Drinking age------> [Archive]

Anonymous

16th March 2003, 05:22

They didn't fight to have the voting age lowered to eighteen for nothing. People figured that if you were old enough to be sent to some god awful communist hell hole on the other side of the world, then you should at least be able to vote for the politicians sending you there. They didn't really care about the drinking age, as most people under 21 drank alcohol anyway.

To me, this just looks like an attempt at bashing the Bush administration for something that's been in affect for almost eighty years.

Pete

16th March 2003, 05:23

America is one of the most conservative drinking nations of the western world. The oldest age in canada is 19

Zombie

16th March 2003, 05:31

beer, along with vodka and wine, is man's greatest achievement. hic!
why ban it when it is soooo good... fuck the age limit, u can still drink at home or at your friend's... no need for bars... hic! as long as u can driiink!

chheeers

Zombie

16th March 2003, 05:33

Quote: from KRAZYKILLA on 9:53 pm on Mar. 15, 2003
I do agree if they go to war let them have beer. However, alcohol does have some nasty side effects.

yeah? so does war.. :biggrin:

synthesis

16th March 2003, 05:55

To me, this just looks like an attempt at bashing the Bush administration for something that's been in affect for almost eighty years. Um, the drinking age hasn't been 21 for eighty years.

mentalbunny

16th March 2003, 14:46

It's waste of police time, like cannabis in the UK, take it down to 18 for fuck's sake!

Pete

16th March 2003, 15:30

During the 20's there was prohibition, but we Canadians fixed that problem nicely... "Liquor drips through dotted lines"

bolshevik1917

16th March 2003, 15:42

The drinking age should be 16 worldwide, that way there would be less street crime and vandalism as young people dont have to stand on street corners or sit in bus shelters to drink and socialise.

I dunno about the rest of the world, but in the UK its 16 to smoke which is far more harmful than drink. You can also get married at 16 but you wouldnt be allowed to have a drink at your wedding - or even vote in the elections. Then you imperialist government can declare war on Iraq and send you off to die.

What a great world we live in

Mazdak

16th March 2003, 16:32

alcohol should be banned. Period. Its that simple.

No more drunken drivers, no more of this kind of nonesense. If you think you caqn handle a beer, tough shit. You can live without it.

mentalbunny

16th March 2003, 16:38

Another gem from Mazdak, how do you expect to enforce that then?

I was talking to some friends about complete anarchy the other day and we came to some kind of conclusion that alcohol and drugs would probably become the new currency.

Zombie

16th March 2003, 16:46

Quote: from Mazdak on 11:32 am on Mar. 16, 2003
alcohol should be banned. Period. Its that simple.

No more drunken drivers, no more of this kind of nonesense. If you think you caqn handle a beer, tough shit. You can live without it.

so if alcohol is banned u think that's gonna make people obedient and stop drinking?! LOL, right...
alcohol is as old as Man (to some extent)... geez
they're talking of legalising marijuana and u wanna ban alcohol!
chill dude

bolshevik1917

16th March 2003, 17:26

"alcohol should be banned. Period. Its that simple.

No more drunken drivers, no more of this kind of nonesense. If you think you caqn handle a beer, tough shit. You can live without it."

LOL!

This is absolute crap, it shows what a loser this guy is and how little understanding he has of the world.

Moskitto

16th March 2003, 17:35

I believe Mazdak did want alcohol heavily restricted, not banned.

Banning alcohol doesn't get rid of drink driving, driving under the influence of illegal drugs still falls under "drink driving" and people still do it. just take keys off of people who drive to pubs and don't give them back if they're not sober.

Zombie

16th March 2003, 17:38

Quote: from Mazdak on 11:32 am on Mar. 16, 2003
alcohol should be banned. Period. Its that simple.

moskitto?? its there he said it...ban alcohol.
and he did imply that we should live without it, theres no doubt bout that.

