National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984

Lol, so by truly treating a 18 year old adult like a adult, is jeopardizing others rights?

I'm sorry guy, by put your advancing a loosing argument.

 

Yes, I'd rather there be a few law breakers vs. an entirely new demographic who could legally purchase and consume.

 

I don't remember your stance on gun control....but that ^^^^^ is the gun grabbers argument verbatim. "Preemptive" laws and punishment on the potential someone's legal or natural rights might be violated at some point in the future (again, major pet peeve )

 

You see it as "treating them like an adult". I see it as allowing a whole new demographic free reign to mess things up for themselves and others, when otherwise the threat was less. Again... I don't know how many times I must say it. IT'S JUST ALCOHOL. We're not talking about any sort of real tyranny here.

 

Just because you were immature at 18, doesn't mean others are. You're taking away others rights, but it's all good because you have yours.

 

I think the federal laws concerning 'arms' is fine as is. For example, I think it's a good thing that people can own a fully auto weapon, but it's not easily obtainable. I think it's fine that ordinary Joe's can't buy grenades and such.

 

It doesn't matter if there are some responsible 18 year olds. There will be plenty who aren't... and they will (*)(*)(*)(*) some (*)(*)(*)(*) up for others. Others that would have been fine otherwise. Again, the rights of that irresponsible 18 year do not outweigh Joe Blow who's just going about his business. And one more time... it's just booze for (*)(*)(*)(*)s sake... it's not like I'm arguing that 18 year olds shouldn't be able to vote. Thi is not some kind of tyranny that you're ideology influenced mind is telling it is. It's not a big deal.

 

The Constitution guarantees equal protections of the laws...and even if you subscribe to the notion "similarly situated"...(which I largely don't)....the group "adults" is similarly situated.

 

No, we are talking complete stupidity. I'm sorry if you fail to grasp the fact that if a 18 year old kid wants to drink, he/she is going to do it anyway. Kids around the world drink at a age younger than 21, and dooms day hasn't happened yet.

Common sense isn't on your side.

 

I've already covered this earlier in the thread.

I know that kids who want to drink are going to anyways. But common sense will tell anyone who's not blinded by principal, that increasing the number of people who can legally consume and purchase booze, is going to increase the negativity related to alcohol. There is no way around that. So with that being said, how can one argue that the harm created by this new liberal stance, outweigh the negativity experienced by those who are negatively affected?

Honestly, tell me, would you still support this right for 18 y/o's if it came back and bit you in the ass in the worst way? Think about it a second...

Myself, I care far more about my loved ones, than the right for some 18 y/o to legally buy and consume. He's only got a few years to go, BFD. But on the other hand, he can ruin his own life and that of others beyond repair. Pretty clear cut....

 

See invidious discrimination:

http://definitions.uslegal.com/i/invidious-discrimination/

 

Who do you think you are? You really think you have the right to tell me what I can to put in my body? What are you willing to do to keep me from drinking? Will you shoot and kill me or perhaps support the government shooting and killing me for drinking alcohol?

 

I've hinted to it a few times up-thread, but I'm going to close with this....

If an 18 year old can be held accountable as an adult in a court of law, they should be afforded the identical rights and privileges of every other adult.

don't like 18 year old adults drinking? Then change the age of majority to 21.....don't deny equal protections of the laws

 

dramatic much?

 

You're making too much sense now.

 

I don't think so. I think that supporting the murder of teenagers that refuse to comply with your little drinking ban is insane. You do support that, don't you? If I don't want to follow your dictation, you want the government to threaten my life and liberty. Resistance is death, yes?

 

Dude, nobody is going to kill you for drinking some brews while underage. It's more likely that you'll get yourself killed.

 

Oh no? So then you don't want the law actually enforced, correct? If no one will use or threaten violence against me to force me to stop drinking then your law will have no effect. I was under the impression that you want the police to forcibly arrest people for drinking alcohol under the age of 21. Is that not your position?

 

I don't think that really applies....perhaps "ageism", but alcohol prohibitions on the 20 and under adult crowd couldn't be considered malicious or hostile.

This would apply much better:

and since "adult" is a group, individuals within that group should be treated similarly.

 

Well, I guess if you think that it'd be appropriate, or worth it, to give police officers a reason to kill you while they were investigated whether or not you were an underage drinker... you might have an argument.

In reality land though, you'll probably just go to jail. You might not even go to jail if you're cool about it. There are still some cool cops out there. Some are willing to let things slide if they can get away with it.

 

I think the whole thing hinges on whether or not the 'discrimination' is reasonable. As per the results of this thread, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this particular issue.

 

Give them a reason to kill me? Why won't you just give a straight answer? Are you afraid to admit it? You are saying that you support my death if I resist a police officer aggressively attempting to arrest me for drinking alcohol. I don't think you could do it yourself, could you? Could you put a gun in a man's face and force him into cell for drinking alcohol? No, I don't think so. I think you'd rather let other men do it for you, so you don't have to carry out your own judgements.

 

I've enjoyed our discussion, LLM...I wish a lot* more disagreements on these boards were a civil as ours....

* I like to get in the gutter and raise a little hell sometimes, so I can't say "all"

 

Of course I don't support anyone being killed by the state for simple underage drinking. And of course I wouldn't commit such a murder myself. The point is that you shouldn't violently resist (it does no good), and also, if you decide to violently resist, you'll probably just get slammed to the ground, maced, or tasered. It kinda depends on you, and how far you decide to elevate things. Do you have a right to kill an officer for attempting to arrest you for underage drinking, would you do such a thing? How far do you want to take this argument? Should a person violently resist as they're getting a parking ticket, or pulled over for speeding... or for any other thing which they disagree with?

Simmer down bra, haz another beer.

 

Indeed. Much discussion here, and most forums for that matter, simply turns into poo flinging.

I refuse to bicker with you too much though. I agree with the vast majority of what you post, and I respect your posting style quite a lot. The same goes for two other members in this thread... and for that matter, several other conservative and Libertarian members of the forum. I agree with most of what they post, but sometimes I've gotta call it like I see it.