<p>
</p>
<p>Stoning perhaps.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Texas law has evolved with regard to open containers. Neither driver nor passengers can have an open container in a car now. Exception to this would be in the back seat of a taxi. limo, bus and in RV’s and motor homes.</p>
<p>mrsref, none of the above. I guess it is a lot different where you live. We have police in our high schools here. Not just security guards (we have those too) but actual police. That does not mean that the kids don’t drink after school.</p>
<p>Other countries are more lax with alcohol. There are a bunch of international students in my school who don’t understand why there is such a high drinking age. In moderation - drinking is fine, but it is only because idiot teenagers can’t control themselves that they drink so much and get in trouble for it. </p>
<p>That said, if we lower the drinking age, the next age level will also feel obligated to be “grown up” as we can see from the spoiled middle school Starbucks addicted kids. I think the rule now isn’t as strict for 18-20 year olds. They drink anyways and even if caught, many people just give them a slap on the wrist (though they do get a record). I would say its more that its frowned upon rather then being illegal at this point. </p>
<p>Maybe we should allow 18-20 years to drink legally, but not buy alcohol legally - at most. Though if we do that, I would advise having a rule banning cars on campus, or at least some regulation on cars - college kids are crazy enough drivers while sober.</p>
<p>I firmlly believe the drinking age should be 18. Entering legal contracts, marriage, adult in the legal system and the draft are available to the 18 year old but not a glass of wine? </p>
<p>I far prefer that the college students in our town drink in bars where there are social sanctions against their behavior (hey buddy you’ve had too much to drink - go home), bouncers and police officers making their rounds rather than hidden away on area farms and apartments. At these “private” parties that exist basically so underage students can drink we have seen rapes, car accidents and students stuck in winter weather where they ended up being airlifted out due to hypothermia and frost bite. Get them back in the public with their alcohol consumption where society will impose limits.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am assuming from the post you made after this that you mean this “literally” as in, nobody is drinking IN the school… However, most of us are discussing outside of school and social events, and I highly doubt there is a high school in the country that does not have social alcohol events going on among the students, OUTSIDE of school.</p>
<p>That said, I don’t condone high school drinking, at all.</p>
<p>As to the issue of alcoholism, 10% of the population will addict to alcohol, and there is evidence that this can become more of a factor in people who binge drink under the 1ge of 18. After 18, moderate drinking puts nobody at a higher “risk” for developing alcohol addiction issues any further than they already are genetically.</p>
<p>As a recovering alcoholic for decades, I have been very clear with my kids that the choice to drink, for them, is a different choice than for others and what it is they need to watch out for, in terms of the early warning signs of alcoholism…but, keeping the drinking age at 21 will do nothing at all to prevent an alcoholic from developing this metabolic disorder. Some people simply cannot process alcohol the way others do. </p>
<p>It’s a false argument. I’ve thought about this long and hard, believe me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ok, a miscommunication…when people on this board talk about keeping alcohol “out of the high schools”, they don’t mean that students are physically in school when they are using alcohol. They mean that HS kids are drinking out-of-hours.</p>
<p>When you said there was no alcohol in your HS, I took it to mean that kids in your HS did not drink.</p>
<p>I don’t think you’d find alcohol <em>IN</em> our high school, either. But there is plenty of opportunity outside of school for HS kids to imbibe if they choose.</p>
<p>Yes, physically bringing alcohol into the school buildings and sharing with younger students. That is what I meant.</p>
<p>"It’s a false argument. I’ve thought about this long and hard, believe me. "</p>
<p>WHAT is a false argument?</p>
<p>^^^^I interpreted her post to mean that the argument that the earlier people begin drinking, the higher their risk for becoming alcoholics is based on false conclusions of research. I gathered that she is saying that research shows that early BINGE drinking rather than just drinking in general is what puts kids at risk.</p>
<p>I’m sure she’ll correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s how I read it…</p>
<p>true. Actually ALL binge drinking puts people at risk at any age.</p>
<p>Alcoholism is best compared to diabetes, actually. There is a type I, which you are born with. You have trouble with drinking from the very start. Or, a type II which you can drink yourself into, which is harder to do and less common and tends to show up at a much later age, usually after some tragedy like death, divorce, etc… (this is the reason docs are now advised not to prescribe a glass of wine for someone who is having a rough emotional time.)</p>
<p>Type one is unavoidable. Type two is not something that shows up in teenagers anyway.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even if this research were well established, should it be a viable reason to prohibit 18-20 year old adults from drinking?</p>
<p>It has been established that alcohol can damage fetuses, but there is no law prohibiting pregnant women from drinking. Similarly, alcohol consumption is unsafe for alcoholics, diabetics and people who are taking certain prescription drugs (and probably many others) but we don’t make it a crime for them to have a drink. Why the inconsistency?</p>
<p>Cigarettes damage multiple organ systems, yet in my state one has to be only 18 to purchase them, (though I don’t think there is any law prohibiting a minor from smoking them).</p>
<p>weed causes a lot of harm too and that dont stop noooooobody</p>
<p>^ It DOES stop some people.</p>
<p>For the 3 or 4 years prior to my daughter’s 15th birthday, we provided alcohol education through the modeling of responsible adult drinking behavior and many discussions about values, self respect, and making smart choices when faced with peer pressure and enticing opportunities. When she hit 15, we embarked on a systematic program of closely supervised progressive experiential learning in addition to continuing our earlier approaches. By the time our daughter was 18, we no longer set external rules or limits on her drinking and instead allowed her to govern herself (subject to our continued observation and scrutiny). When she left for college 4 months after her 18th birthday, her level of maturity and responsible decision making was extraordinarily well developed and the excesses of college life held no allure for her. I have always believed that the existence of an age based status offense law regarding alcohol is no substitute for involved parenting. The only relevance the law had was as an object lesson about what some of the consequences would be if our daughter was involved directly or indirectly with irresponsible drinking behavior. Our approach would not have been well suited for all students, but we knew who our daughter was and were confident in her ability to make the right decisions.</p>
<p>The brain damage research is frightening, and excellent information to have. Thank you for posting that!</p>
<p>However, am I correct to assume this is referring to the effects of kids getting drunk near or to the point of alcohol poisoning? That would make sense, if so.</p>
<p>Wasn’t moderate drinking, if I remember correctly, shown in studies to result in better circulation, etc. and a statistically longer life?</p>
<p>Here’s a rather ironic article (recent):
[Heavy</a> Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers, Study Finds - TIME](<a href=“http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html]Heavy”>http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html)</p>
<p>On the topic of health overall, I think the argument that smoking is far more unhealthy and damaging is quite valid. That, of course, combined with the fact that 18 year olds can marry, have kids, join the military, etc. - but not have a glass of wine for dinner.</p>
<p>Drinking and driving is a valid concern though, but it’s also a valid point that this should be parents / educational responsibility.</p>
<p>In much of Europe, the drinking age is 16. Are the alcoholism rates any higher in those countries?</p>
<p>
As I understand it, Europe has always been heavy on the alcohol, which is probably why the drinking age is 16. You’d have to ask a historian though to confirm this for certain.</p>
<p>I don’t know where people get the idea that a drinking age of 21 keeps alcohol out of the hands of high schoolers! As I posted on another thread, all they have to do is stand outside a store that sells alcohol and wait for some old wino or a recent 21-year-old who doesn’t care to go in and buy them something. A drinking age of 18 solves a lot of problems for college administrators and campus police. At least the kids could be open with it and colleges could have some measure of control over it.</p>