Moskitto

16th March 2003, 17:40

he did say on my forum he just wanted it heavily restricted.

basically, i think he's looking for attention.

Hegemonicretribution

16th March 2003, 18:13

The laws are just an impracticallity, nothing that bad, although maybe it should be 16 for softer drinks, bit older for spirits...The laws normally result in parents doing the punishing, and kids can drink with parents by law anyway (in U.K.) anyway, so as the parents obv don't want them to..for more reasons than the law, why can't the punishments be brought in by them directly, saving police the time of dragging them home. I do not always disagree with police taking home incapable drinkers, and the presence just underlines that the child isn't mature enough for alcohol yet. Perhaps children should drink with adults more, learning to drink like adults... Socialising in a safer environment...I going for some locally brewed beer now from my fridge, but don't tell anyone I am only 17 ;)

RedCeltic

16th March 2003, 18:24

Quote: from Dark Capitalist on 9:03 pm on Mar. 15, 2003
They're old enough to vote and that's what matters.

(Edited by Dark Capitalist at 8:09 am on Mar. 16, 2003)

Dark Capitalist

you can join the service at age 17 with a parent's signature. There are also special exceptions for someone with a felony which prohibits voting rights.

Furthermore.... one doesn't have to be a US Citizen to join the military. You can be from one of America's many "territiories" or you can have lived in the US for three years.

I knew a guy who went to school in the US for three years and joined the American Navy even though he was from Manchester England and couldn't vote or even drink in the United States.

Hegemonicretribution

16th March 2003, 18:35

Quote: from RedCeltic on 6:24 pm on Mar. 16, 2003

Quote: from Dark Capitalist on 9:03 pm on Mar. 15, 2003
They're old enough to vote and that's what matters.

(Edited by Dark Capitalist at 8:09 am on Mar. 16, 2003)

Dark Capitalist

you can join the service at age 17 with a parent's signature. There are also special exceptions for someone with a felony which prohibits voting rights.

Furthermore.... one doesn't have to be a US Citizen to join the military. You can be from one of America's many "territiories" or you can have lived in the US for three years.

I knew a guy who went to school in the US for three years and joined the American Navy even though he was from Manchester England and couldn't vote or even drink in the United States.

Just to play devil's advocate...your friend did CHOOSE to join, and it is therefore his own fault, I guess that drafting people is where the voting age should change. Then again, if you ARE willing to fight, should that not be the time to be goven it? Then to make it fair for the unfit, and those tht may be pacifists or whatever, allow them it to...etc I think there should be NO voting age. Your friend knew what he was doing as he entered so it is his fault, but he should still get a vote. Everyone should, otherwise it isn't a DEMOCRACY. I really hate oligarchies and the such..not allowing EVERYONE to vote..

Zombie

16th March 2003, 18:43

Quote: from hegemonicretrobution on 1:35 pm on Mar. 16, 2003

Just to play devil's advocate...your friend did CHOOSE to join, and it is therefore his own fault, I guess that drafting people is where the voting age should change. Then again, if you ARE willing to fight, should that not be the time to be goven it? Then to make it fair for the unfit, and those tht may be pacifists or whatever, allow them it to...etc I think there should be NO voting age. Your friend knew what he was doing as he entered so it is his fault, but he should still get a vote. Everyone should, otherwise it isn't a DEMOCRACY. I really hate oligarchies and the such..not allowing EVERYONE to vote..

i dunno, i don't see the practicality of letting 'kiddies' vote.. i mean, not all minors are bright u see (NOT ALL :cool: ..), they are more easily impressed (i.e ignorant) than politically aware... i dunno if i'm making some sense here, but it's like giving 10yo kids the right to drive... i mean it doesn't fit u know... errr following my point?

(Edited by Zombie at 1:51 pm on Mar. 16, 2003)

RedCeltic

16th March 2003, 18:46

I wasn't saying that it was anyone elses fault but his own for joining the American Navy. It was his choice, he wanted the money for school.

