I don't think greeks should spearhead this movement.

I think military people who can be put on the front lines but not allowed to have a drink or two to sit back and relax with, should spearhead this movement.

It's stupid to let them risk thier lives for us, but then deny them a beer or two.

That argument has been used before. Prior to 1968 young men could drink beer in many states and be drafted into the Army, but couldn't vote.

Should the drinking age be lowered to 18 or 19? Yes (with qualifications, see below).

Should greeks spearhead a movement to do so? No.

The 21yo drinking age draws a line right through the middle of college communities and other groups of young adults. In many places you can't even get into a bar unless you're 21+, so if even one person in the group is under 21, you either have to change your plans or exclude that person.

The 21yo drinking age is also very difficult to enforce. I had several friends in college who would buy for me, and even though people were carded at the entrances to parties, bartenders routinely ignored the absent bracelet or the big black X on your hand.

I'd say the 21yo drinking age contributes to 18-20yos overindulging. The temptation is definitely there: "Woohoo, I got in and I wasn't carded! Might as well take advantage." And what's the first thing most of us did when we turned 21? Went out to a bar and got $h!tfaced.

I would like to see a graduated drinking age, maybe 18 for beer and wine and 21 for hard liquor, or 18 for 3.2 beer and 21 for everything else. The 18-20yos can go to a bar with their older friends and have something to drink rather than be excluded, and they can gradually get accustomed to what alcohol can do to your body and your judgement. It would be a PITA to enforce, though...

The greek community shouldn't be spearheading this effort, though. We are already associated with alcohol and the negative aspects of alcohol use. :( It wouldn't be inappropriate for greeks to spearhead a "get out the vote" campaign, though, and if a referendum about a lower drinking age happens to be on the ballot, oh well ;)

I agree with aephialum that if the drinking age is lowered to 18 there need to be guidelines in place. I'd suggest that the blood alcohol level to declared legally drunk be stricter for ages 18-21.
Tougher penalties be in place in situations in a cases of drunk driving accidents.

Is SADD, students against drunk driving, still around anymore?

Seems simple enough to me. If one is is old enough to vote and old enough to serve in the Army then one is old enough to make up one's own mind whether or not to drink. Teaching by word and by example our young brothers who elect to drink how to do so responsibly seems like a proper thing for us to consider.

One of the big arguments against the 18 y/o drinking age was that, just as 21 y/o's buy for their peers who are 19-20 in college, the 18 year olds are still in high school and then they are buying for the 15-17 year olds. They said that upping it to 21 would get it out of the highschools. I don't know where I stand on the issue or what the answer is...

I see our biggest risk as binge drinking or drinking and driving. Using the law is a good argument "You can't, it's against the law", but our risk would still be there even if the drinking age was 18 because there would still be bringe drinking leading to death and drunk driving.

Dee

True AGDee, but it would require more extreme cases to get us in trouble.

On some campuses, any underage drinking at all associated with greeks can lose you a charter. With a lowered age that risk is eliminated.

Obviously accidents and etc are going to come back and bite us, but even then it will be less often of the people concerned are legal to drink and bought their own alcohol.

In most of our cases the person is underaged and presumed to be unable to buy it themelves.

OMG THANK YOU ABBEY. That's exactly what I meant. Russ, you're totally twisting what I'm saying - and I think this is yet another "boys and girls are different" issue. Maybe you had bad experiences with advisors, but that absolutely is not the case most of the time.

I know it's been used before, I just wanted to re-iterate it.

Good point, but not necessarily true. For the military, those aged 18 to 21 CAN drink beer, if on a military base, at a military facility (such as the enlisted men's club on base, for example). Why? Because a military base is under the jurisdiction of the military and the UCMJ guidelines. Not only that, but specifically for the Navy, should a unit (i.e. ship) be forward deployed and away from any ports-of-call in excess of 120 days, the crew is allowed a ration of beer from time to time, including those under 21, but not under 18.

Unfortunately, when I was in the Navy, I never got a "beer call" on board ship, even though we had been underway for 130 days because the captain decided not to allow this privilege (he was a Sigma Chi alumni as well). Of course, just three weeks after the 120 threshold, we arrived in Perth, Australia...and many people made up for lost time, and paid for it dearly by engaging in really stupid behavior...

LXA,

Good point. I didn't remember that.

Of course that does lead to the potential of someone enlisting in the Army at 17, being able to drink at 18, be discharged at 20 and not be able to drink again.

Now that would be a bummer.

I think the Army enlistment is still three years, isn't it? Used to be.

I think basic enlistments are all still eight years, but the confusion can be in how it is split into active/reserve commitments.

For example, the majority of enlistees go in under a 4/4 split, but that can be changed - for instance, in the Navy, there is the "pushbutton" promotions you can get from an "A" (technical trade) school, that if you take the early promotion up to E-4, your active commitment becomes six years, reserve for two.

I was under a special program called "sea college" meant for those who wished to complete their college educations in a combined at-sea, on-campus experience. I served two years active, six years reserve, but could not choose my technical trade in the Navy, they chose my job for me (I started out in the boiler room - eww...but was able to "strike" to another job by completing the necessary correspondence course to become an electrician). I also took part in onboard college classes that allowed me to get the math portion of my required classes out of the way before I returned to college on-campus.

This might be a little off topic but here goes...


If there is a big problem with underage drinking and drunk driving (meaning the greatest drunk driving offenders are underaged drinkers) why not consider uping the legal driving age. Or, like some have suggested with alcohol a graduated system.?

Here in Ontario (and a few other provinces) have graduated licensing. They found that new, young drivers (and more specifically younge, new, MALE drivers) were responsible for a majority of accidents. So what they did was this. At 16, you get a G1. You must stay at G1 level for a year (8 months if you complete a ministry approved driver education program). After that time is up you have to take a road test to get your G2. You have to have you G2 for a minimum of 1 year before you take a final road test to get your full G class license.
There are also restrictions on a G1 and G2 license. G1 holders cannot driver between midnight and 5 am. Must have a person in the passenger seat at all times with a full G license (must have had G for at least 4 years). Have NO alcohol in the system. Cannot drive on the highways (2 lane highways are the exception), etc, etc (I just don't feel like typing them all out). A G2 holder has 2 restrictions. All passengers must have a working seatbelt and have NO alcohol in their system.

Maybe 16 is too young to drive like 18 is too young to drink???

Many US states also have graduated licensing. In New York, for instance, if you're under 18 when you pass your road test, you get a junior license. You can turn it into a senior license when you turn 18, or when you turn 17 if you took an approved driver ed program. With a junior license, you cannot drive at all in NYC, you can drive on Long Island only if your parents or a driving instructor is in the car, and you can drive alone elsewhere in the state, but only until 9pm. (Why do I still know this... and I'm still trying to figure out why driving in the boonies of Suffolk County is considered riskier than driving through downtown White Plains... but I digress.) The penalties for DUI/DWAI are also much harsher if you are under 21 (I think that two violations means you lose your license for a year or until you turn 21, whichever is longer).

Maybe that's the right approach... have a graduated drinking age in combination with stiffer DUI penalties for those under 21.

Maybe the basic problen in the USA is tell a kid NO. They are going to do it in a permissive society. Thank You ACLU!

But, if a Society allows Semi-Adults to drint with guide lines or training, it will work!

It still goes back, to dont tell a Kid No, as they will. Peer Preasure is a big thing.