Teen Drinking Parties: What's The Priority?

[OoO 24]

When people talk about lowering the drinking age, I think it is important to keep in mind that raising the drinking age to 21 effectively reduced the rate of drunk driving fatalities by 13%. Thats a lot of lives.

Edited February 24, 2008 by OoO

[Scottyk107 9]

When people talk about lowering the drinking age, I think it is important to keep in mind that raising the drinking age to 21 effectively reduced the rate of drunk driving fatalities by 13%. Thats a lot of lives.

I agree but a lot of things have changed besides the age since then as well. Cars are much safer with better regulations and all around air bags. Look overseas at other countries. Being under 21 as I am you see much more binge drinking rather then social drinking. This is where kids get into trouble. I think if they were legally drinking it wouldn't be such a drunk fest because you can drink at any time rather then just at the kegger on Saturday night. The University of Central Florida which I attend has a policy in which if ems is called for a medical call involving drugs or alcohol the police also respond. It is not just on campus but to the apartments and houses in the surrounding area as well. They will arrest you after your trip to the hospital and set up a nice meeting with the University review and discipline board who decide your fate as a student. They even go as far to take action on the kids with the person who needs attention if they have been drinking or doing drugs as well. We are fighting for medical amnesty so that more students reach out for medical attention instead of thinking about how they may get kicked out of school. There are instances were kids have passed out but their friends wouldn't even call for medical help because they would get in trouble too. I don't condone underage alcohol or drug abuse but why let kids die as a result of university policy?

[OoO 24]

Being under 21 as I am you see much more binge drinking rather then social drinking. This is where kids get into trouble. I think if they were legally drinking it wouldn't be such a drunk fest because you can drink at any time rather then just at the kegger on Saturday night.

A study in 1978 found overall underage drinking as well as bindge drinking to have decreased after the increased drinking age. I know this study was done a long time ago, but I would think that not much has changed.

[Guest]

Now if the courts all of a sudden made a mandatory fee of $10,000.00 for the first offense, no parents would allow this. And if the parents didn't know you still charge them. Shame on them if they don't know what is going on in their house.

agreed, but do you remember the case of the granddaughter throwing a party at her grandmothers' house? i think it was somewhere in greenburgh, maybe yonkers a few years ago. the grandmother was found 100% innocent bc she was away. although i do agree if the fines were very hefty it would decrease the teen drinking parties. but if the parents are truly away on vacation, just like the grandmother, i don't feel they should be held accountable. if they happen to be home and this is going on, that's another story, then they are 100% guilty.

[GM911 0]

Here at The George Washington University, we have a pretty screwy system that I wish would change. If a University police officer sees someone who appears to be intoxicated on campus, they stop them and administer a field sobriety test, including breathylizer readings. If the individual either fails the sobriety test or if the second reading on the breathylizer is higher than the first reading, it's an automatic call to our student-run ambulance agency. Also, if someone is being assisted in walking by a friend, it's an automatic call as well.

We do have medical amnesty, meaning that on the first time you are brought to the hospital, as long as you weren't doing any drugs as well, and were compliant with EMS and UPD, and you stay in the hospital until treated by a physician, there will not be a charge on your student judicial record. However, your parents will be called if under 21.

The rule was supposed to encourage friends to call for help if their buddies were passed out, but it has turned into a game of cat and mouse, where University Police is on full patrol looking for intoxicated people to bust. I'm glad that there are several UPD officers who simply look the other way if there is someone who is obviously drunk, but obviously not a threat to anyone.

Quick war story from last night.... got woken up at 3 am to the tones going off for an intoxicated student, when we got there it was a guy and his girlfriend who were fine except that they had been drinking within the hour, so their second breathylizer reading was higher than the first. Turns out they were celebrating their 1 year anniversary!! Too bad they spent the remainder of it in the hospital....

[abaduck 123]

Abaduck, brother I know where you are coming from! Im scottish too, and growing up I had a Full Blooded Scottish Great Grandmother who always allowed my brother and I to drink wine at family hollidays. Never bothered us as kids, and neither one of us had the crazy urge to drink and go nuts as high school students. Which brings me to one of my points, I believe that its the "Forbidden" things kids will want to do the most. If they are not allowed to drink as young teens in their house at family parties, which is where I was most intrigued to do so, than they will only try and do it illegally without supervision, and do stupid things just to show their defiance of authority.