What I was trying to point out was that not everyone in the American Navy can vote in US elections.

mentalbunny

16th March 2003, 19:35

The thing about kids voting is they have different priorities, but then look at the reasons people voted for Blair ("he has a nice smile" was what one aquaintance of my borther said for her reason for voting for him, needless to say he was disgusted).

Zombie

16th March 2003, 19:42

"he has a nice smile" was what one aquaintance of my brother said for her reason for voting for him
LOL
unfortunately not all adults are bright either... :(
I just hope she was trying to be.. errr.. funny? :confused:

RedCeltic

16th March 2003, 19:48

In the United States, it is hard to moblize young people who are over 18, but younger than say 35, to go vote. If they did vote... you wouldn't see politicians elected who want to ballance the budget on the backs of the poor and students. (by making cuts in education and rasing state tuitions)

But in the United States, most people do not vote. If 60% of the population went out and voted, it would be considered to be a record high for voting.

Why don't people vote? Because quite simply.. they don't see voting as having any effect on their personal life. And, as the nation moves more and more to the right, as the Republcians become more to the radical right, Democrats seem to think they need to move more to the right in hopes of survival.

The whole system stinks from the very core.

mentalbunny

16th March 2003, 19:55

Quote: from RedCeltic on 7:48 pm on Mar. 16, 2003
In the United States, it is hard to moblize young people who are over 18, but younger than say 35, to go vote. If they did vote... you wouldn't see politicians elected who want to ballance the budget on the backs of the poor and students. (by making cuts in education and rasing state tuitions)

But in the United States, most people do not vote. If 60% of the population went out and voted, it would be considered to be a record high for voting.

Why don't people vote? Because quite simply.. they don't see voting as having any effect on their personal life. And, as the nation moves more and more to the right, as the Republcians become more to the radical right, Democrats seem to think they need to move more to the right in hopes of survival.

The whole system stinks from the very core.

So what do we do?

I guess this is the question that nags at all of us and some of us find ways to help but nothing seems to really work. Using the system doesn't work because you get taken over by the system and lose your soul to it, so in the end you become yet another cog int he great machine of corruption, etc.

But if you're an activist outside a major party then you get discredited. How the hell can we get this place moving? How the hell can we raise awareness of what is happening? Why are people so content to go living their day to day lives when hell is round the corner?! Of course they won't realise this till it's too late, or they'll never realise because by then the facists will have taken over and we will all be force-fed propaganda 24/7.

Zombie

16th March 2003, 20:59

We need Neo and Morpheus on this one...
What you've said is very Matrix-like, yet very true...

"Why are people so content to go living their day to day lives when hell is round the corner?! "

1 - probably they don't know that hell is round the corner! they're always fed with that propaganda shit and are not fully aware of the true reality (much like the ppl in the Matrix)
2- they're happy with the way they are, as long as theyre getting food on the table and a roof over their head... the idea of a 'revolution' or at least some radical change with the system would most probably scare them?

how to raise awareness...
well, different means are available.as u know, u have the media (i.e. newspapers, tv, internet,movies, music..), the streets (i.e. protests, public debates or speeches, school activities..), social circles (i.e. friends, family, sororities or whatever u call them) and so on... none of this is new to u i know, but i guess that's the tools we have in order to raise more and more awareness in the youth (mostly)

don't lose faith . we should not give in to what we believe is the ennemy. no matter how discredited u might feel u have to keep pushing. the day u give up is the day those fascists have won!

i'm sorry but i gotta run for now, friends are waiting for me, i'll try to make myself clearer later on....
cheers

