Underage drinking? WHAAAAAAAA?

[Tank Program]

This is one of those areas when I really have trouble understanding people. I just don't get drinking. I suppose that I get it abstractly, but not really. Most of that is because I pretty much can't stand alcohol. Don't like it at all, so I don't drink. The closest I get to it usually is isopropyl alcohol for cleaning stuff. (Dissolves finger oils, so great for cleaning CPU dies, heat sinks, monitors, glasses, etc.) This makes it hard for me to have a perspective on underage drinking. Having been in the UK where the age is 18 and everyone's just left home and gone to university... people go out and get trashed, a lot. Which begs to mind if the age shouldn't be higher so that people are more mature. Or you could argue lower so that they're under supervision, but the impression I get is that underage drinking still happens even under the parent's noses. So the age would have to go way down to get people educated, but then there are probably situations when that would be abused. The important thing appears to be safety and moderation, both hard to ensure, no matter the age.

[MrsKsr]

I think alcohol consumption isn't as big of a deal as people make it out to be. The problems only come when alcohol is abused, like most things. I'm not really exactly sure how the rule works, but in England it's quite fine for anyone from the age of 14 (maybe 15) upwards to have a glass of wine with a meal, that stands for in the home and restaurants etc.

I completely agree with what Olive said, allowing "kids" to drink as opposed to forbidding them is a better way of tackling "binge" drinking as soon as they are 18/21 or look old enough to get into a bar or a club. Personally, my mum always allowed me to have a sip of her wine if/when I asked and I don't see anything wrong with it. After all it's not like she gave me the whole bottle... lol.

As for Marijuana, I think just the same principal applies, it's shown negatively by the media or damned by the government, and hence it has a negative image. It's got nothing to do with the actual pros or cons of using it. Of course there is a difference between recreational use and medical, but if you actually took the time to look at it there are far worse consequences to excessive consumption of alcohol than Marijuana, yet one is legal and the other not. When you make conclusions as to why something is good or bad, you should take into account outside influence on the subject, js.

Anyway /end rant on Marijuana. Each to their own, but I think those who don't drink or don't "use" Marijuana should stop hammering down on those who do. At the end of the day, it's their body and their choices don't really affect you.

Just do what you want and what makes you happy.

[Hoax]

Not sure if it's true but I heard the usa has less 'anti social behaviour' trouble from teenagers & young adults due to alcohol which is most likely because of the high age limit. Then again you get more house parties in the US so people are drinking on their own property
If you look at continental europe alcohol isn't veiwed as just something to get wasted on & you can drink during the day without any negative connotations. Massive generalisation but the culture is clearly different
I think slov summed up everything in the 2nd post tbh, everything in moderation & all. Or you can just binge every now & again

[ItzAcid]

I think alcohol consumption isn't as big of a deal as people make it out to be. The problems only come when alcohol is abused, like most things.

I completely agree with what Olive said, allowing "kids" to drink as opposed to forbidding them is a better way of tackling "binge" drinking as soon as they are 18/21 or look old enough to get into a bar or a club. Personally, my mum always allowed me to have a sip of her wine if/when I asked and I don't see anything wrong with it. After all it's not like she gave me the whole bottle... lol.

+1

Like just about everything, moderation is fine in my opinion. From a Christian stand point, (not going to turn this into any sort of religious debate) I think it's fine. I think getting drunk is wrong, however, due to certain beliefs. Some people just really enjoy the flavor of certain alcoholic beverages. The only thing that makes me angry about underage drinking is that it's all about being a rebel and partying it up.

p.s. I know it's probably an overused argument, but in the United States, If i'm old enough to die for my country without my consent (draft) then I deserve the right to have a casual beer.

[Phytotron]

At the end of the day, it's their body and their choices don't really affect you.

Except they often do end up affecting family, friends, communities, and eventually society as a whole in one way or another.

p.s. I know it's probably an overused argument, but in the United States, If i'm old enough to die for my country without my consent (draft) then I deserve the right to have a casual beer.

Actually, you have it historically backwards (although, you can, of course, repurpose the argument).

