They can Die for Our Country, but we Won't let Them Drink?
Photos
If there ever was a verification of the need to heed the call of more than a hundred college presidents to lower the drinking age to 18, we saw it Saturday evening in our fine city. As usual, thousands of college age people gathered to celebrate the end of the school year doing what college students do, and as usual, the safety forces did what they think needs to be done to react to an impromptu party that routinely becomes too large and too rowdy.
Wouldn’t it be better to have sanctioned block parties, as is done in other locations, in the street or on campus, where a visitor must show Identification to be allowed in, and where irresponsible drinking can be monitored? Imagine using the tens of thousands of dollars spent every year on law enforcement on a cordon, porta-pottys, bands and trained security to create a party that everyone can have fun and people will not travel from miles around to cause trouble. It won’t happen though, because of our modern day prohibition. No one wants to have a party in which more than half of the students cannot participate as equals.
The Amethyst Initiative, the college president's effort to inform elected officials to rethink the impact of a nationwide drinking age, recognizes that on many levels, this policy is unfair and counterproductive.
"This is a law that is routinely evaded," MSNBC quoted John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College in Vermont who started the initiative, as saying. "It is a law that the people at whom it is directed believe is unjust and unfair and discriminatory." These leaders of some of the largest and most prestigious universities in the country believe that the suppressed drinking age results in binge drinking and the kinds of activities that have become all too familiar in our city.
What is most frustrating is that college is supposed to be a place where young adults go to become mature leaders of our region, state and nation. Instead they learn that while they are old enough to die for our country, our nation, they are not mature enough to drink responsibly.
Paxton Crenshaw
10:49 am on Monday, April 23, 2012
Can't the drinking age be amended via a state ballot measure? Sure, it'd be a lot of work, but I also think it would pass. Plus, young people tend to support more progressive candidates - it'd be win/win for those under 21 and for people like me who drink legally but can't stomach the GOP!
JustSaying
11:38 am on Monday, April 23, 2012
"Wouldn’t it be better to have sanctioned block parties, as is done in other locations..."
Seriously, I think it would be better if students were taught how to behave in public before the were sent to college (e.g., don't throw things at cops, don't fight with your fellow party-goers, etc.). Also, who would pay for the services needed (security, portapotties, bands, for the sanctioned block parties... The city. the landlords, the partygoers...?
Jessica Johnson Salamon
2:57 pm on Monday, April 23, 2012
I agree with this, changing the age will not necessarily change the behavior of most of the students. It would take a combination of measure to truly bring about some change in the binge drinking behaviors of young people, least of which is the prevailing notion that binge drinking is normal and expected at their age, it's called 'part of the college experience' and it's not limited to college students. Flip through your cable channels one night and you'll find plenty of reinforcement for binge drinking being acceptable.
James Thomas
11:54 am on Monday, April 23, 2012
The 18 year old drinking age has been tried. It was changed back because the number of 18 year olds who died on the roads skyrocketed. It was changed back and the number plummeted. How many teens need to die this time before this argument loses any semblance of logical thought?
Chris (Kit) Myers
12:27 pm on Monday, April 23, 2012
Another great idea from Mr. Hawksley. I suggest your block for next year's College Fest. Get together with your neighbors and set it up.
18-year-olds are old enough to die for their country? Yeah, American 18-year-olds start wars all the time.
Jessica Johnson Salamon
2:54 pm on Monday, April 23, 2012
Are you unaware that the enlistment age is 18? There is even a program that allows for enlistment at 17 with parental permission. So while they may not start wars, plenty of 18 year olds die for our country. Thirty three 18 year olds died in Iraq. http://tinyurl.com/chmqwwd
Chris (Kit) Myers
5:19 pm on Monday, April 23, 2012
I am not totally out of it, Ms. Salamon. I am quite aware of the enlistment requirements and I never said that no 18 year olds have died. Read again what I said and think about it.
Jessica Johnson Salamon
6:12 pm on Monday, April 23, 2012
Unless you are speaking in some code of which I am unaware, I still find your comment to be unrelated to the topic at hand. Who starts the ware is immaterial, we allow 18 year olds to join the armed forces, we say that they are mature enough to handle the rigorous training that entails and be entrusted with weaponry and experience the horrors of war, yet they are not mature enough to drink a beer. They are also old enough to marry, to vote, to hold down employment without restrictions, to use tobacco, to gamble, but in the singular instance of alcohol they have to wait another three years.
James Thomas
10:34 pm on Monday, April 23, 2012
How about a compromise?
Since the argument is, if they're old enough for military service they're old enough to drink, why don't we just drop the MILITARY drinking age to 18? Why should those who haven't earned the right, by serving their country and accepting the risks that this entails, get any more freedoms than they have now?
Jack Kelly
12:39 pm on Tuesday, April 24, 2012
This is about a few people being irresponsible and ruining it for everyone else. I highly doubt those that planned this party were doing this with the intent that it was going to be shut down by the cops, and Kent PD would need assistance from several neighboring communities and SWAT.
All it takes is a couple of jackasses to ruin it for everyone.
Plus, if there was even a discussion started about lowering the drinking age, I'm sure there would be a threat on the federal level of losing millions/billions in highway funds. That's why the the level for being considered "legally under the influence" in Ohio was lowered years ago, for example.
Chris (Kit) Myers
1:54 pm on Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Yes. Unintended consequences. Human brains not yet completely developed, mixed with alcohol, makes for a potent cocktail. It happens all the time, and it ain't pretty.
Perhaps this unofficial celebration should be held downtown in the block bordered by Main, Franklin, Erie, and South Water; the entertainment district. It will make the downtown more vibrant and add tax money to the city coffers.