Bismarck Tribune - North Dakota News - Lower age for drinking is no answer

Lower age for drinking is no answer

Aug 26, 2008 - 04:06:39 CDT

Do presidents of the nation's 100 best-known universities really think that lowering the drinking age to 18 will make campuses safer and reduce high-risk drinking among students?

The presidents of the University of North Dakota and North Dakota State University don't think so. The Tribune's editorial board does not think so, either.

The idea was to provoke a national debate on the drinking age, with the hope that it would be lowered and, as a result, create an environment where young people learn how to drink without abusing beer, wine or hard liquor. Unfortunately, problems with alcohol can be found in abundance off campus and among those long past 21 years of age. It's not just college students who abuse, by any means.

Among most of the states, the drinking age is 21. Lawmakers, usually older, have chosen to "protect" younger members of the community. Is it fair? Does it work? Well, maybe that's something that can be debated.

There are somethings to keep in mind:

n Former Minnesota State University Moorhead student Jason Reinhardt of Fargo died of acute alcohol poisoning after celebrating his 21st birthday by trying to down 21 drinks in an hour at a Moorhead bar. His March 2004 death led to an effort in the North Dakota Legislature to stop so-called "power hour" drinking binges in bars.

n Alcohol caused the death of Dusten Gailey, a Wyoming student at the University of Mary who was found unconscious in his Bismarck dorm room in October 2003. The official cause of death is listed as ethanol intoxication.

n Alcohol was involved in the death of an NDSU student visiting friends in Wahpeton in May. The student suffered fatal injuries in a fall down some steps after he had been drinking.

Officials on North Dakota college and university campuses said recently they are making progress on addressing drinking among college students. At the heart of this effort is the North Dakota Higher Education Consortium for Substance Abuse Prevention. The group works on a number of fronts providing campuses with skills, information and attitudes aimed at reducing high-risk drinking.

Will a national debate on whether to lower the drinking age help? Not as much as working with students on campus, modeling the right choices and being frank about risks.

News > Opinion

Printer friendly version Lower age for drinking is no answer

Comments

X-Tender wrote on Sep 2, 2008 9:58 PM:

" To LB
I really dont think you understand what you just wrote. You were 19 and it was legal for you to drink so you drank more at house parties but you are expecting others to get drunk in bars and let the bartenders babysit them,sorry it doesnt happen that way. So now you think we should lower our drinking age because it obviously helped you in so many ways cause you drank more and acted more stupid. Makes sense to me!!! "

maturity wrote on Sep 2, 2008 4:30 PM:

" Im with Farmboy on this one, If your old enough to die for your country you should be able to drink at your leisure. The mothers of america are going to ruin this country, there are to many armchair quarterbacks making decisions for us americans. "

LB wrote on Sep 2, 2008 3:13 PM:

" All I know is that when I was 19---MN was legal, ND was still 21. I was going to school at MSU. Did it make me party less? Nope---in fact, party more & party stupid. House parties, booze bought by others, passing out in houses you didn't even know the owners..... I think ANY college student will experience this, whether 19 or 21. At least, if the legal age was 19 (or 18) they could be monitored in bars, where the bartender & establishment themselves take the blame if the drinker is past 'the line'. "

My take wrote on Sep 2, 2008 2:54 PM:

" The reason kids go out and binge drink is not because it is illegal and a "forbidden" thing, it's because they are extremely immature in their way of thinking and that won't change when the law does. And, yes, my daughter lacks in driving skills, and she's sober! Imagine if she could drink first before she catches on to or learns to drive better. 16 was not the magical age she would be able to drive well, and 18 is not the magical age she can handle alcohol. She's solid proof that just because the law says she can handle things doesn't mean her maturity level says she can. Same with drinking. These kids need time to grow up. What's the hurry? "

JustMe wrote on Sep 1, 2008 4:51 PM:

