Lower the Drinking Age on Base to 18?

[Gunz]

...and crotch rockets. :wall:

 

[Wench]

Shut your mouth when you're talking to me!

I gotcha, I was just making the same point I had made earlier in the thread.
I don't want to drink around 18 yr old retards either, but I think Military 18 yr olds deserve it.

Unless things have changed, they are banned from visiting the border states (and some others) of Mexico, and need clearance to go to the other states.

I like the sound you make when you shut your mouth!

I just think 18 y/o military are just as dumb and make just as piss-poor decisions as 18 y/o civilians when alcohol is involved; I guess it's a matter of saving them from themselves more than a "you earned the right" for me. In fact, I'd much rather save them to fight another day than a damn 18 y/o frat boy.

 

[Brill]

I don't know when you were in, but the service is different now even than when I joined. Privates have an epic amount of freedom.

And $$$$$ to boot!

 

[parallel]

I just don't agree with the whole "save us from ourselves" justification for meddling in the lives of people in general, much less meddling in the lives of those who are asked to give their lives for us all including the idiots of all ages who don't have the decision making skills my 8 year old possesses. We had plenty of freedom when I was in... without all of the politically correct bullshit that today's service members have to deal with.

 

[fox1371]

...I guess it's a matter of saving them from themselves more than a "you earned the right" for me...

I understand what you're trying to say Wench. However I couldn't disagree with you more. This mentality is what has brought our society from a society of independence, to a society that begs to be ruled. No longer is it a time where responsibility is placed on the individuals, but instead it's placed on the Government etc to protect us from our own decisions.

 

[pardus]

Yup.

Again I will bring up the specter of the 2nd Amendment in this discussion.

What is freedom? Can you carry a gun? Can you die for your country? Can you drink alcohol? All? Some? None?

To me it's a PC argument, "ohes noes, people will be stupid, get hurt and hurt others!" Yeah, well sorry folks, freedom and Darwin are life partners, retards hurt themselves/others everyday with cars/guns/sticks/fists etc... and none of those fucks signed their life away for their country.
Like I said before, the chain of command needs to stop being lazy incompetent cunts, and fully engage with their troops.
WTF is so hard about that?
As a leader you have two jobs, complete the mission, look after your guys. You sacrifice all for that, that's what a leader does!

I understand what you're trying to say Wench. However I couldn't disagree with you more. This mentality is what has brought our society from a society of independence, to a society that begs to be ruled. No longer is it a time where responsibility is placed on the individuals, but instead it's placed on the Government etc to protect us from our own decisions.

 

[Wench]

The 2nd Amendment doesn't even begin to apply in any way, shape, or form.

And it's not a matter of taking away some level of responsibility; this is a law that is already in place and has been in place for decades. I'm arguing against an exception to it, not saying remove a personal responsibility that these kids have. They've never had it.

 

[fox1371]

The 2nd Amendment doesn't even begin to apply in any way, shape, or form.

And it's not a matter of taking away some level of responsibility; this is a law that is already in place and has been in place for decades. I'm arguing against an exception to it, not saying remove a personal responsibility that these kids have. They've never had it.

I beg to differ. The current law may have been present for decades, but the previous laws were in place for centuries. These kids have never had a personal responsibility? Am I reading this statement correctly?

 

[pardus]

The 2nd Amendment doesn't even begin to apply in any way, shape, or form.

And it's not a matter of taking away some level of responsibility; this is a law that is already in place and has been in place for decades. I'm arguing against an exception to it, not saying remove a personal responsibility that these kids have. They've never had it.

I heard exactly the same argument made to me for the loss of a 2nd Amendment right in my country of birth, for people who came to age after the restrictions were passed. "We never had it so it doesn't matter!"

I had it and lost it. Fuck any cunt that want's to take my rights away again!

The law for drinking here used to be 18 years old. Explain that to me.

"God" was added to the pledge of allegiance in the 50's, do you understand the resemblance?

 

[Wench]

No you aren't reading it correctly. These kids have never been allowed to drink at 18. All this talk of personal responsibility, but this is one that these kids will never is experience is what I am saying. I'm not arguing for taking something away they already have--juse don't make an exception and give them something (drinking at 18) they would never be able to do anyway.

 

[Wench]

Are you guys making the argument for all 18 y/o's, or just military? Because your arguments are pretty broad, and statistics have borne out that raising the drinking age was a pretty smart thing to do. Don't hear much (really none) uproar about moving it back for a reason.

