I can get volunteered to go to war, but I can't booze it up. *sigh*

[KillerMuffin]

In the mid 1980s in the state of Kansas the legal drinking age was 18 for malt beverages and 21 for hard liquor. Alaska set it all at 18. Most states had varying rates depending on age or type of alcoholic beverage or how the beverage was sold.

Then the feds came in and basically said, all ya'll better make the legal drinking age 21 for all beverages in all packages.

Like several other states, Kansas thumbed their nose at congress.

So congress went on to tell these recalcitrant states to either do it or they'd pull funds for things like education and highways.

So the legal drinking age became 21.

Same thing happened with highway speed limits. They got set nationally at 55 mph or no highway funds. Eventually that was repealed.

So the question is who has the right to set the legal drinking age? Does that belong to the state or to the federal government? If it belongs to the state, does the federal government have the right to pressure the states to do what it wants them to? How much right does the federal government have to exert its will on state governments? Do you know of any examples where this is happened for the good as well as for the bad?

 

[modest mouse]

Should women be eligible for the draft?

(How fucking obnoxious is it to say 'eligible')

 

[KillerMuffin]

Hey, I signed up for the selective service. They rejected me of course, but I did trot down to the post office when I was 18.

You can't be for total feminine equality if you don't.

 

[modest mouse]

Muff, Good answer.

Back to your question...

I'm divided on who should take charge of the drinking age, for two reasons:

1. State and local agencies are the people dealing with the problems that arise with alcohol, i.e. DWI, alcoholism, domestic abuse, underage consumption, etc.

Thus I'd prefer they have some say in what policies apply to their jurisdiction and the following implementation.

But...

2. A network of different laws and age restrictions is inherently problematic. Consistency only helps address the overall issue rather than fracture and parcel it out.

In the Northeast especially, access to other State's is commonplace so the benefits of a 'national' policy are more apparent than they may be out West.

***

I make the point with voting rather than the draft. An 18 year old can determine the fate of the country but lock his/her ass up if they have a beer. One can only laugh.

 

[Calamity Jane]

Sticking with the drinking, it would seem equally strange that I can purchase alcohol on a sunday and on federal holidays in missouri, while 10 miles from my house, i can't because that's kansas. I remember driving to nebraska to buy sunday beer when i lived in kansas.

Didn't the federal government just pull all federal funding for clinics that offer abortion services even though abortion is legal? Shouldn't that be a state by state decision?

 

[Starfish]

I have a major problem with the Federal government dictating that the people of a certain state have to conform to some supposed national standard they develop. I don't see why it is okay for the Federal government to overturn a state’s decisions, when those decisions directly reflect that of what the people want.

This holds specifically true to the medical Marijuana issue that California and Arizona faced for so long, and now what... Vermont.... Ohio..... and more are being told that we can't decide for ourselves. What the fuck is that about? The Government hired a group of officials from the NIH, (National Institute of Health) to conduct tests about Marijuana and to give the official results at a government held press conference. I am sure they had hoped that they would reveal some terrible information about the 'drug' but instead, they found no conclusive evidence that moderate to even regular use was harmful at all and to the surprise of the government they revealed that info. Days later, the feds tried to make it out that the tests were conducted improperly and that their official stance on the matter was that it is harmful and addictive and will remain in prohibition.


I'd like to think that I live in a country where I am free to decide for myself what to think and do.
Isn't that what our self government is supposed to be about?

Federal Bureaucrats, many of which have been in office way too fucking long, are usually so far from in touch with the people of their states, that they don't have even a decent clue about the desires of the people.

I feel that the federal government oversteps it's bounds on a regular basis, and suffers little or nothing for it's offenses to the people to whom it was designed to serve. The key word there is serve, not prohibit, demand, bribe, invade, and so on and so on.

Not to mention the idea that no one ever fucking said that what we decide to do has to be good for us, in our best interest, or decent. Who the fuck designated the Federal Government was the 'morality cop' of the entire nation. This is not saying that I think people should be destructive to themselves. Just that I think that people are going to do what they want, no matter what the government says or penalizes them for, they'll just do it in secret, untill they get busted, and thrown into prison at the tax payers expense. I see it everyday with far worse issues than this.

I fear I now live in a country where I am free to do what the government tells me I can do.

 

[sport]

Good Thought

How do you think the people that were drafted to Nam. felt. They could be drafted or shafted but if they went to buy a beer they were to young. I don't like each state setting age anyway.

 

[Starfish]

Hey, I signed up for the selective service. They rejected me of course, but I did trot down to the post office when I was 18.

You can't be for total feminine equality if you don't.

I am for women being given the right to work where they want, sign up for what they want, and do what they want, but I will never agree that women will ever be equal to men.