" You should not have an opinion or be allowed to drink until you at least know how to spell it. All the problems that you see in college will end up in HS. And give the if you can fight in a war you should be able to drink thing a rest. Of all of you who use this as a selling point, how many of you have served? You think you are all experts because you are in that age bracket right now, we have all been there, and trust me, and even though you do get freedoms at 18, it still is not a magical age you become mature enough for everything, even if you are legal. "

farmboy wrote on Aug 31, 2008 6:18 PM:

" HOW COME ITS OK TO SEND OUR 18 YEAR OLDS OFF TO DIE SO ALL YOU CAN SIT AT YOUR COMPUTERS AND TELL THEM THERE NOT MATURE ENOUGH TO SIT AND HAVE A BEER WITH YOU SAD, SAD, SAD. "

momofdefiants wrote on Aug 30, 2008 10:38 AM:

" Here is another nerve to hit. You all talk about the right to vote, fight for your country, have children, get married, sign legal documents etc. all at the age of 18. Please keep in mind you have no right to do any of these things while intoxicated. You can't drink while you are working without the consequence of losing your job. Why can't you do things while intoxicated. BECAUSE, drinking impairs your judgments. Come on people think about this. There is no debate here. It's obvious there are laws for a reason. There are age restrictions for a reason. Just deal with it. Do the one thing you actually have some control over. Teach your children to think before they express themselves and they can't think clearly at all if they are under the influence of alcohol or anything else that may impair judgement. Now I will say really this is a no brainer. "

momofdefiants wrote on Aug 30, 2008 10:26 AM:

" Let's all look at the reality of this debate. Did anyone stop to think "we, as adults" raising these new 18 to whatever yearolds are the problem?? Hit a nerve did I. I have 3 children one of which is going to be 18 in less than a year. I have heard that I cannot tell her "no" because she has the right to express herself. My response is tell it to the judge. When you get caught. I myself drink on occasion. I do not keep alcohol in my house, nor do I allow drinking in my house. I had the school tell me that because she is 17 she has the right to drop out of school without my permission but to get her back in she needs my permission until she is 18. What's wrong with that. Parents have lost the ability to discipline because of society beliefs and now that the youth has gone far out of control, they want us to clean it up. If we are legal adults at 18, and out of the coddling arms of our parents, it is now time to be held accountable for our behavior. Teach your children the best you can. Discipline your children regardless of societies thoughts. (this can be done without physical harm) just by saying no and sticking to it. Letting your children express themselves without consequences is the reason this is even in question. Parenting is NOT for cowards. We tell our kids to "just say no" when it comes to almost everything. Parents, follow your own advice. If it is not in the child's best interest, if it is against the law, if it is wrong, make the child accountable for their behavior now before someone else has to be their victim later. "

verde wrote on Aug 29, 2008 11:51 PM:

" The drinking problems in this region are not about the age, but about the attitude toward drinking. The mere fact that so many have chosen to launch this huge debate and fight for a younger drinking age only adds to the appeal of drinking and proves that it is way too important to far too many people. When vacationing in Montana when my children were younger, I was invited to take my kids to the bar to wait for a table in the restaurant to be prepared. My kids at the time were pre-school to early elementary. Montana's problem is not much different from ours, but their policies are more lax. Drinking beer and/or hard liquor should not be this important to anyone, and those who think it is that important really need to get a life! The youth of the region should not look forward to growing up because they can drink alcoholic beverages. They should look forward to growing up because they can have their own career, their own family, and develop their own intelect and talents.
Drinking is the problem it is in large part because too many people want to fit into a crowd, and feel challenged by peer pressure. They need to learn to be more independent. They need to learn to be leaders, not followers, and they will be much happier. "

Mandan wrote on Aug 29, 2008 11:11 PM:

" to does it: I have seen more 35+ in the bars everyday of the week sometimes multiple times a day some driving from bar to bar than I have seen younger people who are at work or possibly classes.
Age does NOT necessarily bring more maturity that is a fact. Have people just completely lost their minds? The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT were the last to change their own rules, they blackmailed all the states to change the age or else but yet they did NOT change it at the military bases for a long time after that. One of the last to change was the Southern CA bases because they didn't want the younger military to go across the border to drink! Just like Minot or GrandForks all the younger 18-20 yr olds need to do is go across the border! Talk about a bunch of hypocrits. We have the highest drinking age and yet we still have one of the highest drinking problems in the world, coincidence? NO! "

BISON N BRANDY wrote on Aug 29, 2008 4:04 PM:

" mytake your way off base. the reason underage kids go out and binge drink the way they do is because they never know when the next party is gonna be. when your underage, alcohal is viewed as the most forbidden of fruits. your 17 year old who "cant drive worth a spit" should absolutley not be viewed as the standard for most 17 year olds. maybe she "cant drive worth a spit" because shes been drinking "

REX wrote on Aug 29, 2008 3:35 PM:

" Mamma Mia, Was that Old Grandad 100 proof or less? If you're going to nip, go with the best. Those who will drink, will drink. The age makes no difference but that the younger ther LEGAL drinking age, the younger the friends of the drinkers. "

MamaMia wrote on Aug 29, 2008 9:59 AM:

" I think 18 is a bit young. I don't want a drunk senior in my 5th period class because he went down to the Main Bar and had a liquid lunch. But then, I've probably had them anyway. One time they did a locker shake down and found several bottles of Old Grand Dad in a few boys' lockers. Little nippin' between classes, you know? Nineteen or 20 wouldn't be bad. "

My take wrote on Aug 29, 2008 9:35 AM:

" That's just the thing, we need to LET them grow up, not make them grow up or expect them to grow up. Maturity takes time. And, no, I don't want the government to be my parent proxy. If my kid ends up in jail, I would expect her to call me, and I wouldn't let the authorities handle it alone. I am the parent. Not the government. But the government sets laws for the safety of the majority. I don't think the government is "parenting" anyone, their job is to set laws and guidelines to keep society safe and in order. "

REX wrote on Aug 29, 2008 4:14 AM:

" This is a complete no brainer. "

Does it wrote on Aug 28, 2008 7:34 PM:

" Do people think that the military matures people. I have seen people go off to basic and over seas and come back dumber. Some people say it's a way to deal with what they saw, but the next guy say it was a nice vacation. So you think just because they are in the military they should be allowed to drink, i disagree. Remember the mature men that tired to run from the cops??? The drinking age is ok where it is. We all say we know 25 yrs olds that aren't mature enough to drink. Lets not add to the problem. "

RealityCheck wrote on Aug 28, 2008 5:23 PM:

" To My Take: Sounds like you don't want to let your / everybody else's kids grow up and want the government to be a "parent by proxy". Thats a bad road to travel... leads to less freedom and more government control. My old man told me when I was 15 that if I ever ended up in jail, don't bother to call... and I believed him (and subsequently didn't end up in jail).
To The Mediator: It looks like there may be more support for this than NDSU / UND / The Bismarck Tribune would like to admit. Though I'm pretty sure you all will follow the P.C. "Nanny State" line... "

My take wrote on Aug 28, 2008 3:07 PM:

" All I'm saying is there are different age laws for different things. You can start school at 5, drive at 14, vote at 18, drink at 21. Each responsibility is set for the level of average maturity at the age. Different ages bring different and added privileges and responsibilities. Sometimes lowering an age is not the wisest because somewhere along the line 21 was determined to be the age drinking should be allowed. Yes, 18 year olds can vote and serve our country, neither of which is a chemical that interferes with common sense and good judgment. Not all 14 year olds can drive, not all 18 year olds can handle alcohol. We're still making the decisions if our kids drive at 14, but we cannot make those decisions if they can drink at 18 if the law changes. I don't want my child to sit in the bar the night of her senior prom. "

Mandan wrote on Aug 28, 2008 1:08 PM:

