Raise the drinking age to 25?

vanity | 5/20/03 | me

[bassmaner]

Apologies for the vanity, but this is bugging me and I need FReeper input.

I live in the Philadelphia suburbs, and I recently saw a billboard on Baltimore Pike in Clifton Heights sponsored by the Ad Council which appeared to support increasing the minimum drinking age to 25. Is there any kind of serious movement underway to make such an abomination law, or was it some kind of sick joke?

[Roscoe]

The thread doesn't contain any facts from which to draw an informed opinion. You pinged me to an empty screed.

[jmc813]

So you're saying that until today, you've never thought about the appropriateness of the drinking age? Ever?

I've been posting back and forth to you for two years, and the ONLY thing I know is that you dislike libertarian philosiphy. That's it. Help me out and prove to me that you are really a person. Tell me an opinion of yours on anything at all. Do you have a favorite sports team? Musical Group? Religious preference? Anything.

[Roscoe]

Tell me an opinion of yours on anything at all.

Dinuguan is better than menudo.

[jmc813]

Oh, yeah, it figures a statist JBT like you would like pork blood stew!

Just kidding ;-)

[nustart23]

I am totally in favor of raising the drinking age. In Ohio we have the Ohio Responsible Drinking Initiative (ORDI) that will accomplish 5 major points.
1. Raise the drinking age to 23. (College age children should not have access to alcohol.)
2. Lower BAC to 0.07%.
3. Ban all Sunday sales, purchase and consumption of alcohol.
4. Give Ohio State Highway Patrol same jurisdiction on private property as well as public property for DUI and alcohol/drug investigations and arrests.
5. Give 72 hour automatic drivers license suspensions to any person arrested for alcohol related offense. (This would be for licensed drivers who commit an alcohol related offense while not driving.)

Only until we accept that alcohol related offenses are killing our young and destroying our families can we dare say we are a just society.

(One footnote: MADD will not support this initiative and we encourage everyone from holding back financial support for MADD until they support ORDI!)

[Phantom Lord]

I wholeheartedly disagree with everything you posted. Everything.

1. Raise the drinking age to 23. (College age children should not have access to alcohol.)

Why should "college age children" not have access to alcohol? At 18 one can vote, enter legal agreements, purchase a firearm, join the military and fight for and possibly die for America, but they shouldn't have "access to alcohol"?

2. Lower BAC to 0.07%.

0.08% is low enough, though I supported keeping it at .10%.

3. Ban all Sunday sales, purchase and consumption of alcohol.

Why should people not be allowed to purchase alcohol on Sunday? Why should people not be allowed to go out for a nice dinner with a bottle of wine on Sunday? And by what authority and reason should the stated ban the consumption of alcohol on Sunday? Give me one good, legitimate, and non-totalitarian reason that I should not be able to sit on my couch, watch football, and have a beer on Sunday.

4. Give Ohio State Highway Patrol same jurisdiction on private property as well as public property for DUI and alcohol/drug investigations and arrests.

Let me know what other amendments besides the 4th you would like to eliminate.

5. Give 72 hour automatic drivers license suspensions to any person arrested for alcohol related offense. (This would be for licensed drivers who commit an alcohol related offense while not driving.)

Why should one lose their drivers license for non driving related offenses?

[nustart23]

17,000 people killed by drunk drivers annually in the USA.
KEEP THAT IN MIND.

As to answer your posting:

1. While it is true that an 18 year old can vote, enter into legal agreements, fight and die for America, they cannot be elected Commander in Chief (President) until they are 35. Cannot be elected a United States Senator until they are 30, and cannot be elected a U.S. Representative until they are 25. I think it has something to do with maturity and responsibility that comes with maturity. Nobody 21 years old is mature enough to handle the potent and lethal drug alcohol. Last year in Ohio 4 OSU students, age 21, died from alcohol overdose. If 23 had been the legal age would they have still been alive?

2. At 0.05% BAC one is considerably impaired by alcohol. 0.07% is a liberal limit and would get the borderline drunks off the highways.

3. If people cannot refrain come consuming alcohol for a twenty-four hour period, especially on our Lord's day, they have a considerable drinking problem. Families travel our highways on Saturdays and Sundays more than any other days of the week. Why shouldn't we give them extra protection from drunks for at least one out of two of those days?

4. In Ohio, an Ohio State Trooper can be stopped at a red light, look over and see young youngsters drinking beer or a porch (or even worse, smoking pot or crack) and he hasn't the legal authority to do anything about it because he is only sanctioned on state and public property. Come on, surely this would not violate any body's civil rights!