Hegemonicretribution

16th March 2003, 23:01

Quote: from Zombie on 6:43 pm on Mar. 16, 2003

Quote: from hegemonicretrobution on 1:35 pm on Mar. 16, 2003

Just to play devil's advocate...your friend did CHOOSE to join, and it is therefore his own fault, I guess that drafting people is where the voting age should change. Then again, if you ARE willing to fight, should that not be the time to be goven it? Then to make it fair for the unfit, and those tht may be pacifists or whatever, allow them it to...etc I think there should be NO voting age. Your friend knew what he was doing as he entered so it is his fault, but he should still get a vote. Everyone should, otherwise it isn't a DEMOCRACY. I really hate oligarchies and the such..not allowing EVERYONE to vote..

i dunno, i don't see the practicality of letting 'kiddies' vote.. i mean, not all minors are bright u see (NOT ALL :cool: ..), they are more easily impressed (i.e ignorant) than politically aware... i dunno if i'm making some sense here, but it's like giving 10yo kids the right to drive... i mean it doesn't fit u know... errr following my point?

(Edited by Zombie at 1:51 pm on Mar. 16, 2003)

I was just pointing out, practical or not, refusing the right t vote to a CITIZEN on age bias is arguably wrong, but definately NOT democracy. Bad use of words, more pallatable than correct terms. Although, as it has been mentioned not all that many adults take elections that seriously...wonder why? There is no point, one vote will not, in general, have any difference to the out come. You have NO say, only if you group together for a party you are willing o compromise on, rather than the one you want, can you get the lesser of two (three whatever) evils. I say give them the right to vote always, but until they are confident and able enough to actually register themselves they shouldn't get to.

As for alcohol, everyone should have a right to it equally, parents responsible for restriction of their children from things bad for them (just like sweets etc), however any alcohol related offense should have a time-phased ban from alcohol. Second one, and a permanent ban. This way those that can't drink are those that have proved incapable of controlling themselves.

Pete

16th March 2003, 23:35

"alcohol should be banned. Period. Its that simple. "

Its been tried and it failed miserably. In Quebec it was only in force for 2 years (during the 'moral' 1920's) and Canada ran a huge alcohol market for America.

Socialsmo o Muerte

16th March 2003, 23:47

Quote: from Mazdak on 4:32 pm on Mar. 16, 2003
alcohol should be banned. Period. Its that simple.

No more drunken drivers, no more of this kind of nonesense. If you think you caqn handle a beer, tough shit. You can live without it.

Got to admit he is right though. It may be unrealistic, but if it could be enforced, it would be for the better for everyone.

pastradamus

17th March 2003, 01:45

thats just letting organised crime prospire.

Prohibition=Capitalist cruelty.

RedCeltic

17th March 2003, 04:17

Well... Let's see what Daniel De Leon (founder of Socialism in the USA) had to say about the subject of morality and prohibition...

The following is from Reform or Revolution

Take now an illustration of the revolutionary principle that the material plane on which man stands determines his perception of morality. One man writes to THE PEOPLE office: "You speak about the immorality of capitalism, don't you know that it was immoral to demonetize silver?" Another writes: "How queer to hear you talk about immorality; don't you know it is a type of immorality to have a protective tariff?" He wants free trade. A third one writes: "Oh, sir, I admire the moral sentiment that inspires you, but how can you make fun of prohibition? Don't you know that if a man is drunk, he will beat his wife and kill his children?" And so forth. Each of these looks at morality from the standpoint of his individual or class interests. The man who owns a silver mine considers it the height of immorality to demonetize silver. The importer who can be benefited by free trade thinks it a heinous crime against good morals to set up a high tariff. The man whose wage slaves come on Monday somewhat boozy, so that he cannot squeeze, pilfer out of them as much wealth as he would like to, becomes a pietistic prohibitionist.

