E
eersandbeers
Posts: 1,071
Jan 26, 2010 10:52pm
mexappeal12 wrote: the only inalienable rights you have are the ones in the constitution, yes. I am saying that people have a misconception of that word and throw it around ...I have a right to do this... i have a right to do that... you do not have a right to drink alcohol... you have a privilege
I don't think you understand the point of the Constitution.
The Constitution was created to limit and enumerate the rights of the federal and state governments. The Constitution also does not grant anyone rights. It provides rights by limiting the powers of government and enumerating specific rights which you retain.
It did not seek to list every single right that Americans have. The 10th Amendment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
That means there are more rights than just those listed in the Constitution.
It isn't about my right to drink. It is about my right to live my life as I want as long as I do not infringe upon your rights. The right to live my life as I see fit would seem to be an inalienable right.
HitsRus
Posts: 9,206
Jan 26, 2010 10:56pm
ernest_t_bass wrote:
I'm 18, I'm legal. Please, leave me alone, stop giving me "rules" by which to live, and allow me to live my life in peace. If I harm others, then please punish me, but who are YOU to punish me for "harming" myself?
Might be the silliest thing I've seen you post.
There is no right...constitutional or otherwise that allows you to put other people at risk. Drive 100 MPH thru a school zone? No one gets hurt, so it's no harm no foul? And if you do harm somebody does your punishment make restitution?
'allow me to live my life in peace'....Peace is the exact reason alcohol laws are made to begin with.
mexappeal12
Posts: 489
Jan 26, 2010 11:02pm
i didnt say that was the point of the constitution... i didn't say it granted you rights... i said your inalienable rights are the ones in the constitution
and i am saying that you are using the word "right" incorrectly
to live your life as you see fit? so is doing cocaine your inalienable right if thats how you want to live your life as long as it doesnt infringe upon someone else's?
laws are different... you dont have the right to drive 150 mph ... you can and you are violating a law... there is a difference
and i am saying that you are using the word "right" incorrectly
to live your life as you see fit? so is doing cocaine your inalienable right if thats how you want to live your life as long as it doesnt infringe upon someone else's?
laws are different... you dont have the right to drive 150 mph ... you can and you are violating a law... there is a difference
Firad
Posts: 1,525
Jan 26, 2010 11:03pm
I agree with everyone who says if you can go to battle at 18 then you should be able to drink. However since some 18 year olds are still that age in high school I don't know if you should be allowed legally to drink while in high school. So I agree with whoever on here said that after you graduate high school you should be legal to drink.
HitsRus
Posts: 9,206
Jan 26, 2010 11:03pm
Now read that slowly and digest that...who makes the laws? No dictator or king made the alcohol laws.eersandbeers wrote:mexappeal12 wrote: the only inalienable rights you have are the ones in the constitution, yes. I am saying that people have a misconception of that word and throw it around ...I have a right to do this... i have a right to do that... you do not have a right to drink alcohol... you have a privilege
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
mexappeal12
Posts: 489
Jan 26, 2010 11:07pm
who are you telling to digest that slowly?
bcubed
Posts: 410
Jan 26, 2010 11:15pm
I agree give mtrulz a beer! Then he will have his girlfriend in one hand and the beer in the other and never be able to post on the huddle again!mtrulz wrote: 15, so gimmie a beer.
Glory Days
Posts: 7,809
Jan 26, 2010 11:20pm
it bothers me that we hold drinking alcohol on the same level as fighting for your country. now for example if we were talking about the voting age changing to 18(if it wasnt 18), thats comparable. you should be able to voice your opinion if you are able to be sent off to war. i guess i just think its sad that we equate alcohol to being a man(or woman).
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Jan 26, 2010 11:24pm
No dictators or kings. But don't forget the federal government stiff armed the states into the 21yr drinking age by threatening the witholding of highway funds.HitsRus wrote:Now read that slowly and digest that...who makes the laws? No dictator or king made the alcohol laws.eersandbeers wrote:mexappeal12 wrote: the only inalienable rights you have are the ones in the constitution, yes. I am saying that people have a misconception of that word and throw it around ...I have a right to do this... i have a right to do that... you do not have a right to drink alcohol... you have a privilege
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Jan 26, 2010 11:27pm
I like the 19 age for the reasons most have posted.
Does anyone remember the reasons why the age was put up to 21 in the first place? If I remember correctly, federal highway funding was held over states heads until such laws were passed. I don't/didn't agree with that whatsoever.
edit: major beat me to the punch by a couple minutes
Does anyone remember the reasons why the age was put up to 21 in the first place? If I remember correctly, federal highway funding was held over states heads until such laws were passed. I don't/didn't agree with that whatsoever.
edit: major beat me to the punch by a couple minutes
Glory Days
Posts: 7,809
Jan 26, 2010 11:28pm
because people didnt goto the government when they made mistakes in life. when people started holding the government responsible for the things people do to themselves thats when the government started to protect people from themselves. aslong as tax money is spent on drug addicts and alcoholics, the government should have every right to control those things.eersandbeers wrote: How did this country survive for more than a century without all these "great" laws protecting us from ourselves?