5. If you are too drunk or impaired to drive, you are too drunk or impaired to drive. Why shouldn't your driving privileges be revoked until you sober up?

[Phantom Lord]

Last year in Ohio 4 OSU students, age 21, died from alcohol overdose. If 23 had been the legal age would they have still been alive?

Every year people under the age of 21 die from alcohol poisioning. How did this happen with them being under the legal age? Would raising the age to 23 have prevented these deaths?

How many people a year die from cocaine, heroin, and other drugs? Maybe they should be made illegal and then those deaths will not happen.

2. At 0.05% BAC one is considerably impaired by alcohol. 0.07% is a liberal limit and would get the borderline drunks off the highways.

Define "considerably". And every person handles alcohol and greatly different manners. Some people are severely impaired by less than one drink, which will not get their BAC even close to 0.05%. Others can have BACs well above .05% and you would never know it.

3. If people cannot refrain come consuming alcohol for a twenty-four hour period, especially on our Lord's day, they have a considerable drinking problem. Families travel our highways on Saturdays and Sundays more than any other days of the week. Why shouldn't we give them extra protection from drunks for at least one out of two of those days?

This is one of the most laughable reasons I have ever read. It is not a matter of being able to refrain from drinking for 24 hours. It is a matter of the government overstepping its legitimate authorities. And regarding "Our Lords Day", will your suggested law have an exception for the consumption of alcohol at religious services? And if so, why? And if not, why not? And your "lords day" is not everyone else's "lords day". We do have a seperation of church and state in this country, which unfortunately has been taken far beyond the Founders intent by courts over the years.

4. In Ohio, an Ohio State Trooper can be stopped at a red light, look over and see young youngsters drinking beer or a porch (or even worse, smoking pot or crack) and he hasn't the legal authority to do anything about it because he is only sanctioned on state and public property. Come on, surely this would not violate any body's civil rights!

So what your saying is that I can sit on my front porch in Ohio doing bong hits and if a cop sees me he has no legal authority to come and arrest me? There is no way that is true. Find me one case where a cop saw someone doing drugs in the open, on their land where the cop arrested them and they were released because of "lack of authority".

5. If you are too drunk or impaired to drive, you are too drunk or impaired to drive. Why shouldn't your driving privileges be revoked until you sober up?

If I am found to be drunk in public and my source of returning home is my vehicle I should be prevented from driving. If I am found to be drunk in a hotel that I am staying at why should my drivers license be revoked for 72 hours? Plus, I will be sober in the morning or several hours. It doesnt take 72 hours to sober up. In fact, I would have to consume 70+ drinks in an hour to need 72 hours to sober up.

[Phantom Lord]

Being as you signed up just yesterday (4/6), what was your motivation and purpose in signing up here? To push a totalitarian, theocratical form of government?

[nustart23]

So what your saying is that I can sit on my front porch in Ohio doing bong hits and if a cop sees me he has no legal authority to come and arrest me? There is no way that is true. Find me one case where a cop saw someone doing drugs in the open, on their land where the cop arrested them and they were released because of "lack of authority".

In answer to this question I am saying that in Ohio a city policeman, county sheriff's deputy, and I guess a town constable (if Ohio still has constables) could indeed arrest you if they seen you involved in the activity mentioned above. But a Trooper of the Ohio State HIGHWAY Patrol could not arrest you on your front porch for such activity unless he or she followed you to your front porch after seeing you do it on PUBLIC property. He or she could call the local law enforcement to come and arrest you, but the Ohio State HIGHWAY Patrol are not chartered with any jurisdiction on private property. Only state roadways and state property.

Other states such as Michigan, Kentucky and New York have State Police with the same jurisdictions as local police.

Initiative #4 would close this loophole in Ohio for only drug and alcohol investigations and arrests.

[gexman2001]

Nustart23, you said:

In answer to this question I am saying that in Ohio a city policeman, county sheriff's deputy, and I guess a town constable (if Ohio still has constables) could indeed arrest you if they seen you involved in the activity mentioned above. But a Trooper of the Ohio State HIGHWAY Patrol could not arrest you on your front porch for such activity unless he or she followed you to your front porch after seeing you do it on PUBLIC property. He or she could call the local law enforcement to come and arrest you, but the Ohio State HIGHWAY Patrol are not chartered with any jurisdiction on private property. Only state roadways and state property.

