Lowering the Drinking Age

[Dreamstalker]

I don't like the idea of alcohol licenses, most especially not if they're reserved for the 18- to 20-year-olds.

Apparently here in MA there is a separate "alcohol" ID. Once very recently I needed to buy a small bottle of sake for cooking and was denied b/c my state ID didn't have the word "alcohol" on it (WTF I'm clearly over 21, look at the damn birthdate). I wound up hiking halfway into the next town to the liquor store where the owner is a friend of the family, he sold it to me on the basis of age alone.

[DesignFox]

Apparently here in MA there is a separate "alcohol" ID. Once very recently I needed to buy a small bottle of sake for cooking and was denied b/c my state ID didn't have the word "alcohol" on it (WTF I'm clearly over 21, look at the damn birthdate). <snip>

Yea, my county ID was like that. Good enough to prove who I am and let me on a plane with...not good enough to prove I'm of drinking age (even though it displayed my DOB).

Screeeeewed up.

I have since gotten a photo license and a passport, so I don't have this issue, anymore. But sheesh.

[Dreamstalker]

A lot of these ID requirements are screwed up. To go off on a tangent, I was at the post office this morning and overheard a clerk telling someone that their state (government issued) ID was not a valid form of picture ID to get a passport.

I used to carry my passport for alcohol purchases, but stopped doing it when i got my state ID (carrying a passport around if you don't absolutely need to generally isn't a great idea anyway).

In NM and all other states I've been to my state ID is fine, all they need is proof of age. It was proposed here at some point that out-of-state ID would not be accepted to buy alcohol.

[Boozy]

I didn't think that licenses to buy alcohol existed outside of fundamentalist Islamic countries.

The more you know...

[katie kaboom]

I used to carry my passport for alcohol purchases, but stopped doing it when i got my state ID (carrying a passport around if you don't absolutely need to generally isn't a great idea anyway).

In NM and all other states I've been to my state ID is fine, all they need is proof of age. It was proposed here at some point that out-of-state ID would not be accepted to buy alcohol.

For me that is a hit or miss kind of thing. There is a liquor store i go to where I've had some people accept my out of state ID and others deny it. I get so pissed off when it gets denied, because it is a valid photo ID and i am well over the drinking age. Don't punish me because underage people like to make fake IDs, that's not MY problem.

Is it true that any liquor store HAS to accept a passport as proof of age or does it vary by state or what?

[Sylvia727]

My driver's license says "Under 21 until Month/Day/Year" in bold red font. Driver's licenses issued after 21 don't mention it at all. I'd never heard of a license to buy alcohol, only proof of age required.

[Greenday]

Same thing my NJ license was. Actually, until you are 21 in NJ, your license is vertical instead of horizontal, plus it says "21 until MM/DD/YYYY" Never heard of an alcohol license to buy alcohol for personal use. One to distribute.

[Slytovhand]

and they aren't allowed more than one passenger (or something like that). I guess they're trying to avoid those car loads of rowdy teenagers cruising around at 2 am. That's an accident waiting to happen.

Less people to kill in an accident. And, less likely to get egged into doing something stupid. 3 passengers are more likely to incite recklessness than just one (herd mentality and the like).

Down here, there are limits on the power of a vehicle that you can drive on your P's... provisional license (at least in Victoria), based on power to weight ratio. Since I'm a bit past that stage, I'm not sure of the limits... And they just brought the same thing in for motorbikes as well.

[Dreamstalker]

That could be what the MA one is...although why a card? (unless you're selling booze on the street corner)

The RMV website is unclear (to me anyway) on the distinction. As long as there's a birthdate that proves you're over 21 what's the fuss?

[DesignFox]

<snip> As long as there's a birthdate that proves you're over 21 what's the fuss?

I dunno. All I know is I had bought the county ID because my original driver's license didn't have a photo.