Prior to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984, the drinking age varied from state to state, but most were at 18, or below 21. Conversely, prior to the 26th Amendment, adopted in 1971, many states had voting ages above 18, many at 21. Draft age was, of course, 18. So, the argument then was that if someone was old enough to drink and be drafted into war, one should be allowed to vote.

And, you do realise that the draft was discontinued in 1973, right? You still have to register with the Selective Service System, but you can't be forcibly conscripted.

[Lucifer]

I pretty much don't care. I think the drinking age should match the voting age.

I think that parents absolutely should drink with their kids, in moderation, often enough for the kids to be familiar with what moderation is, exactly, and how to accomplish it. Parents should also make sure that every kid knows what their driving limit is before they start driving. Parents are legally allowed to do that, because kids can drink at any age so long as their parents are the one(s) who give them the alcohol. My oldest is nearing an age where she and I are going to start talking about getting her experience with alcohol so that she'll know what her limits are, how her judgment is affected, and so forth. I also don't like how a high drinking age drives the behavior underground, where it can't be monitored.

I disagree that drinking is something that doesn't affect other people. People who don't know their limits tend to drive and kill people. (And I say this with my own DWI currently working its way through the courts: even people who do know their limits can abuse them and endanger other people)

I agree that, given the choice, I'd rather have alcohol illegal and marijuana legal. But don't kid yourself into thinking that pot is somehow a safer drug than alcohol. It carries a lung cancer risk when smoked, it impairs your judgment just as badly, and it screws up your coordination/reflexes which is what makes it dangerous to drive under the influence of alcohol, too. I just think that it's effects when used are better to have in our society than alcohol's. Also, don't kid yourself about medical marijuana. All of the science I've seen that says it can cure <whatever> is severely questionable. Experimental methods are unsound, they tend to start with their theory and work backwards to prove the hypothesis, there's sampling bias in the results, etc. It doesn't cure depression, even, or make any pain go away. And finally, the medical marijuana crowd are, imo, doing much more damage to the cause of legalizing marijuana than they are helping. It's obviously a transparent attempt to find a way to be a legal pothead, you're not fooling anybody.

However, I'd rather have both alcohol and marijuana legal. Alcohol has long traditions in our society, going back to ancient times. I don't want to lose those traditions, they're important. I'm not a traditional person, but I think the added sense of ceremony that goes with making a toast at a wedding with a glass of real champagne is well worth having legal alcohol, as well as all the other times alcohol is used both ceremonially and traditionally.

[Phytotron]

The best, most legitimate use of "medical marijuana" is for those, for example, who are suffering through chemotherapy, as well as ailing AIDS patients. It does lessen pain somewhat, and perhaps more importantly, will usually nausea and improve appetite. In that respect, it can contribute to one's health, in keeping one ingesting nutrients, staying strong, and maintaining general better sense of well-being, which itself contributes to getting healthy. It's a management thing, not a cure (obviously).

[Lucifer]

The best, most legitimate use of "medical marijuana" is for those, for example, who are suffering through chemotherapy, as well as ailing AIDS patients. It does lessen pain somewhat, and perhaps more importantly, will usually nausea and improve appetite. In that respect, it can contribute to one's health, in keeping one ingesting nutrients, staying strong, and maintaining general better sense of well-being, which itself contributes to getting healthy. It's a management thing, not a cure (obviously).

While that's a very good point, the argument against medical marijuana is that there are already a variety of prescription drugs available that fill those needs.

I'm torn on whether I'd want pot at that time or not. On the one hand, I watched my dad go through three years of chemo, so I have a good idea what the challenges are like (but obviously not the great idea I'd have if I had gone through it myself). On the other hand, I've also smoked a lot of pot, and I can't see a strong enough guarantee that it won't seriously damage the emotional frame of mind of a person using it for the other benefits you describe. What I mean is, when I was depressed, smoking pot had about a 50/50 chance of improving my mood WHILE I WAS HIGH (only!), and the same chance of actually making my depression more serious, possibly turning it into a full-blown depressive episode. The loss of self-discipline with depression causes enough problems for cancer patients, a drug that might actually make it worse.... well, you can see where that argument is going. My dad's position on the subject pretty much mirrors my own, except that he didn't have any personal experience with pot.