We simply are not the same.

It is biologically, physiologicallly, pshychologically and even sociologically inept to assume that we are the same.

When women start to bear litters of babies, then I won't worry about the majority of us being shipped off to die.

Until then, well........ I'd like to have some procreative insureance that we won't be whipped out by a massive war.

 

[modest mouse]

Fishie,

You are so wrong about the draft. Don't use a crutch, that's bullshit and insulting to women.

Men are fodder for war? Nice viewpoint, thanks for that. Last I checked the genders were in this together, maybe I'm wrong.

I nominate you for latrine duty at boot camp, no combat time but you can serve just like the rest of us.

 

[Starfish]

Crutch, my ass. I am fucking proud as shit to be a woman, and I have no fucking problem with my natural limitations. If what is natural is insulting in the eyes of humans, then people in general prove to be more fucked up each day.

Fodder for war? WTF is that? Where did I say that? Do you assume this much on a regular basis? Did you never think that I don't worry constantly about those people that are shipped off to die in these wars?

Until you don't put words in my mouth, I won't respond to this garbage/fodder any further.

 

[modest mouse]

Fishie,

Obviously I have taken your post differently than it was intended.

Make-up sex?

 

[alltherage]

The argument over states rights largely ended with the civil war. In fact, the states are so tied to federal dollars that the federal government can coerce states into doing most anything it wants. I agree that this is contrary to the spirit of a federal goverment structure. It would be better to return local control to the states and have federal aid come to them in the form of block grants rather than in the form of funding for specific programs. Local governments have more fiscal responsibility than the fed does and ultimately they would make better use of the money. However, some national standards are necessary. I think every child should have standards to meet educationally and some consequences must be felt when school districts fail to meet this standard.

 

[Starfish]

mm, LOTS OF IT TOO!

 

[android1966]

With the higher proportion of women serving in the armed forces
these days, I would expect if the draft (in the US) or conscription (in the UK) was reintroduced it would include both sexes. In Israel for instance conscription is for both sexes, men serve 3yrs and women 2yrs. In the UK you can enlist in the forces at 16 but can't buy beer till you are 18, though generally we start going to pubs illegally at 15.

 

[SINthysist]

Why is it that we want to celebrate diversity

At the Nation-State/Culture level, but not at the state level. I like Kansas being Kansas, Oklahoma and Nebraska being Oklahoma and Nebraska, Missouree being Missourah.

Now driving in Kansas and Washington DC and Washington State are all different and unique situations. Who knows better what the driving/speed needs are? Who knows more of what goes on at your local school?

But the fact that most of these laws are produced ans enforced coersively with tax funds is just plain UN_MERICAN!

 

[patient1]

Killer Muffin is my feminist heroine
for assuming responsibility, not just demanding rights. It gives a person a lot of credibility.... just imagine if everyone followed that example...


Money comes with strings, that's the way of it. The one to pay is the one to say. If you don't want someone else dictating whether or not there will be alcohol at your wedding for example, or what religion it will be, don't take their money. You resent somebody who takes your money & spends it without respect for your wishes,too, don't you?

That said, the Federal government is still heavy handed about things like medical marijuana. The response should have been limited to cutting drug enforcement budget in the state, nothing else. They're heavy handed about a lot of stuff.

I think emancipation & suffrage are excellent examples of a national standard set for the good.

 

[LovetoGiveRoses]

Agree on the drinking age. You can be shot at in the military, but having a beer is too dangerous. Our personal freedoms are being eroded quickly. Personally, I always wear a seatbelt. I'd rather it be my choice than something that is forced upon me. I believe that people should be allowed to be stupid if they want.

There is some question about the impact on other people (higher levels of car crashes by inebriated 15-21 year olds for example), but I don't think the answer is to make drinking illegal. We should let responsible young people have a beer legally and have a strong driver education program to have them become more skilled and responsible drivers and a heavy-duty education program FOR EVERYONE on the problems on drinking and driving. Drinking and driving is a problem for all age categories, not just <21 people. There should continue to be strong laws against drinking and driving, maybe even stronger.

One of the things that REALLY bothers me about the 21 year old drinking age is that it is implying that all people that are under 21 are not responsible. It's saying, in essence, you're guilty and you're not even going get the opportunity to prove otherwise where it should be to assume that you're responsible until you prove otherwise.

<continuing on soapbox> That's one of the problems I see in the USA that is easily correctable, that is, not treating young people with respect and consideration. I think sometimes we treat young people like children until they're 30 years old. Every time I think of that I think of Alexander of Macedonia conquering most of the known world by the time he was 18 or Napolean becoming a General while still in his 20's. There many very talented young people out there.