" to My Take: I hate to tell you but when your 17 yr old turns 18 she is no longer a kid and has all the powers of being an adult except for alcohol that you do. Also just because ND has the driving age at 14 it is not a federally mandated law which the drinking age is because if we do not keep it at 21 the federal government will yank transportation funds. Alot of states do not let people drive until they are 16 and then if they get a ticket they lose that priviledge until they are 18 yrs old. I did not think my son was ready at 14 to drive and since the initial purpose of that had alot to do with the rural community NOT in town kids I did not let him get his license. If you do not think your kid is a good driver don't let her drive alone until you can't stop her which is at 18.
If a person is an "adult" by law at 18 then they should be allowed to make ALL the same choices as somebody twice that age no matter what. The LAW does not consider someone under the age of 18 as an adult so some of these comments are absolutely ridiculous we are talking about legal adults NOT 12, 14, 16 yr olds we are talking about legal adults told they cannot do something any other 21 or older adults can, talk about a bunch of hypocrits! "

Momof wrote on Aug 28, 2008 10:21 AM:

" Just because the age is set a certain way across the board doesn't mean any of these young adults are mature enough to do any of it. Raise the age of everything is you so wish but I say DO NOT lower the drinking age. This poses a whole new set of problems. Just my thoughts. "

Think about it wrote on Aug 28, 2008 9:01 AM:

" It skocks me that we can send an 18 year old to Iraq to die for our counrty....but not let him have a beer when he gets home. What is wrong with this thinking???? Oh, but he is mature enough to dit in battle and to vote for our president and to serve on jury dute...but not mature enough to drink. So tainted "

blackduk wrote on Aug 28, 2008 1:18 AM:

" if you can have a baby @ 16 plus and then raise the kid like crap so its mentally srcewed up for the rest of its life and can't contribute to society, whats the big deal... i guess we live in a country were theres nothing wrong with lying to 17 and 18 year olds about being all they can be until there poped in the head with an iraqi riffle, or teen parenting that i wouldnt want raising my dog, but drinking at 18 is a mucher bigger issue ;- ( "

Andre wrote on Aug 28, 2008 12:09 AM:

" The drinking age of 21 is ridiculous. Why did this age suddenly become the panacea of drinking problems - as if lowering the drinking age will suddenly make the world stop and our nation collapse. If alcohol is such a problem, why doesn't Congress simply ban it? Let adults be adults and make their own choices on alcohol. How about forcing to be carded every single time you want to buy alcohol, regardless of age. If a person is caught selling to minors, they will have their rights to buying alcohol stripped for a certain amount of time. Right now, the argument that because the drinking age is 21, teens and preteens can't get their hands of alcohol. Newsflash! They can! It's not difficult at all - there will always be someone who has access to the drinks and keeping the drinking age at 21 only makes it a useless, stupid barrier that makes binge drinking more appealing. "

Reality Check wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:56 PM:

" if we lower the drinking age or even have no drinking age we can teach kids to not abuse alcohol by bringing them up with wine and beer at the dinner table like most European countries. You may not be able to stop abusing alcohol completely but you can decrease it by not having a drinking age or making the drinking age be 18. "

My take wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:06 PM:

" The legal age to drive is 14, should we lower the drinking age to 14, since the law says 14 year olds are responsible enough to handle a vehicle? I have a teenager who is almost 17 and can't drive worth a spit, so because the legal age says she can handle it doesn't mean she can handle it. 14 is just too young to drive. 18 is just too young to drink. Parents can drill it into their kids to respect alcohol, but it's a whole different story when the kids are out there with their friends and peer pressure. In a perfect world the kids would say no thanks, my parents taught me respect for alcohol. In the current world they say why not, who's gonna stop me and what are they gonna do to me, anyway? BTW we brought our child up to respect driving, the rules of the road, other drivers, and other's property. That didn't bring her to the maturity level she needs to pull it off. That comes with time. I can't see her ready to handle alcohol in a little over a year, and I'm sure many parents of high schoolers feel the same. Who stands to gain if the drinking age is lowered? You're right, age does not mean maturity, but we need to give our kids time to grow up and those extra three years between 18 and 21 can't hurt. "