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Jan 26, 2010 11:28pm
You are correct as I pointed out in my previous post. I disagreed as well.ytownfootball wrote: I like the 19 age for the reasons most have posted.
Does anyone remember the reasons why the age was put up to 21 in the first place? If I remember correctly, federal highway funding was held over states heads until such laws were passed. I don't/didn't agree with that whatsoever.
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Jan 26, 2010 11:30pm
Ohio was one of the late states to adopt the measure I believe too.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Jan 26, 2010 11:35pm
You are correct. Ohio went to 21 in 1987. Wyoming was the last in 1988.ytownfootball wrote: Ohio was one of the late states to adopt the measure I believe too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._history_of_alcohol_minimum_purchase_age_by_state
Cat Food Flambe'
Posts: 1,230
Jan 26, 2010 11:40pm
19 (18 with an active military ID). When I turned 18, you could buy liquor in Michigan - we seniors made many a trip to Monroe and Dundee to stock up for our underage buddies. Looking back, it's a wonder one of them didn't get killed. 
Here's a thought - what if we dropped the drinking age from 21 to 18, with under-21's restricted to being served alcohol by the drink in a bar or restaurant? This would allow kids to drink in a somewhat supervised location rather than taking home a bottle of Jaegermeister to MTRulz.
Here's a thought - what if we dropped the drinking age from 21 to 18, with under-21's restricted to being served alcohol by the drink in a bar or restaurant? This would allow kids to drink in a somewhat supervised location rather than taking home a bottle of Jaegermeister to MTRulz.
Curly J
Posts: 7,282
Jan 26, 2010 11:41pm
I remember I was Grandfathered in when they raised it from 19 to 21 in Ohio. Then went to Utah and the age was 21 and not Grandfathered in. Of course this was after a year in South Korea where there was no drinking age.
mexappeal12
Posts: 489
Jan 26, 2010 11:45pm
With all the drunk driving accidents I doubt they will ever lower the age...but I do not disagree with 19
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Jan 26, 2010 11:49pm
Grandfathered in...lol...that was a damn good thing for me at the time also. I wonder what they did with all that 3.2 beer? I know my bladder didn't miss it.
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Jan 26, 2010 11:52pm
MADD was the push behind the drinking age being raised in the first place, and I can't disagree with it now, though I wasn't happy at the time. Drunk driving related deaths did drop dramatically.mexappeal12 wrote: With all the drunk driving accidents I doubt they will ever lower the age...but I do not disagree with 19
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Jan 26, 2010 11:52pm
I VOUCH! Uh, not that I know from personal experience, but Mantooth was quite emphatic about how he noticed they started growing then. Mantooth, confirm! j_crazy, vouch!j_crazy wrote:Rumor has it, JC didn't get pewbs until 24. Mantooth, confirm. Heretic, vouch.pmoney25 wrote: When you start growing pubes
Anyway, I say 18. Our problem as a country is that instead of actually educating kids on things like alcohol, drugs and sex, we make them taboo. Which leads to them wanting to find out what's what without guidance. Which leads to teen pregnancy and people turning into addicts of alcohol or other substances. Maybe if attitudes were more educational and less "don't do that...it's bad!", things like drinking wouldn't have the rebel/cool label attached to them...which would remove a lot of the negatives people associate with them.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
Jan 27, 2010 12:20am
21 because changing it now would cause a LOT of problems. The last thing we want is 14 and 15 year olds drinking. And that's exactly what would happen more than it does now.
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Jan 27, 2010 6:44am
Yes, without a doubt.Crew Love wrote:With this said, couldn't you see allowing 18 year-old high school students to drink negatively impacting quality of education?
Just some thoughts.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jan 27, 2010 7:03am
I have no guilt with it being 21.
rookie_j70
Posts: 677
Jan 27, 2010 8:06am
ditto on the whole 18 and old enough to die for your country
rookie_j70
Posts: 677
Jan 27, 2010 8:12am
Wow. that is the most intelligent thing I've read in a long time. And it makes so much sense. I remember being in junior high and high school health class and being taught to "just say no" they really never educated us on these subjects. Also, I went to a Catholic school to make matters worse.
Anyway, I say 18. Our problem as a country is that instead of actually educating kids on things like alcohol, drugs and sex, we make them taboo. Which leads to them wanting to find out what's what without guidance. Which leads to teen pregnancy and people turning into addicts of alcohol or other substances. Maybe if attitudes were more educational and less "don't do that...it's bad!", things like drinking wouldn't have the rebel/cool label attached to them...which would remove a lot of the negatives people associate with them.