Launched in July 2008, the Amethyst Initiative is made up of chancellors and presidents of universities and colleges across the United States. These higher education leaders have signed their names to a public statement that the problem of irresponsible drinking by young people continues despite the minimum legal drinking age of 21, and there is a culture of dangerous binge drinking on many campuses.
The Amethyst Initiative supports informed and unimpeded debate on the 21 year-old drinking age. Amethyst Initiative presidents and chancellors call upon elected officials to weigh all the consequences of current alcohol policies and to invite new ideas on how best to prepare young adults to make responsible decisions about alcohol use.
As of July 12, 2009, more than 100 college presidents and chancellors have signed the letter, with over 20 more since then. One of the key features of the Amethyst Initiative is to lower the drinking age to 18. See http://www.amethystinitiative.org/ for more details.
The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry has just published the results of a study that found that binge drinking among the under 21 population has decreased nationwide with the institution of a drinking age of 21 – everywhere, that is, except on college campuses.
An editorial on July 12th in the Washington Post stated, “Those on college campuses who favor a lower drinking age point out that students will decide to drink regardless of the law, and forcing them to do so in secret and illegally will make such behaviors such as binge drinking harder to monitor. But outside college campuses, where underage drinking is clearly prohibited, young people have more often made the decision not to drink. This, in turn, has helped drive down drunk driving, assault and other unsafe behaviors. The journal's study drives home the fact that when young people know that the law will be upheld, they adjust their behavior. It's time for college administrators to stop passing the buck to the drinking age and start taking their loco parentis role more seriously. Instead of complaining about the drinking age, they should try enforcing it.”
Local law enforcement is shaky. It's been observed that at off-campus parties where underage drinking is clearly occurring, officers are overwhelmed by the numbers of partiers; just breaking the party up is an effort that takes several officers (sometimes all that are then currently on the street) hours, often without the checking of I.D.s. Many witnesses have stated that the partygoers leave the party carrying alcohol, piling into vehicles which may or not be driven by those who are underage and/or under the influence. Those who are cited for underage drinking do make it to court, but the lion's share of them who do walk after their cases are nolle prossed or put on the stet docket. Salisbury University officials state that underage drinking is a problem and that those who are caught face in-house sanctions, although those numbers are a closely guarded secret, falling under what are allegedly privacy issues.
It is this writer's opinion that lowering the drinking age is, at its face, a poorly conceived idea, that allowing more drinking, especially off-campus, invites more bad behavior, more binge drinking, more upset of the teetering balance of allowable behavior among our college students.
What do you think?
The Amethyst Initiative supports informed and unimpeded debate on the 21 year-old drinking age. Amethyst Initiative presidents and chancellors call upon elected officials to weigh all the consequences of current alcohol policies and to invite new ideas on how best to prepare young adults to make responsible decisions about alcohol use.
As of July 12, 2009, more than 100 college presidents and chancellors have signed the letter, with over 20 more since then. One of the key features of the Amethyst Initiative is to lower the drinking age to 18. See http://www.amethystinitiative.org/ for more details.
The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry has just published the results of a study that found that binge drinking among the under 21 population has decreased nationwide with the institution of a drinking age of 21 – everywhere, that is, except on college campuses.
An editorial on July 12th in the Washington Post stated, “Those on college campuses who favor a lower drinking age point out that students will decide to drink regardless of the law, and forcing them to do so in secret and illegally will make such behaviors such as binge drinking harder to monitor. But outside college campuses, where underage drinking is clearly prohibited, young people have more often made the decision not to drink. This, in turn, has helped drive down drunk driving, assault and other unsafe behaviors. The journal's study drives home the fact that when young people know that the law will be upheld, they adjust their behavior. It's time for college administrators to stop passing the buck to the drinking age and start taking their loco parentis role more seriously. Instead of complaining about the drinking age, they should try enforcing it.”
Local law enforcement is shaky. It's been observed that at off-campus parties where underage drinking is clearly occurring, officers are overwhelmed by the numbers of partiers; just breaking the party up is an effort that takes several officers (sometimes all that are then currently on the street) hours, often without the checking of I.D.s. Many witnesses have stated that the partygoers leave the party carrying alcohol, piling into vehicles which may or not be driven by those who are underage and/or under the influence. Those who are cited for underage drinking do make it to court, but the lion's share of them who do walk after their cases are nolle prossed or put on the stet docket. Salisbury University officials state that underage drinking is a problem and that those who are caught face in-house sanctions, although those numbers are a closely guarded secret, falling under what are allegedly privacy issues.