I wouldn't begrudge someone else the choice, but if it were legal for recreational purposes (a cause I support, but not a one-issue vote for me), then the patients who want the benefits you describe from it can take their chances on their own cognizance, and preferably while working with a doctor.

[Phytotron]

I'm torn on whether I'd want pot at that time or not.

Yep, likewise, for similar reasons. In fact, I almost added that part of it to the above post, that it's a matter of the trade-off for those who choose that avenue of therapy (when actually used as such, not just an excuse to get stoned legally). It might help me feel better physically, but it'll likely mess up my brain one way or another—from burnout stupidity to emotional/mood disturbance.* Tough choose.


* By the way, folks, another urban legend: Pot has no long-term effects. In truth, especially in cases of heavy/regular users, even if it was over a relatively short period, it often does cause emotional or mood disturbances years down the road.

Yes, the gubment and other anti-drug/alcohol campaign have exaggerated or plain lied about the effects for various drugs and alcohol. But that doesn't mean they're harmless. It means that tactic of trying to scare people with bullshit needs to stop, and advocates against drug and alcohol use or abuse need to be honest about it.

[ItzAcid]

p.s. I know it's probably an overused argument, but in the United States, If i'm old enough to die for my country without my consent (draft) then I deserve the right to have a casual beer.

Actually, you have it historically backwards (although, you can, of course, repurpose the argument).

And, you do realise that the draft was discontinued in 1973, right? You still have to register with the Selective Service System, but you can't be forcibly conscripted.

Wow, I feel like an idiot lol. I thought that if the situation was dire enough, we were forced to fight if registered ( nowadays, you don't apply in person which I though was what happened. I received a letter in the mail with all my information and certifying that I was registered). Is that not correct?
Getting on to more of a military conversation rather than drinking, my bad . To be on topic, I think there shuld be a limit on how much someone 18-21 can purchase at once, but don't make it illegal altogether.

p.s. I was reordering/"repurposing" it to benefit the lowering of the age

[Clutch]

I've read on the internet, I've read journals, I've talked with long time potheads, currently using and those who have stopped, and almost every faction says that the opposite side (the sides being for marijuana and against it) is lying about long term and short term effects of weed.

How the hell am I supposed to figure out the actual truth about the effects? So far, the only thing I've noticed is a bit of a drop in my motivation, and my cardio has seen better days. Unwanted effects, but not totally unexpected. Is it safe to assume that it differs from body to body? Maybe, personality to personality?

[Lucifer]

Boxed: The problem is that pretty much every faction IS lying about the long-term effects of pot. That's how politics work. Lie, lie, lie, get what you want, lie some more.

You have to figure it out on your own, by asking yourself questions. For example, do you think a personal can retain their mental health if they spend a lot of time out of their own head? Most people agree that's not possible, that's why being an alcoholic is so bad. Why would being a pothead be any different?

As far as physical effects, the same faction that told us drugs kill brain cells is now telling us that pot makes synapses widen, and the damage can't be repaired. Meanwhile, the other faction is telling us that breathing smoke into your lungs is harmless. Um, didn't we just sue the living shit out of tobacco companies for telling that lie?

You can clear that one up by simply looking at similar situations that don't use pot, like, I don't know, a house fire (where we KNOW that smoke inhalation can kill you). Makes sense then that not only are cigarettes dangerous, ANYTHING YOU BURN AND BREATHE is dangerous.

You can work on the rest. Don't kid yourself into thinking pot is safe, know that your judgment is impaired when you're high, and the more time you spend high, the more life you live with impaired judgment.

[nsh22]

Is it safe to assume that it differs from body to body? Maybe, personality to personality?

most definately.

i havent tried (nor do i plan to try) weed becaue of preexisting mental issues which would likely be exasperated by marajuana.
i dont drink because i really dont like the taste

[Clutch]

Lucifer, you said you smoked a lot of pot and now it seems you're telling me that there aren't any positive effects haha

What I've really been looking for is some kind of chart with a simple pros and cons setup with..I don't know, maybe after 5 years of smoking, then 10, then 15 or something like that.

Pot has been used for a long time, I wish everyone could just shut the hell up and figure out the actual facts about it.

[Lucifer]

Well, it is a euphoric drug. That's obviously a positive effect...