Other states such as Michigan, Kentucky and New York have State Police with the same jurisdictions as local police.

Initiative #4 would close this loophole in Ohio for only drug and alcohol investigations and arrests.

In answer to this I am saying, I don't want the Ohio State Highway Patrol to become Ohio State Police. Hell, they act like they're state police already. You're wrong when you say they can't come on private property to harrass and arrest (something that they've become good at). All they have to do is lie and say they chased you onto private property and they're in like flynn.

Phantom Lord, you're A OK in my book. I don't want a totalitarian police state in Ohio. We have one but we don't need one.

Nustart, you're a puny cop suckass as far as I'm concerned.

I SAY, LOWER THE DRINKING AGE TO 18,
RAISE THE BAC BACK TO 0.15%,
OPEN THE LIQUOR STORES ON SUNDAYS,
TO HELL WITH THE OHIO STATE PATROL,
AND AS FAR AS TAKING MY LICENSE FOR BEING DRUNK ON MY OWN PROPERTY, F--- YOU ORDI, F--- YOU NUSTART, AND F--- ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO F--- WITH MY RIGHTS!!!

(Oh, and by the way, to really get "real drunks" off the highways, just a note to all the law enforcement agencies in Ohio and the nation. Get off your asses, get out of the coffee shops, quit eating donuts and start looking for "DRUNK DRIVERS" that are a danger to us all. Not just someone who may or not be drinking, or thinking about drinking or whatever. STOP BEING CHICKENSHITS!)

[nustart23]

First of all on this day after Easter, I hope that the Lord forgives you for your profanity. I would guess you are a heavy imbiber of alcohol.

Second, I would be careful what you say. If I can find out your identity, I'm sure the OSP can too.

Just a thought!

[somniferum]

Forget nutstart's ridiculous comments about "college aged children" .. an oxymoron if I ever heard one. It is fairly obvious what his/her/its real agenda is.. that EVERYONE should be considered a child, to be told what to do by their "betters" such as nutjob here.

Its fun to be a tin-pot dictator in your own mind.

[nustart23]

First of all I take offense to being called an "oxymoron" and a "nutjob". Evidently the truth hurts. I will not refrain from my stand that 'college aged children' should not be allowed to consume alcohol. A child goes to school and college to learn. However drinking something that dulls the mind and destroys brain cells is not conducive to learning.

By raising the drinking age, continuing to lower the BAC, stifle alcohol's availability we can not only save lives, but families. The faces of alcohols destructive powers are not only the faces of dead children on the highways, but the faces of children from broken homes. Homes broken by alcohol abuse. Getting a drunk off the highway who has only drank one beer may get him to realize he has a drinking problem. May save him and those who love him.

[preacherman1]

KEEP UP THE FAITH BROTHER. GOD'S CHILDREN ARE CALLED WORSE NAMES THAN THESE BY SATANS CULTS. DRUGS AND ALCOHOL ARE ONE OF THESE CULTS. ANYTHING TO KEEP BOOZE AWAY FROM OUR KIDS AS WELL AS SOME GROWNUP KIDS IS ALRIGHT BY ME AND THE LORD. THE LORD HAS NO USE FOR BOOZE.

AMEN BROTHER

[somniferum]

Apparently the Lord has no use for Shift keys either...

Im not *even* going to get into you calling me a 'satan cult'

[somniferum]

Erm.. my apologies if you misunderstood me. I wasnt calling you an 'oxymoron' .. rather, I was referring to the phrase 'college aged children' .. which IS an oxymoron because quite simply, people in college are not children. They are adults. And as one of those said college aged adults, I really can decide for myself whether or not to drink without people like you trying to legislate the choice for me.

[nustart23]

Yes. It's me again.
Anybody read about the six innocent people who were killed in Sandusky last week.

The driver that was responsible was "legally" drunk. i.e. his blood alcohol content was 0.025% and he said he had drank two beers nine hours before the accident (a likely story- if he had drank two beers nine hours before he would have had no trace of alcohol in his blood).

Six lives gone forever, because a drunk chose to drive. What a waste.

Ohio Responsible Drinking Initiative (ORDI) wants to lower Ohio's BAC to 0.07% down from the 0.08% that it is now. Hopefully Ohio's General Assembly will listen. How many children have to be killed before they will do anything.