The original rule in NJ was that you had to have a photo license until you turned 21. The DMVs around here are such a royal pain in the ass that, since at the time it wasn't mandatory to have a photo, I just sent my renewal in the mail and got a non-photo license.

My father suggested I get a county ID because then I'd never have to worry about needing a photo ID to get on an airplane. Of course, when he got his county ID, you paid $3 and it never expired. By the time I got mine, I had to pay $10 and it expired within 5 years.

Anyhow, what I didn't know at the time was that there are two types of county ID. One is pink and can strictly be used for identification purposes. Even though it has your birthdate listed, it cannot be used to make alcohol purchases (and it does state this in bold on the back and if you go out and try to obtain beer it WILL be rejected- even if you present both it AND your VALID freakin' driver's license /rant).

ANYWAY-
The other ID is yellow and can be used to buy alcohol. I assume it costs more to get, also.

Moot point now. The first time I was refused booze I simply left the establishment (and went across the street to the place that WOULD serve me), and thereafter carried my passport around. When my non-photo license expired, the new requirement for photo licenses was in full effect. And the useless waste of time and money that was my county ID has since expired and hit the shredder.

All in all, it makes no sense to have an ID that isn't good enough to prove you can have a beer- despite the fact that you can use it for ID for everything else.

What were we talking about? (j/k)

I still think if you're old enough to kill or be killed for Uncle Sam, you're old enough to get yourself a damn beer.

[guywithashovel]

I got to thinking about this issue the other day, and while I am in favor of lowering the drinking age, I do have a couple of requests for the people that I think would help show many doubters that lowering the drinking age would be a good idea. And to be perfectly blunt, here is the request:

1. Show responsibility regarding your drinking habits. One time back when I was in high school, a classmate of mine got drunk during a school sporting event, and he was so inebriated that he had to have his friends carry him out of the bleachers. I have also heard many other stories about young people getting way too carried away with alcohol and placing themselves in scenarios such as this one. I believe many people see this and think, "Well, it's a good thing the drinking age is 21. These kids are too damned immature to be trusted with booze." Now, I'm sure the knee jerk reaction will be, "Well, they're just indulging themselves because they are doing something that is forbidden. If we permit it, it will no longer be forbidden, and thus they won't be as tempted to go over the deep end." That is a fair point, and I will concede to it to some degree. Nonetheless, I firmly believe that a showing of responsibility from the younger people would be highly beneficial towards obtaining a fairer drinking age.

2. It would probably help if you would respect the law as it currently is, and by that I mean refrain from drinking if you are under 21. Yes, I realize this does run counter to my first request (and remember, they are merely requests), but I do think that if people could show that they have respect for the laws of the land, then people might be more open to considering a more lenient law. Remember, because we have had a drinking age of 21 for so long, many people are in the mindset that those under said age are too young to handle alcohol responsibly. In fact, if a lower drinking age is ever suggested in conversation, many people react the same way they react when the legalization of marijuana is suggested. Both laws have been in place so long that many people don't think society can function under any other ruling. Perhaps if everyone showed a little respect for the present laws, then more people might see that a more lenient law can be handled.

And yes, I realize that I'm being quite idealistic here. But I think these are points that people should consider.

[Sylvia727]

I firmly believe that a showing of responsibility from the younger people would be highly beneficial towards obtaining a fairer drinking age.

Maybe. Probably. But we're talking about a nationwide cultural change. Any effective organization would have to be nationwide, or at least very widely spread. And really, the responsibility for a shift in cultural attitudes is dependent on everyone to change-- to stop glamorizing alcohol and drunkenness. One can't, metaphorically, hold the booze over the 18-year-old's head and chant "Nyah, nyah, nyah, you can't have this," and then act surprised when the 18-year-old thinks booze is where the party's at. If society wants them to act responsibly and not drink early, then they need to act responsibly and not taunt them with the wonderfulness of drinking.

if people could show that they have respect for the laws of the land, then people might be more open to considering a more lenient law.