Mandan wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:45 PM:

" to my take: when did the drinking age of 21 become a long standing law? Just because it was that here in ND longer than some the federal government forced it on a lot of states less than about 15 years ago. Age does not bring about maturity! I worked in bars for over 20 years ( starting at the age of 18) and I can tell you that I have met alot of people age 14-20 that act alot more mature than most the adults I served (or refused to) serve alcohol to. If 21 or 28 is magically mature than I expect to not see anymore alcohol related incidents in the paper done by anyone over the age of 20! You have got to be kidding with all that garbage you have stated because it is ridiculous to even think like that!
To Reality Check:Exactly on both points!!!! "

Mandan wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:34 PM:

" to momof: If you think keeping the drinking age at 21 will keep accidents and DUI's down you are way off base! If someone under age wants to drink they will, yes illegally but they will so they can and will and do cause accidents and get DUI's and actually in reality those underage are going out to friends or a pasture even the river and drinking and driving farther than most! Age does not determine whether someone will be irresponsible with alcohol attitude about alcohol does. If a child is brought up by their parents with a respect for alcohol than there should not be a problem but making forbidden and taboo is what makes kids wants it even more.
Facts are at 18 you are legally an adult, able to vote, enter into binding contracts, enter the military, be prosecuted as an adult therefore alcohol should be legal for 18 yr olds or you should change the legal adult age to 21 and we all know that will not happen! "

My take wrote on Aug 27, 2008 5:13 PM:

" Actually my point is that the age should be raised, if anything! There are many other things society must do to prepare these kids for such a responsibility, so the drinking age is not the big issue, the immaturity of this generation is. Society needs to put expectations in place and stop coddling this generation and pampering them. Changing this law is doing just that. Just another law they don't need to abide by, just another way society must change instead of the mind set or attitude of the young generation. Do you really want 18 year olds buying beer for their jr. high siblings? This generation thinks that everything is disposable and replaceable, including laws. Do we feed that attitude or do we take a stand and demand they obey the long standing laws rather than change them so they don't have to develop self discipline? Putting a beer legally in their hand is not going to make them grow up. Placing some responsibility and consequences on them will do more to get them where they need to be. Sure, those who want to drink will get it anyway, but why make it easy? In the old days kids left home much more mature and they were still 3 years from the legal drinking age. If we want to keep the pattern structured, the drinking age should be 28! "

RealityCheck wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:49 PM:

" To MomOf et al: Let's look at this from a more pointed view. Your are allowed to enjoy all the rights and privileges afforded you by our country, except the government says you can't drive a car. Why? Because you're a woman. Sound ridiculous? Try substituting "age 18" or "not 21" in there and somehow it is OK?
MyTake: Your argument does nothing but prove the age should be lowered. I agree we raise the oldest children in the world. Let's start treating them like they're the adults the law says they are and let them legally drink. After all they must abide by all the laws that we OLD people have to. Isn't that enough? "

something wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:43 PM:

" who cares what the legal drinking age is. its not worth an argument about. lets just all hug and sing some relaxing hymns. "

Momof wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:55 PM:

" I agree that age is just a number but don't agree that the age should be decreased back to 18. I know people of many ages (all older than 21) that can't drink responsibly. I think it will just be encouraging our kids at a younger age to drink irresponsibly and see the DUI's and accidents increase. It's just making the problems worse because now you are looking at a 3 more years of young adults that will try their luck because they didn't think "they were that drunk". "

Independent Conservative wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:14 AM:

" My take, your post is interesting. I'm going to have to pick up that book. I wonder how much the current educational system facilitates arrested adolescence. If it were restructred to allow parents/kids options after 8th or 9th grade to complete a tailored education then go into the workforce, or some form of auxiliary military and for those wanting to further their education and prepare for university-level studies, perhaps things would be different. Just thinking out loud, but it seems we're keeping young adults children too long. "

