I had seen something about this before on our national website. I thought Penn State was in on it too. Anyway, kudos to these college presidents for having the balls to stand up and say what makes sense, not what is politically correct.

The fact that MADD is saying that students wouldn't be "safe" at those schools - in effect, telling parents not to send their kids there - just points up what a POS organization they are. :rolleyes:

You have an organization made for parents who have lost a child to drunk driving and you expect them to be rational?

With as much power as they wield, yes, I do. When the founder leaves a group it's a red flag IMO.

I am a huge fan of Dr. Gordon Gee from The Ohio State Univ. -- I see he's one of the main supporters.

I agree with the Presidents because some people do illegal things simply for the thrill of doing something illegal.

Drinking was once illegal, people still drank and it was evetually made legal. The lottery was once illegal, people still played their numbers and again, it was made legal. I really do not see a difference here.

I was an RA in a freshman girls hall and there was plenty of alcohol flowing. As the RA, I wasn't even old enough to drink!

Lower the age and less people won't drink, but it will stop some of the reckless behavior.

Probably is. I could drink in college. Louisiana changed the age to 21 when I was 20 because of the highway funding issue. Luckily, I could drink while I was 20 because all of the bars were convinced that we would be "grandfathered" in! I think a lot of college students will experiment with alcohol and go overboard...I know I did. Binging, however, was not such a problem when we could drink for the time we stepped foot on campus. Other drugs, like Benzos, weren't abused like they are now when you get just get a little drunk instead.

Between the time I was at OSU in the 80s and when my niece started a few years ago, they "cleaned up" South Campus. They put in a lot of nice restaurants and coffee shops and tore down our beloved watering holes where we drank "buckets of beer" (some of us are stilly mourning that). The administration did this to provide options to students who were underage.

Are they restaurants and coffee houses utilized? Yes. Have the underaged students quit drinking? Absolutely not. They are still going to drink, but it's not on High Street.

This is not unique to Ohio State. My aunt lives at the edge of the College of Wooster. The students don't patronize restaurants because they can't have a beer. They eat on campus and drink in their dorms or houses.

Dr. Gee is on to something, and I commend him for it. I rarely drink any longer, but I did plenty before I turned 18, which was then the law for "low beer" in Ohio. I was never in favor of the 21 law then, and I'm still not.

and supervision........

You read my mind.

Here is a pertinent article from the March 2008 issue of Lambda Chi Alpha's magazine, the Cross & Crescent.

http://www.crossandcrescent.com/2008...ility-founder/

If this went through it'd be great.

Of course MADD will be against it for good reasons because of deaths.

But, the difference is between the social aspect and binge drinking is about underage students at the moment.

The Federal Government changed the speed limit on our highways and raised the legal drinking age at the same time as I remember and those states who did not raise the legal age were told they would not get any state highways funds from the Govt.

So, it was basicaly a form of blackmail.:mad:

Now, it seems be coming full circle again. The economy of many college towns suffered and many local bars sent out of business which in turn lost taxes to the city, county, and state. So, who was the winner here?

The post I made showed a discussion on this and evidently got deleted. But the one thing it did have was a survey and the largest % was to change the law.

Ah, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Let's get into the Way Back Machine w/Mr. Peabody and go to that long-past year, 1974. Say we stop in Illinois.

Since the Land of Lincoln is situated next to the border of America's Dairyland (Wisconsin), many of us flatlanders were prone to heading north to quaff brewskis. At that point, Wisconsin's state law said it was OK to drink @ 18. Illinois had come up w/a hybrid law: beer/wine @ 19 & hard stuff @ 21.

This law worked...for a while. Then the Dept. of Transportation started noticing that there were far too many kids between the ages of 19-20 ending up in their local morgues due to drunk driving. That's why MADD doesn't want to see anybody getting the age brought down to 18.

Wish all you want, gang...since the 21-years-old law is attached @ the hip to highway $$$, it's not gonna change.

You just said yourself that people were driving state to state. Doesn't that maybe have more to do w/ the drunk driving being higher than age? I think the drunk driving would have gone down just as much if all of the states had gone to 18 or 19 instead.

And the group does state that they want the Federal Highway Funding Act re-evaluated/eliminated.

http://www.amethystinitiative.org/statement/

Interesting statistic found on the Howard County chapter of MADD website:

The U.S. Surgeon General reports that life expectancy has improved in the U.S. over the past 75 years for every age group except one: the death rate for 15- to 24-year-olds is higher today than it was 20 years ago. The leading cause of death is drunk and drugged driving.

Please note, 20 years ago was 1988, AFTER the drinking age was raised to 21 everywhere.