It is this writer's opinion that lowering the drinking age is, at its face, a poorly conceived idea, that allowing more drinking, especially off-campus, invites more bad behavior, more binge drinking, more upset of the teetering balance of allowable behavior among our college students.
What do you think?
25 comments:
What do they want more tax on alcohol, good Lord.
At 18 years old, I was old enough to fight and die for my country, yet could not legally enter the 'all hands' club, as I was apparently not of legal age.
It is interesting that this author imposes that colleges SHOULD act as loco parentis, AND states that people 18-20 are not of the age of consent. Is that what the author is implying? Last time i checked, 18 was the age of consent.
What I support, and I do know it shoots holes in my own argument, is 18 to drink in, 19 to carry out. Because the responsible bartender/server is monitoring consumption, right?
The problem lies in the fact that it is ILLEGAL for a parent to teach their children how to enjoy alcohol. They can lose their kids for doing this.
So how else are they to learn.... freshman year!
I agree with 2:01
Frankly as a college student, you see kids who have never had alcohol on a regular basis before not knowing what to do with themselves when they can.
Making them wait till they are 21 only makes it worse. Like the above person said : If you can vote, fight for your country, and be tried as an adult, then you should be able to have a drink.
If you can defend our country at 18 then let them drink.
My thought is that lowering the drinking age to 18 and teaching responsible drinking would not at all be a bad thing. Just like anything, moderation is the key.
Anon 2:01, in fact it is NOT illegal for parents to furnish their minor children with alcohol under their supervision as long as its in a private residence:
Furnishing of Alcohol to Minors
Furnishing is prohibited WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTION(S):
• private residence AND EITHER
• - parent/guardian
• - legal-age spouse
• one or more specified religious, educational, or medical purposes
Notes: Maryland's exception allows furnishing of alcohol to minors by members of their immediate family when the alcoholic beverage is furnished and consumed "in a private residence or within the curtilage of the residence." See Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 10-117(c)(1) beginning October 1, 2002, and Md. Ann. Code 1957 art. 27, § 401A(c)(1) prior to October 1, 2002.
No way should they lower the age, its madness.
The accepted legal drinking age of 21 in the US is higher than just about every other country. It should be lowered. Does not have to be 18, bu ti could be lower than 21, easily.
Let me just say first, that i am at the ripe old age of 18(little humor) to be 19 in december - and i did MUCH less drinking once i hit 18 than i did when i was in highschool & it had to be kept from parents & everyone else; if they lowered the age, most 18 - 20 year olds would realize that alcohol is only well worth the "getting drunk" phase if you are not allowed to do it, there is no challenge in drinking if you can do it at 18 WHEN YOU GRADUATE HIGHSCHOOL & TURN INTO AN ADULT. I work 40 hours a week at a REAL JOB that ive had since the day i did graduate, i pay taxes & my bills- & if i want to go home & have a glass of wine or a beer, or go to a restaurant & have a drink when i get off, i think that i deserve atleast that decision, im probably more mature that most that are of legal drinking age.. So who says the government should decide that for me? If i can LEGALLY live in my own apartment by myself(which i do) and legally buy my own car from a dealership(which i have) why am i not legally given the choice to drink or not? something to think about coming from someone who is 18 years old!
I agree that if you are old enough to fight and die for this country, then you are old enough to drink. If not, raise the military age to 21 or bring back prohibition.
As a former college student, it doesn't matter if you are 18 or not. You are going to get alcohol at college. You will not curb any drinking or change anything by lowering the age. The only difference is you won't have to get the people who are of age to get it for you. When you first start drinking, you learn what your limits are. Hugging the porcelin God a few times teaches you to be a little more responsible. You certainly don't want that hangover ever again. I do agree that if you are old enough to fight and die for your country, you are certainly old enough to have a beer. Even when you turn 21, it takes time to curb the binging. How many people have you seen at the age of 21 bar hopping that have to be carried out of a bar and driven home? Bottom line is until you learn for yourself, it doesn't matter what age you are.
