fatbass wrote:

Again, I feel like I'm in an alternate universe agreeing with pro so often.

Hey man you've always got one toe in an alternate universe.

I only agree to the same extent as Plotty. Lower the drinking age to 18 years old, but not any lower. We need some regulation when it comes to minors and drinking. To do anymore, in my opinion, would be a huge mistake. We need some government regulation, but I would leave this one up to The States. Having said that, Kalleefourkneeia would probably allow children as young as 5 to drink Jim Beam. Wouldn't that be special? Anarchy is not a wonderful thing. I believe in very limited government. Now, try to convince me that there shouldn't be legal minimum age for drinking. Having personal liberty is one thing, yet being stupid about alcohol consumption is quite another.

BERG wrote:

Now, try to convince me that there shouldn't be legal minimum age for drinking. Having personal liberty is one thing, yet being stupid about alcohol consumption is quite another.

First, did you take the time to read the link I provided? Second, if you did you would see that teenagers drink alcohol despite the age restrictions, so what is gained by them? I mean other than LEO's spending time harassing teens instead of pursuing crimes that have been committed toward others. I NEVER had a problem getting alcohol as a teen, and I lived in a town of less than 5000 people that is 90% Mormon. So what the hell was/is accomplished by having the legal drinking age set at 21? Lets try and follow the 'logic', a person can drive a vehicle 75 MPH on freeways at 16 but can't be 'trusted' with a 12 oz can of Bud Light, a person can vote for the President/Senators/Congressmen/Governor at 18 but can't be 'trusted' with a 5th of Vodka, a person can be given a fully automatic rifle and sent to a foreign nation and KILL other humans INTENTIONALLY at 18 but can't be 'trusted' with a keg on the weekend.

I agree that it is a farce that we send our kids off to war at 18 but they can't have a beer at that age. I do think it should be left to the states to determine what age is best. Not the federal government.
But I do believe there should be a minimum age like 18. I work in a jail and more and more the people that are drunk driving are 16 to 20 year olds which is down right scary to me. I know the article talks about stricter laws for the crimes that are commited not the actually drinking. The laws have changed and gotten more strict in the past 10 years. And as far as I can see is, it hasn't slowed anything down.
The law is a good thing if it was upheld in every aspect. Yeah alot of kids still get alcohol at ease but thats only because someone else is breaking another law.

fatbass wrote:

I concur 100% with repealment of every drug law.

Let's see how far you'll go with this:

Would you be in favor of it being legal for grocery stores to dispense Percocet, OxyContin or Phenobarbital tablets to small children out of gumball machines? How about off-the-shelf vials of Vecuronium and Diprivan for those kiddies who might like to experiment with surgical anesthesia and paralytics?

If not, just where would you draw the line?

I think Pro. has gone the way of libertarian fanaticism.

BERG wrote:

I think Pro. has gone the way of the libertarian.

There, I fixed you typo.

I take it as a great honor to be called a radical/fanatic, as that is what I have no doubt Jefferson/Franklin would be considered if they were alive today. I guess you consider Ron Paul a fanatic also, but somehow view the current pinheads in BOTH parties 'rational'. Oh the irony.

Pete wrote:

fatbass wrote:

I concur 100% with repealment of every drug law.

Let's see how far you'll go with this:

Would you be in favor of it being legal for grocery stores to dispense Percocet, OxyContin or Phenobarbital tablets to small children out of gumball machines? How about off-the-shelf vials of Vecuronium and Diprivan for those kiddies who might like to experiment with surgical anesthesia and paralytics?

If not, just where would you draw the line?

For me, just as I see it valid to not dispense cigs to toddlers, I think not handed a child a 'loaded gun' is wise and prudent. I personally think that at whatever age one is deemed by society to be entrusted to vote/drive they should be entrusted to decide whether to drink, do drugs and other self-destructive vices. If the local/state government deem that age to be 16/18/21, so be it.

Pete wrote:

fatbass wrote:

I concur 100% with repealment of every drug law.

Let's see how far you'll go with this:

Would you be in favor of it being legal for grocery stores to dispense Percocet, OxyContin or Phenobarbital tablets to small children out of gumball machines? How about off-the-shelf vials of Vecuronium and Diprivan for those kiddies who might like to experiment with surgical anesthesia and paralytics?

If not, just where would you draw the line?

Parents draw the line, not the government...just like it was 120 years ago.

We should also lower the legal age for gambling.

Quote :

Would you be in favor of it being legal for grocery stores to dispense Percocet, OxyContin or Phenobarbital tablets to small children out of gumball machines? How about off-the-shelf vials of Vecuronium and Diprivan for those kiddies who might like to experiment with surgical anesthesia and paralytics?

If not, just where would you draw the line?

At schools then we should have beer can dispensers Also allow 16 year olds to get totally wasted at sporting events.

coyoteslayer wrote:

At schools then we should have beer can dispensers Also allow 16 year olds to get totally wasted at sporting events.

TROLL!!

shotgunwill wrote:

coyoteslayer wrote:

At schools then we should have beer can dispensers Also allow 16 year olds to get totally wasted at sporting events.

TROLL!!

Grass fairy