Oh, by the way, Ohio State Senator Jay Hottinger, who last year bragged about wanting to lower the state's BAC even further, has not responded to ORDI about supporting the 0.07 initiative or any of the other three. If anyone out there is in his district, ask him why. And if YOU can't get a response, VOTE HIM OUT, along with any other member of the House or Senate who won't support ORDI.

LET'S LOWER OHIO'S BAC NOW!!!!! AND KEEP LOWERING IT IN THE FUTURE!!!!


1 posted on 07/01/2004 11:10:10 AM PDT by nustart23

[nustart23]

I want to apologize to Sen. Hottinger for making the remark in my last posting on July 1, 2004. It was a Sergeant Brian Webster (not Sen. Hottinger) of the Newark (Ohio) Police Department who made the statement about wishing to seek the BAC lowered even lower than 0.08%.

Here is that article:

FAMILIES, ACTIVISTS CELEBRATE LOWER DUI LIMIT

Wednesday, July 2, 2003

By Jon Craig
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
NEWS 04C

Two mothers, a sister and a wife -- all of whom lost loved ones to impaired drivers -- came together yesterday to praise a new state law lowering the blood-alcohol limit to 0.08 percent.

"Hopefully you'll never get a call like I did on Christmas Eve of 2001,'' said Darcee Claxon of South Webster in Scioto County. Claxon cried while describing her younger brother, Cody Michael Hammersley, "who forever will be 17'' and dreamed of playing college baseball and getting married.

Hammersley was fatally injured 500 feet from his home in Coshocton when his car was broadsided. The other driver, also 17, registered 0.082 on the Breathalyzer but was not charged with driving under the influence under the old limit. Still, he served 18 months in jail and in a rehabilitation center on another charge.

Until yesterday, the blood-alcohol threshold was 0.10 percent. The new limit means a 170-pound man drinking four to five beers an hour -- or a 137-pound woman drinking three beers an hour -- is too drunk to legally drive.

Meanwhile, Columbus attorney Bradley P. Koffel questioned the effective date that people can be charged under the lower limit. Koffel said his reading of House Bill 87 makes the new threshold effective in six months on Jan. 1, 2004.

"As a defense lawyer, if we have any clients charged with DUI for testing between 0.08 and 0.099, we will be requesting dismissal of that charge,'' he said. "Even if they're right, there is still going to be a lot of litigation and discussion in the courts.''

Speaking at a press conference at a Dublin hotel, Claxon implored teen-agers to take keys away from friends who insist on drinking and driving. She said her brother lost a two-week battle in the hospital before being declared brain-dead.

"I watched my brother's heart beat for a last time. Those images still haunt me today. I cannot explain the immense pain. Cody was a fighter (but) he doesn't have a voice anymore -- he was robbed of that -- to let people know drunk driving is not an accident.

"We pay daily, and we will pay for the rest of our lives,'' Claxon said. "I believe (0.08) will save the lives of other people.''

Others attending the press conference lost loved ones to drivers legally drunk under the old law.

Louanne Jones of Bexley lost her 19-year-old son, Brett Alan Sutton, in 1995 to a five-time offender now serving a 10-year prison sentence related to her son's death. "Slowly but surely we're changing the attitudes,'' she said.

Donna Maines' 18-year-old daughter, Jennifer, was killed on Thanksgiving 1996. The Newark mother's pain is compounded by the fact that the drunken driver was arrested -- again -- and imprisoned seven weeks ago.

And Sherrie Kass-Roth of Gahanna lost her 45-year-old husband, David, in a 1995 crash with a drunken driver that also severely injured their daughter, Bethanie.

It is estimated that about one-fifth of all alcohol-related crashes occur with drivers who test between 0.08 percent and 0.10 percent.

Sen. Jay Hottinger, a Newark Republican who sponsored the legislation, estimated the lower limit will save 30 lives the first year. The change also is expected to save at least $30 million annually in federal transportation funds as Ohio became the 42nd state to toughen its standard. The federal government threatened to cut off road-construction dollars starting in October for states that do not comply.

Hottinger was joined at the news conference by Maj. James H. Walker of the State Highway Patrol and Sgt. Brian Webster of the Newark Police Department.

"It's long overdue,'' Webster said. "Quite frankly, I would like to see it lowered even more.''

Using yellow crime-scene tape, officials from Mothers Against Drunk Driving of Ohio cordoned off 379 empty seats representing people killed in alcohol-related crashes last year in Ohio. More than 11,400 were injured.

"What a very sobering view that is,'' Hottinger said.