Maybe...or maybe they'll think that this means the law is working. Respecting a bad law does not usually encourage change. People are usually content with the status quo and only work to fix problems. Prohibition (of alcohol, in the 1920s) springs to mind, here. Not an exact parallel, but speakeasies (illegal private bars) sprang up like mushrooms precisely because the population as a whole chose not to respect a bad law. Crime rose, disrespect for law enforcement rose, and things didn't settle back down until Prohibition was repealed. I'm a proponent of peaceful protest, and I don't advocate widespread private alcoholic parties for 18- to 20-year-olds -- but that's what's happening, and I don't think it's going away until the laws change or compromise.

There's a pop culture preconception that all 18- to 20-year-old drinkers are reckless drinkers, and I'm sure the stereotype is based on a valid portion of the population. But I've been attending college and living on a college campus for years, and I've never met anyone who's been admitted to the hospital for alcohol poisoning, or who's gotten into a drunken car accident. I've also never met anyone who was a booze virgin on their 21st birthday. On the other hand, I've known over-the-age adults who've vomited into the bushes and crawled home because they were too drunk to stand-- and these people supposedly have enough alcoholic experience to know better. Maybe I just hang out with abnormally responsible people. Could be.

[Greenday]

Maybe...or maybe they'll think that this means the law is working. Respecting a bad law does not usually encourage change. People are usually content with the status quo and only work to fix problems. Prohibition (of alcohol, in the 1920s) springs to mind, here. Not an exact parallel, but speakeasies (illegal private bars) sprang up like mushrooms precisely because the population as a whole chose not to respect a bad law. Crime rose, disrespect for law enforcement rose, and things didn't settle back down until Prohibition was repealed. I'm a proponent of peaceful protest, and I don't advocate widespread private alcoholic parties for 18- to 20-year-olds -- but that's what's happening, and I don't think it's going away until the laws change or compromise.

There's a pop culture preconception that all 18- to 20-year-old drinkers are reckless drinkers, and I'm sure the stereotype is based on a valid portion of the population. But I've been attending college and living on a college campus for years, and I've never met anyone who's been admitted to the hospital for alcohol poisoning, or who's gotten into a drunken car accident. I've also never met anyone who was a booze virgin on their 21st birthday. On the other hand, I've known over-the-age adults who've vomited into the bushes and crawled home because they were too drunk to stand-- and these people supposedly have enough alcoholic experience to know better. Maybe I just hang out with abnormally responsible people. Could be.

That's pretty much how I feel about this one. If we "be good" and "respect the current laws", then absolutely nothing will change. Lawmakers won't see that we are responsible. They'll just think that the dumb 21 age limit is correct and will not change it. It's not like people are violently protesting. If anything, by drinking underage, it's a form of peaceful protest. Adults are just as likely to drink in a harmful manner, so why punish just those under 21? Screw everyone over or no one.

[Evandril]

I cannot think of a single example where people looked over the status quo, saw everything was peaceful...and decided to change anything. Most people do NOT like change, and have to have a very good reason for wanting something to change...and if they are comfortable, and everything works...*shrugs* As the saying goes, 'if it's not broke, don't fix it', and that would get tossed in our faces if everyone 'behaved'. Before incidents like Rosa Parks and the like, the argument that segregation was more comfortable for *everyone* was fairly common.

[guywithashovel]

To some extent, I will concede some of the points about people seeing things as going well and not in need of change if people showed more respect for the laws.

However, I still think a stronger showing of responsibility on part of the under 21 crowd would be helpful here. I find it hard to believe that people aren't looking at the kids who get excessively wasted and cause horrible car accidents and other social mishaps and thinking, "Gee, it's a good thing the drinking age is 21. These kids clearly cannot handle booze."

Perhaps a little civil disobedience is in order. In fact, I think it probably is. But it needs to be done responsibly.