Mazdak

17th March 2003, 18:09

The problem with prohibition is it was not enforced. If the police actually did their job and close speak easies and punish the owners severely, people would quickly forget getting wasted on alcohol if they knew the price was getting wasted by the cops. (just a figure of speech, i dont support killing alcoholics, for all you idiots who will say i do)

Mazdak

17th March 2003, 18:13

"they talk of legalizing marijuana" JESUS! I am completely against such moves. the Penalty for using it should be increased heavily. How does one go about enforcing bans? Tough prison sentences, more cops, etc. And no, moskitto, i have changed my view. heavy restriction is what we have on cigarettes and it doesnt stop people from smoking. I am not looking for attention. I am so tired of hearing this shit about me looking for attention because I agree with you. Assholes.

So how exactly is a drunken driver going to cause an accident if HE CANT GET ALCOHOL? Explain it to me, since i have such little understanding of the world and you are all wise, you pompous piece of shit.

Moskitto

17th March 2003, 21:36

ok mazzie,

read my latest post on this subject about those around me.

RedCeltic

18th March 2003, 01:15

I'd give anything to meet up with Mazdak on his 21st birthday and tell him I want to buy him a pint and see if he still has such high morals then.

A person who is so dead set on controling what the masses do and do not do is out of touch with the working class.

Prohibition on Alcohol is not something the worker wants.

If the goal of communism is to set up a worker state where the worker controls the means of production and the Govt. What is it that Mazdak dreems of?

Because I know very few people who work for a living that don't enjoy a drink at the end of the day.

Moskitto

18th March 2003, 12:16

drink driving isn't neccesarily alcohol,

it is also illegal to drive under the influence of cocaine, heroine, cannabis, LSD (that would be dangerous), or infact any drug to such a level where it would impair your judgement, if you test negative for alcohol they look at your eyes or smell you and if they think you're on something else they take you to the station and take a blood or urine sample.

Mazdak

19th March 2003, 22:52

RedCeltic, my parents dont care about me drinkling alcohol in the least. They offer me. Friends offer me. I REFUSE. MY MORALS DONT CHANGE. And i am going to make sure they do not. I will not risk touching a drop of the stuff.

Zombie

19th March 2003, 23:02

dude, u don't wanna touch the stuff, it's ur life, nobody's telling u what to do and what to not do. but don't push other people to abide by your moral and personnal judgements, againt their will. it simply doesn't work like that.

knowledge

22nd March 2003, 01:29

Old enough to go to war, yet not old enough to drink.

I can't be sure about anyone else, but being under 21 and getting alcohol was never difficult for me and those around me. Come to think of it, it was just that much more fun to drink alcohol and be under age.

Mazdak

22nd March 2003, 18:34

Quote: from Zombie on 11:02 pm on Mar. 19, 2003
dude, u don't wanna touch the stuff, it's ur life, nobody's telling u what to do and what to not do. but don't push other people to abide by your moral and personnal judgements, againt their will. it simply doesn't work like that.

Thats right, morals are for weaklings right? We should accept the fact that we run the risk of dying because, even though we are considerate enough to abstain from drinking(hence not risking getting into a car drunk), some other loser is not and we end up dying because of his irresponsibilty. Humans are like children, they dont have enough control to do things on their own the right way, so you have to stop them with force. You dont want the child drinking the detergent, you place it out of their reach. It is that simple.

Hegemonicretribution

22nd March 2003, 20:18

I think that attemted murder charges should be brought against drink drivers. I am resonably happy with the age, although for softer booze I still say 16 (it is 18 for anything here). I know lets ban sex out of marriage, not many unwanted pregnancies.....Enforce that one how? Now ban eating outdoors to eliminate litter. Next lets all ban nasty things, these thought criminals can be real criminals when they kill rape and pillage....Don't let the masses suffer for the few. Restrict the few, free the majority.

Sometimes we have to compromise for the greater good. Whether or not you agree with alcohol, pot whatever, being authoritarian and enforcing masures could stop progress. If you did it in a country you had fought hard to create, you could suffer a result. Lead by example.

Anyway your views on alcohol will be passed on, you are gentically superior, heavy drinkers are less likely to reproduce because of fertility rates ;) (joke)