 

[fox1371]

Are you guys making the argument for all 18 y/o's, or just military? Because your arguments are pretty broad, and statistics have borne out that raising the drinking age was a pretty smart thing to do. Don't hear much (really none) uproar about moving it back for a reason.

I'm an advocate of lowering the age to 18 for everyone. Although, I would say that those serving in the military should get preference. One thing that I don't think we can be 100% clear on is what the statistics support. Is it the change in the drinking age that has shown a decrease in alcohol related fatalities? Or is it that the punishment for violating those laws, as well as the public outlook on those charges has changed? Having a DWI on your record 10 years ago, didn't have the same impact as it does now. The statistics also didn't display a positive change until about 5 years after the law went into effect.

 

[Wench]

I'm not sure where the misconception came from that the age was 18 for some extended period...it wasn't widely lowered to that until the mid-70s, and there were quite a few states that kept it at 21. In any case, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. In my experience, I've seen nothing to recommend lowering it.

 

[TLDR20]

If we are talking lowering it for everyone, I would be more on board. That isn't what the bill suggests or what the original question was about though.

 

[Il Duce]

I think another issue is how useful dictating post policies is from the legislature.

I would not want my local state representatives voting on PT times/routes, uniform policy, staff duty hours, opening/closing ranges, or frankly the gamut of command decisions best left to the officers and NCOs who run those units and that post.

 

[pardus]

No you aren't reading it correctly. These kids have never been allowed to drink at 18. All this talk of personal responsibility, but this is one that these kids will never is experience is what I am saying. I'm not arguing for taking something away they already have--juse don't make an exception and give them something (drinking at 18) they would never be able to do anyway.

I'm reading it correctly, you aren't getting my point. I understand these people don't have it, I'm saying it was something their predecessors had and was taken away. The fact that you have never experienced a "right" or privilege that your forebears did, is no reason to justify you not having it. Understand?

Are you guys making the argument for all 18 y/o's, or just military? Because your arguments are pretty broad, and statistics have borne out that raising the drinking age was a pretty smart thing to do. Don't hear much (really none) uproar about moving it back for a reason.

I'm only talking about about military, and only on post.

To be clear to all here, this is an academic discussion to me. I support the proposition, but wouldn't go out of my way to have it enacted.

I'm not sure where the misconception came from that the age was 18 for some extended period...it wasn't widely lowered to that until the mid-70s, and there were quite a few states that kept it at 21. In any case, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. In my experience, I've seen nothing to recommend lowering it.

That I didn't know, thanks for that.

 

[Wench]

Re: reading it correctly--that was in answer to fox1371, who asked above if he was reading my post correctly. I was on my phone and didn't bother with the reply function.

You're still a wanker .

 

[pardus]

Re: reading it correctly--that was in answer to fox1371, who asked above if he was reading my post correctly. I was on my phone and didn't bother with the reply function.

You're still a wanker .

Up yours with a big thing that goes up things!

 

[Marauder06]

Another perspective. http://www.havokjournal.com/nation/dont-lower-drinking-age-members-military/

An excerpt:

...there’s probably a reason why this suggestion is coming from someone who isn’t in uniform, chiefly being that most military leaders on active duty—including me—not only don’t think it’s unnecessary, they also think it’s a terrible idea. There is also a reason Maragas is the sole sponsor of the bill—most people probably realize that there are far more important veterans’ issues to address than this one.

 

[JBS]

Should totally be allowed to drink at 18 if you serve.

I think it's total bullshit that we can send a young man to die in Afghanistan (or any other shithole), be responsible for (in some cases) millions of dollars in technology, man a turret capable of destroying etire apartment buildings (along with fire discipline in populated areas), and depending on the maturity level, even lead a fire team or squad of our sons into battle, but we can't trust him with a case of beer.

Say what you want about they're not mature, etc. If that's the case why would you put a rifle in his hand and tell him to put a round in the enemy after dragging him 4,000 miles from his family? He's too immature to drink, but not too immature for you to ask him to be accountable for the lives of our men, friendlies in the area, as well as the equipment and vehicles?

I'm just every bit as conscious of the general dangers of drinking, but it comes with the territory.

If your NCO's are worth two f**cks, the junior enlisted woud drink safely, and carry on to live and fight another day without incident.

EDITED TO ADD:

I didn't read the last couple of pages of posts, so my comments are in no way directed at any other individual poster, only my feelings on the issues for this topic.