CH wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:40 AM:

" Maybe we should be like Europe. You know, no drinking age some places it is 10-12. If you have spent any time there you know 1st hand that when you grow up with it, it is not a big deal. Part of Drinking underage is the tabo of it. Take that away and it will change. I will grant that for the 1st few years of it, young people will take advantage of it, but given time it will reduced the "fun" factor. "

REX wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:45 AM:

" Stupid. "

My take wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:09 PM:

" I read a book not too long ago that stated that adolescense lasted from 13 to 17 a few decades ago. (The book was called "Why Do They Act That Way" a five star rating on Amazon). Adolescense currently can last to 25. Our kids are not growing up because society is weak and afraid of this generation, makes no demands or expectations, encourages kids to do their thing if it feels good, and does not put any responsibility on this young generation. Some parents are just as afraid. So now, instead of telling our kids that the law says you do not drink until you are 21, period, and if you do you will take the chances and the consequences, instead what our society is doing is customizing the law to suit the dear little things so they won't be told no, won't have to learn any guidelines or self discipline, won't have to be accountable or responsible, won't have to meet any expectations and no one has to deal with their kids when they get busted. This is sad. Try raising a kid in this generation when "everyone else" can do what they want all the time, or "nobody" has to follow this rule or that rule. The responsible parents look like freaks. How did it come to this? Society needs to grow a spine and do what's right for the kids, give them time to grow up and mature (which nowadays is a lot longer than those who left the farm ready to work) and do us all a favor by setting guidelines and sticking to them. "

SwimmerGirl wrote on Aug 26, 2008 9:32 PM:

" If we learn at an earlier age what our limits are we won't be getting trashed everytime we get ahold of alcohal. 18 is the legal age to smoke and to vote and to be an adult in society, it's also the age where we can join the armed forces so if we're expected to behave like adults why arn't we treated like other adults. Age is just a number it doesn't mean your any smarter. "

BISON N BRANDY wrote on Aug 26, 2008 7:45 PM:

" to the bismark mom:

i've been in college for 3 days and i've already been held accountable for my underage drinking by the campus police. to say that no one is b eing held accountable for their underage drinking is absurd. "

PO wrote on Aug 26, 2008 5:30 PM:

" The only 18 year olds I would support for going in and having a drink are the ones serving in our military, otherwise I say no to the rest of them. If you had a military ID card you'd be able to drink if I was in charge, if not you'd have to wait til your 21. "

kev wrote on Aug 26, 2008 5:00 PM:

" What bugs me is that a small minority(MADD) Lobbed the congress to change the national drinking age and undermining the constitution by blackmailing State Governments. Just another example of the corruption in Washington. "

Aaron wrote on Aug 26, 2008 2:36 PM:

" If you have a choice to serve in the military when you're 18, then you should have a choice to sip some sauce when you're 18 as well. Is the relationship transparent now, Halatbis? And here's a new spin on things: if America ever inacts a draft (forcing civilians to become soldiers), then conscripts should be forced to drink (a little bit of sarcasm on this last note). "

Razors Edge wrote on Aug 26, 2008 2:24 PM:

" Ok Ill try this again.

There isn't a debate on age. The thinking that you can handle alcohol at 21, but not at 18, 19, or 20 is ridiculous. The debate should be about our society. I've been at the bar that Jason Reinhardt died in at Moorhead. It was definitely a college bar. I watched a guy (not Reinhardt) come in drunk one time, his friends grabbing the garbage can, and then fed him shots. Their friend would puke, and then he'd take another shot. His friends were obviously 21 or over, and doing something that was harmful to their friend. Is this sound judgment? Turning 21 doesn't make you inherently "smarter" than a 20 year old or an 18 year old. "

RealityCheck wrote on Aug 26, 2008 2:18 PM:

" Lower it and be done with it. It's a double standard and an effort by those more moral than the rest of us to inflict their "holier than thou" standards. Interestingly enough, it was recently reported almost 50% percent of traffic fatalities were "alcohol related" (whatever that means). Some would say this is reason enough to put further restrictions on booze. I say this is more than enough reason to fear sober drivers (they caused more fatalities). This issue is huge and I applaud those who brought it to a state and national stage. While we're at it, can we bring back the 0.10 alcohol limit? I'm tired of my mouthwash putting me at risk for a DUI. "

Halatbis wrote on Aug 26, 2008 1:30 PM:

" Please explain the correlation of drinking alcohol and serving in the armed forces. There is no draft to force anyone into the military service--only an age requirement of 18 or over. There is no requirement that anyone must partake of alcoholic drink. It appears that if someone wants to drink they certainly will find a way to do it--as did I at 17 or whatever. Does that make me a hypocrite? Maybe. Maybe it makes me realize that I took many ill-considered choices at an age when I was not qualified to make them. As the old saying goes, "too soon I get old and too late I get smart". "

Online Editor wrote on Aug 26, 2008 1:21 PM:

" To Razor's Edge: It contains information I am not able to verify, it could be considered libelous. "

To Bismarck Mom wrote on Aug 26, 2008 1:04 PM:

" You state that "My critical thinking skills were non existent at 18." This is an arguement that gets made often when considering drinking age. When are critical thinking skills developed? And if a person can't be counted on to make an informed decision at 18, why are they given the greatest priviledge this country allows, the right to vote?

I believe it is a contradiction to say that at 18 a person can vote, hold public office or serve in the military but they don't have the critical thinking needed to decided whether or not to have an alcoholic beverage. "

Aaron wrote on Aug 26, 2008 12:17 PM:

" To Independent Conservative: Aaron is an internationalist with civil libertarian leanings, and didn't mean to imply the Italians, or any other ethnicity, have a monopoly on the positive effects the sauce has on the body (proven over and over again in medical journals, the latest I read coming from the U of Oregon school of medicine about the positive effects of beer on the body). A beer/day or a glass of wine/day is also good for the heart. At the University of Manitoba, Winnepeg, they are much more civilized in that they have a campus pub within the Union. At least the last time I visited. And I completely respect someone's right not to drink. When that someone decides what's good for them would be great for everyone is when we fall away from that Jeffersonian and Thomas Paine ideal of Individual Liberty. "

Bismarck Mom wrote on Aug 26, 2008 11:07 AM:

" Do we really want to go back to 18? When I was 18 I was able to drink and so I foolishly did. I drank in high school and into college. I did not drink responsibly. Coming from a traditionally Irish family who had evening cocktail hour it all seemed appropriate. Of course that was before MADD an others who remind us about teens driving drunk and weilding a 2000 pound steel killing machine. And it was before I knew anyone died of alcohol poisoning. My critical thinking skills were non existent at 18. That said I still think these colleges are just trying to shirk their responsibilities. They have rules about not drinking in the dorms and do not enforce them. Ask any college student what dorm life is about. Its all about the drinking and partying and who is the coolest, fastest drinker, can hold their liquor the best. If colleges had the guts to enforce this it would not be a problem. Colleges hold no one accountable any more. And now we see this in our high schools as teachers are afraid to discipline as Johnny might complain to his mommy and she will sue the school because the teacher was too harsh. No one is accountable to anyone any more and truth is what you want it to be. The solution lies in your own family. What values are you instilling in your children? Or do you just let them choose their own regardless of the consequences. If your are a parent or a teen looking for answers go to www.everystudent.com Maybe the college presidents are looking for anwers in the wrong places. The drinking problem is not age but lies within our empty selves. "

Independent Conservative wrote on Aug 26, 2008 11:06 AM:

" It has always made sense to me: 17-18 years old to fight and die to defend our way of life; 18 years old to vote; 18 years old delineating adults from juveniles in legal matters; why not a legal consumption age commensurate with these other privileges and definitions? It is inconsistent. For thod who oppose on grounds of personal responsibility issues (18 v. 21), I'd wager those who abstain for various reasons will continue to do so while those who were going to drink anyway will do so to the same levels of moderation or excess anyway. I never met an underage drinker who ever lessened their consumption because of the legal age limitation. Has anyone? Note to Aaron: we who are Irish know it, too! "

Mandan wrote on Aug 26, 2008 11:04 AM:

" Allowing 18yr olds to buy alcohol and drink at home and not in bars seems to be a little ridiculous. House parties cause more problems with minors drinking than bars where they are carded (at least most of the time). At 18 you are an adult by law, you can enter into a legal and binding contract, enter the military and fight for your country, buy tobacco, etc. but you cannot buy alcohol! That is ridiculous, especially those that I have heard say "but they are just kids!" are hypocrites when at the same time allowing these so-called kids to go fight for their freedom and end up coming back in a box! I have always thought that the drinking age should be 18 and when I graduated the age here was 21 but I had married and left the state and went to NC where I managed a bar. When they changed the drinking age to 21 they grandfathered it so those that were already drinking age were still allowed to. It amazes me that the last place the drinking age was changed was on military bases because on base at the enlisted/officers clubs the age was 18 after all states had to change! Major Hypocrits! "

Aaron wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:37 AM:

" Downing 21 shots on your birthday, or any birthday, is idiocy. Being able to have a glass of wine or a cold beer with dinner, or a shot of after dinner liquor (the Italians know it's good for digestion), whether you're 18 or older, should be a right. Especially when the elders of this country are able to legislate our young adults to fight wars. If you're old enough to fight in the Service, you're old enough to have a glass of wine, a beer, or a slug of whiskey: we all know it's unwise to have 21 slugs of whiskey in one sitting. Who ever wrote this editorial ignored that glaring inconsistency in what we otherwise call a "Free" country. Lower the age to 18, but since democracies are about comprimise and understanding, maybe just have a law that sets a maximum limit for how many drinks an individual can order? "

NDr wrote on Aug 26, 2008 8:52 AM:

" All these people are asking for is a "real" debate. Why are the do gooders so worried about doing that? Is because their logic may be wrong? A subject as important as this that involves our childrens lives and futures deserves a real and honest debate. We have one of the highest dinking ages and one of the worst problems. Maybe, just maybe, we really need to have this debate and look at why others with lower ages have less problems. It may be an age thing, or it may be something else. Let's debate it, our kids lives depend on it. "

flatlander wrote on Aug 26, 2008 8:50 AM:

" Interesting that two of the three fatalities didn't involve drinking at bars. Plus I can think of another drinking death that occured at UND in which a guy wandered away from a party and died (took forever to find the body). Just a hunch, but I'm guessing that parties are more dangerous, particularly for women, than bars. Maybe and that these university guys might have a point. At a bar, there are consequences to the owner if somebody drinks themselves to death at their premises. At a bar, the bartender is generally sober. At a party, there are some guys who think the drunker they get girls the better and the people hosting the party are obviously oblivious to the consequences or they wouldn't be doing something illegal to begin with. Rather than rejecting it out of hand, maybe people could at least discuss the issue and identify the real problem: Adults in the US are terrible role models. In much of Europe, 16 year olds are allowed to drink - the flip side is that adults getting drunk is not acceptable. "

BabyT wrote on Aug 26, 2008 8:14 AM:

" You bring up people dying on their 21st birthday as a reason to not lower it, but in fact, if you actually put some thought into it, this IS a reason to lower it. At 21 years old, they are probably off on their own at college, doing more or less whatever they want without parents nearby. If we allowed beer only, and no entrance in actual bars (bar/restaurants allowed), it would VASTLY take care of that problem. At 18 chances are they are still around home, parents have some influence and authority. We have adopted graduated driving privileges, why not do the same for alcohol. "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.