100% correct. Same with smoking. Are there 'Sea Scouts' in America? We had them back home in Scotland - kinda like a navy cadet outfit, play-at-sailors for teenagers 12-16 or so. Well-known story of the Sea Scout troop (this was back in the 1970s I think) where they had a big problem with kids smoking. They tried everything - bribery, increased punishment for getting caught, all sorts, but the kids were still having illicit smokes. So they changed the rules: not only was smoking allowed, but the Scouts were allowed to draw a weekly cigarette ration, just like 'real' navy sailors. Guess what? Within a couple of weeks, virtually none of the kids were smoking....

And don't even get me started on underage sex and the age of consent!!!

[GM911 0]

And don't even get me started on underage sex and the age of consent!!!

NOt sure what you meant by this... I sure hope you aren't supporting having sex with underage children!!!

[jcoppola 52]

100% correct. Same with smoking. Are there 'Sea Scouts' in America? We had them back home in Scotland - kinda like a navy cadet outfit, play-at-sailors for teenagers 12-16 or so. Well-known story of the Sea Scout troop (this was back in the 1970s I think) where they had a big problem with kids smoking. They tried everything - bribery, increased punishment for getting caught, all sorts, but the kids were still having illicit smokes. So they changed the rules: not only was smoking allowed, but the Scouts were allowed to draw a weekly cigarette ration, just like 'real' navy sailors. Guess what? Within a couple of weeks, virtually none of the kids were smoking....

And don't even get me started on underage sex and the age of consent!!!

Please clarify your comment on the consent thing, or it will be deleted. We cannot have those types of statements that can be interpreted the wrong way here. Not trying to be bossy, but it is for the protection of the integrity of the site.

Thanks.

[abaduck 123]

Please clarify your comment on the consent thing, or it will be deleted. We cannot have those types of statements that can be interpreted the wrong way here. Not trying to be bossy, but it is for the protection of the integrity of the site.

Thanks.

Oh it was just by way of analogy with the fact that the USA is rather 'out of line' with most of the rest of the world in having a drinking age of 21. Similarly with the age of consent - I think it's 17 in NY? It's something else that varies widely - 17 or even 18 is not uncommon, but many civilized western countries are significantly younger... a little research surprised even me: 16 in UK, 15 in Germany, 14 in Austria and Canada, 13 in Spain. It's a matter of making a crime (and a serious one in the case of underage sex), purely on grounds of age, of something in one jurisdiction that's perfectly normal elsewhere.

It's no big deal - mods, if you feel it's drifted the topic in a direction that this site isn't comfortable with, please feel free to delete the line from the original post, and followups, with no hard feelings - it was more an aside than contributing to the core discussion. Others have touched on smoking and gaming, seemed logical to point out that sex could be equally illogical!

[jcoppola 52]

Oh it was just by way of analogy with the fact that the USA is rather 'out of line' with most of the rest of the world in having a drinking age of 21. Similarly with the age of consent - I think it's 17 in NY? It's something else that varies widely - 17 or even 18 is not uncommon, but many civilized western countries are significantly younger... a little research surprised even me: 16 in UK, 15 in Germany, 14 in Austria and Canada, 13 in Spain. It's a matter of making a crime (and a serious one in the case of underage sex), purely on grounds of age, of something in one jurisdiction that's perfectly normal elsewhere.

It's no big deal - mods, if you feel it's drifted the topic in a direction that this site isn't comfortable with, please feel free to delete the line from the original post, and followups, with no hard feelings - it was more an aside than contributing to the core discussion. Others have touched on smoking and gaming, seemed logical to point out that sex could be equally illogical!

Thanks for the interpretation. I plan to use the "delete" function very sparingly because I believe in giving someone the chance to explain themselves before just erasing original thoughts. I understand your thought process now and the analogy...no need to dwell on it.

Thanks AGAIN.

JVC

[MELILLO719 30]

Well what do we trust people to do at or before 18?