They tried this already back in the early seventies, say around 1973. I know because I was in that category.It only lasted about three years and went back to 21.Not sure why.You still could not get into places that required you to be 21, so you were stuck drinking at places like THE JUG a club down in OC that served only beer. Oh , To be young again !!
Are they adults or are they children? Our Goverment was set up by the people for the people, but not to control the people. But this country has been doing just that from the begining. ie: Prostutution / Marajuana / remember prohabition / Abortion / can't see Elvis shake his Pelvis on TV / ect. Yes some people will call these things morally wrong. Then let them obstain. I am an adult, I choose my own morallity, What gives anyone the right to take my freedom of choice away from me. Am I a child that needs mommy and daddy goverment to protect me? NO! I'm an adult that does no harm to anyone else. My choices may or maynot send me to hell, but it's my choice to go there if I want to.
If 18-21 year olds are children bring them back home. We don't send children to war like Iran. If they are adults let them make their on choices and mistakes.
Tom Sawyer
Keep the age the same but exception to people who enroll into the military. Just restrict them to beer and wine.
Heck, lower the drinking age. Your allowed to marry same sex now, let illegals in the US and live off american tax payers, currupt ppl in the office, no god in schools and bail out all the companies who are greedy.
Let's put it to a vote. Let's put legalizing marijuana to a vote 2 and see what happens. I think you might be suprised.
My condolences to all you responsible car-owning, apartment-renting 18-year-olds, but there are way way WAAYY more irresponsible 18-yr-olds out there. The laws protect them from themselves, and us from them.
Also, answer this question: How many Junebugs would you like drinking at Ocean City bars, or buying beer at the local 7-Eleven?
I have to agree that if you can fight and die for your country, you are entitled to a drink or two.
Also, the higher drinking age is not stop college students from drinking.
Lower the age and make their drinking their problem.
If colleges were really concerned about this subject, they would start expelling those students who break the laws and consume alcohol underage.
Once the word got around that if you drink, you face tough consequences -- at least getting sent home is better than getting killed as a drunk driver.
These kids have to wake up and realize there are consequences to their actions, some of which will change their lives forever.
When I was in high school during the early 90's, we all smoked pot because we couldn't buy alcohol. I remember making homemade wine with Mom's yeast and a sack of sugar, but didn't like the feeling of being drunk. You need a stressful adult life to really appreciate alcohol. I drink a half gallon of Jim Beam each week, mostly on worknights. It's good medicine and cheap entertainment for the working slob.
The current law is a joke. Lower the age to 18.
In Spain, there is no drinking age. Children are brought up to drink responsibly. Wine is served with dinner. One important age difference is you have to be 18 yrs
to get your drivers license. This to me makes more sense! In the US, 50% of the 16 yr. old drivers are involved in an accident. Ask your insurance agent. That's why premiums are so high.
I am undecided on the drinking age issue,but if you want to prevent underage drinking,you gotta get tough on the people who furnish booze to minors.
The licensed beverage industry,whether it be the dispensaries or bars,are doing their part with ID checks but the problem is people over 21 buying it for them.A wino will buy a 16 yr old kid anything they want as long he gets a few bucks for his trouble to get another bottle for himself.Or the kids can steal it from someones home (Dads bourbon supply,for example).
I grew up with an alcoholic in the home,so I had access to whiskey pretty much whenever yet I never drank alot.It was a combo of easy access and witnessing the negative effects of alcohol abuse up close that did it for me.Kids who are never exposed to booze go crazy when they finally get it.
The law doesn't matter anyway. Have a party busted near SU and the underage drinking is ignored because of the dip stick police chief and the good old boy network of yo yos
Please government, tell us what to do.
Is it OK to put this into my mouth?
Is it OK to touch this, or feel that?
Decide at what age you are legally an adult and responsible for your own actions and that is your answer. Why must be babysit adults? Maybe this would spur more parents to raise their children responsibly. I have contact with many University level students who don't have a lick of common sense because their parents have coddled them all their lives. Many have NEVER had a paying job. It's absolutely frightening to me!!!!!
Post a Comment