Smoke? Quit school? Get a job? Join the army? Get married? Have kids? Vote? Run for office? Become interior firefighters? They can be trusted to do all that, and yet we daren't let them have a drink, even under the supervision of their parents? If anyone truly believes that... well, they're beyond reasoning with, IMHO.

okay but thats alot diffrent then alcohol. Like someone said how many mva's do fire departments get called out to were teens under 21 have been seriosuly hurt injured ejected or killed because of alcohol. I mean to me having a drink under your parents supervision is fine with me i see were you're going with that but 18 able to drink sorry i'm under 21 and i don't even think that's right i have friends now that drink and do stupid things and thats exactly why 21 is a good age to be able to drink leaglly ur more mature and know better.

[BIGRED1 71]

Heres a crazy idea, make the driving age 21. If drinking something is so dangerous then why is operating a large, heavy object that can move at rather high speeds, while at the same time protecting the "user" of the object from injury until "out of control" Alcohol has a sort of fail safe that you cant really function to well if you drink to much. Exceed it too much and you die which is not good. But if you drive fast well it really does not effect you till you hit something. Forget fake ID's, if you had to get the ID to drive when 21 then it would be a little harder to drink in high school and even some college.

or maybe the whole thing is blown out of proportion. I don't have all the info but somewhere in Europe ( i think Germany) it is very hard to get your license and if you get caught driving drunk then thats it. No more license, EVER. No "well we will suspend your license for x months" no second shot. you take the bus for the rest of your life. would this happen in the US, nope, too many would complain about how it's "unfair".

i also was thinking that maybe it is just where we all are. I think the "culture" of the Northeast is different then say the midwest. Parents here work long hours to pay the high taxes, the city is easily accessible with all it's "evils". Is the teen drinking and driving death rate higher outside of the Metro areas? I mean kids are gonna drink but maybe it's cause schools try and scare them, parents ignore the issue till little johnny is in car accident or jane comes home piss drunk, and then it's too late. Stop demonizing drinking. If it is so bad then why is it legal? well you have to wait to do this cause it's dangerous. Really mom then why do dad and you drink wine every night at dinner? or when you go to the country club? Kids are not stupid and the sooner we as "adults" realize this the better we will all be. I grew up in a house where drinking was never demonized and it was never a big deal. Made it through high school and never really drank. same with college. when it is normal then it is not like you are doing something special. And don't the police really have better things to do then arrest parents cause their kids are drinking? If Mom and Dad are sitting in the living room enjoying a nice movie while kids are rocking out in the backyard, thats one thing but if no parents are home then it's 100% on the kids. arrest them and make them pay the fines.

[Scottyk107 9]

okay but thats alot diffrent then alcohol. Like someone said how many mva's do fire departments get called out to were teens under 21 have been seriosuly hurt injured ejected or killed because of alcohol. I mean to me having a drink under your parents supervision is fine with me i see were ur going with that but 18 able to drink sry im under 21 and i dont even think thats right i have friends now that drink and do stupid things and thats exactly why 21 is a good age to be able to drink leaglly ur more mature and know better.

So how exactly mature do you have to be to kill someone? Your expected you use judgment in war as an 18 year old soldier as whether to take a persons life but back home your judgment isn't exactly good enough to have a drink? You can also be a paramedic before 21 holding the lives of your patients in your hands. I have seen LEO's and even high school teachers <21. So you can buy a rifle or shot gun, decide to have a baby, or on the other side of that have an abortion. Seems a little backwards if you ask me. And I agree with the car and driving statement. If its drunk driving everyone is worried about switch the drinking and legal driving age. By the time we drive then we will know how much is too much and the effects it has on us.

Edited February 25, 2008 by Scottyk107

[helicopper 1,050]

Several people have brought up drunk driving accidents and drunk runs on college campuses. Personally, I've handled a lot more over 21 drunk driving accidents than under 21 accidents.

I would venture to guess that this is because there are far more drivers aged 21 and older than under age 21.

[abaduck 123]

So how exactly mature do you have to be to kill someone? Your expected you use judgment in war as an 18 year old soldier as whether to take a persons life but back home your judgment isn't exactly good enough to have a drink? You can also be a paramedic before 21 holding the lives of your patients in your hands. I have seen LEO's and even high school teachers <21. So you can buy a rifle or shot gun, decide to have a baby, or on the other side of that have an abortion. Seems a little backwards if you ask me. And I agree with the car and driving statement. If its drunk driving everyone is worried about switch the drinking and legal driving age. By the time we drive then we will know how much is too much and the effects it has on us.

Scotty gets where I'm coming from. But I'm not convinced about changing the driving age; if you can drive a tank for the army you can damn well drive a car! So why not raise the age to join the army to 21? In fact, why not raise *everything* to 21? Smoke, have sex, get married, sign a legal contract - make everyone a minor until 21? No-one would stand for it, that's why.

Young people do tend to be immature. They'll be immature behind the wheel even when sober, and get in wrecks - that's why car insurance is much more expensive for young people. They'll get drunk and do stupid stuff some times. The key is to keep them from combining behaviours and getting behind the wheel when drunk, which is the especially lethal behaviour. In the UK it's become really socially unacceptable to drive drunk over the last 20 years or so - if people see a drunk driver, someone leaving a bar obviously under the influence - they WILL call the cops and turn them in. And the penalties are severe too - on conviction, you lose your license for year, mandatory, minimum. If there's aggravating factors, such as a high reading, or especially a previous conviction, you can be banned from driving for longer - 2-5 years even. And you have to sit an extended driving test to get it back again.

So, I'd say the way to go is change social attitudes, combined with aggressive enforcement against drunk drivers (regular random stop & breathalyse, for instance), and leave the 90% or whatever of people who drink with no problems alone. NOT to have a nanny state attitude, prohibition for everyone under 21, even at the dinner table with parents - that's the state interfering where it has absolutely no place, IMHO.

[helicopper 1,050]

When people talk about lowering the drinking age, I think it is important to keep in mind that raising the drinking age to 21 effectively reduced the rate of drunk driving fatalities by 13%. Thats a lot of lives.

Thank you for highlighting this point! This is the reason the drinking age was raised.

Sure, it is true that some teens will drink regardless of the drinking age, some even with parental consent (or at least indifference), but many will not.

I'm amazed to see that so many people think the drinking age should be lowered. As noted above, the incidence of fatal accidents was reduced dramatically by increasing the drinking age. There are alot of other reasons to maintain the drinking age at 21: date rape/acquaintance rape, hazing deaths/injuries, etc.

Heres a crazy idea, make the driving age 21. If drinking something is so dangerous then why is operating a large, heavy object that can move at rather high speeds, while at the same time protecting the "user" of the object from injury until "out of control" Alcohol has a sort of fail safe that you cant really function to well if you drink to much. Exceed it too much and you die which is not good. But if you drive fast well it really does not effect you till you hit something.

That's not such a bad idea. They've already instituted the graduated licensing program in NY to try to reduce the incidence of accidents caused by immaturity and inexperience. Someone mentioned being able to rent a car before age 21 - most of the big companies won't rent to you until you're 25. If they do let you rent, you pay big time! The same with insurance. Why? Because at that age and with that amount of experience you're more of a liability!

As for the age of consent, even though you may be able to marry at an earlier age in some states, you probably still need parental consent (in most states)!

As for all these comparisons about becoming a soldier, a paramedic, or a firefighter at 18 versus being able to drink. There's a HUGE difference! To be a soldier/paramedic/FF, you have to receive significant training and are supervised (at least to some extent). So, the corollary is flawed because there's no training involved to tip a few back or know when to STOP tipping a few back!

As for police officers - you can't become a PO until age 21 in NYS so that one doesn't work either. And I know of no teaching positions in HS that don't require a BS (or higher) so the odds of a <21 year old with that degree are pretty slim.

[Guest]

So how exactly mature do you have to be to kill someone? Your expected you use judgment in war as an 18 year old soldier as whether to take a persons life but back home your judgment isn't exactly good enough to have a drink? You can also be a paramedic before 21 holding the lives of your patients in your hands. I have seen LEO's and even high school teachers <21. So you can buy a rifle or shot gun, decide to have a baby, or on the other side of that have an abortion. Seems a little backwards if you ask me. And I agree with the car and driving statement. If its drunk driving everyone is worried about switch the drinking and legal driving age. By the time we drive then we will know how much is too much and the effects it has on us.

You don't have to be mature at all to kill somebody, this is shown by the FBI statistics that children under 10 commit murders. (I can't figure out how to do hyperlinks, so if a mod wants to activate this that would be great. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offenses/e...rtable_03.html) And also if you search around that website a little more, you can find stats on children UNDER 4 that have committed violent crime. As for the military, you are trained to kill, they train you to react to a violent situation and come out on top.

[Scottyk107 9]

HUGE difference! To be a soldier/paramedic/FF, you have to receive significant training and are supervised (at least to some extent). So, the corollary is flawed because there's no training involved to tip a few back or know when to STOP tipping a few back!

As for police officers - you can't become a PO until age 21 in NYS so that one doesn't work either. And I know of no teaching positions in HS that don't require a BS (or higher) so the odds of a <21 year old with that degree are pretty slim.

I see where you are coming from and agree with the training, schooling, and supervision needed to hold some of those positions. But once you turn 21 as you stated there is nothing to guide you. So how are you better suited to know about a substance that you have never had at the age of 18 or 21. It is pure personal experience everyone is different and reacts differently. The thing you do have to understand is the consequences to you actions. And if you can be held accountable as an adult for crimes at the age of 18 what changes in the next 3 years? Do criminals between 18-21 get any special considerations for their actions since some would say they are not "fully mentally developed" (which is one of the main arguments you hear for the age of legal drinking being higher)? I guess the age for LEO's varies in different states sorry I guess I was talking about Florida which is 19. I do not know much about NYS requirements Chris you know a lot more then I. Your right about the HS position requiring a BS but I have seen and have even had teachers under 21 who obtained their AA in High School and BS there after. And when I mentioned soldiers and their taking of lives, I didn't not mean who has the ability to kill. Rather who has the ability to think about what they are doing and the consequences that come with it. Sure a 4 year old can commit murder but they do not know what they are doing and cant comprehend what it means. Maybe my views will change in the coming years when I fully mature or reach the age of 21.

[Oswegowind 17]

I personally believe the youth of this current generation were not taught one bit of responsibility. I had to learn mine the hard way! I remember going to parties (in the woods!), there was the "aqueduct" and "the dunes" and a number of other spots. Never once did I drive to or from the party except to drop off the Keg earlier in the day and ice it! Now it seems that if you find one of these parties, you have to take some type of action that will make headlines. I remember the Troopers busting one of our shindigs one night and just making sure that everyone that was getting into a car got into one with someone who had not had a drink! Isn't that enough? Do we really need to collar everyone, or is it because of one BIG mistake that occurred in Harrison a few years ago where a couple of boys obviously made the worst mistake of their lives. The fact is, that all of this MEDIA impact and the Busting Up of Parties has gained momentum since that day. So, eventually will it wear off or will it get worst down the road? I know, as a parent, that these parties will not be held at my house because it ain't worth the agony of the media and courts, but I guess I will have to worry along with the other parents as to where our children have gone for the night, and what were they doing. You can't leash them all of the time, trust me, my parents tried! Teens will have to learn some severe lessons along the way, just hope that if you are the parent that you taught them the right way and trust that they will make the right decision!

[Dondestro 9]

EXACTLY!

Most of my friends and I usually had a "DD" or walked to and from the parties we went to. Or, as time went on and we got older, we would sleep at someone's house to avoid driving altogether.

Around here most parties were either in the woods or at someone's house - all within walking distance of home or someone else's house. I don't know what these guys do now, but it feels like we do more and more calls (including fatal MVAs) thanks to underage drinking.

I'm not promoting it nor am I condoning it, but for the safety of everyone - DO NOT DRIVE DRUNK!!!!! (This applies to those of us "over" age too.)

AHHH POWERLINES....haha boy do i miss those parties!

[Danger 160]

I guess it's always a "not my friends/generation" thing. We had crazy house parties from when I was 15 to when I was legal. No one ever drove drunk, no one went to the hospital. Sometimes the cops broke it up, sometimes they just said quiet down.