August 19, 2008

The Amethyst Initiative

Oh please please please let these 100 college presidents work some magic and get the 21 year old drinking age reversed. Infantilizing adults is no way to run a society, much less a free one. And talk about your laws with problematic consequences that are arbitrarily enforced and often evaded (which of course encourages a disrespect for the law in general) ...

Posted by armand at August 19, 2008 09:34 AM | TrackBack | Posted to General Stupidity


Comments

It's very revealing to see MADD leading the hysterical opposition on this one. What a great, illustrative example of an advocacy group that has totally outlived their original reason for being and morphed into something really disturbing and authoritarian.

I await their campaign to repeal the 21st Amendment altogether; it's surely only a matter of time, no? Think of the children!

Posted by: jacflash at August 19, 2008 10:28 AM | PERMALINK

Yeah, I'll never get past the voting & enlisting vs. drinking disconnect. It's unthinkable that we would deem people old enough to kill and die for their country then deny them the right to have a beer.

Posted by: moon at August 19, 2008 02:27 PM | PERMALINK

"I await their campaign to repeal the 21st Amendment altogether; it's surely only a matter of time, no? Think of the children!"

Is Pelosi working for them, now? Because you could sure take that line out of her speeches. It is just like a bunch of over emotional women to get steamed over their kids dying. Just like the Jersey Girls, huh? I'm sure Binky thinks they're just missing the right man to tell them when enough is enough.

Posted by: Morris at August 30, 2008 10:53 AM | PERMALINK

I don't even know who the Jersey Girls are. Perhaps you could explain how they -- and Pelosi -- are relevant to this conversation?

Perhaps also you could explain this one to me too: If making it legal for those 18-21 to drink -- something they're already doing now, out of sight of ostensibly more responsible adults -- while maintaining draconian penalties for DWI will somehow radically increase "kids dying", then what good are the DWI laws, or for that matter any laws?

Posted by: jacflash at August 30, 2008 06:06 PM | PERMALINK

It's about access. As you may know, I work with problem gamblers. There have always been problem gamblers, guys huddled around dice to see who wins a coat and such. But when my state legalized gambling, it increased access and gave social acceptability to gambling. We might still have quite a few people seeing us, older men betting on dice or horse races. But about half of our clients are middle aged women, who all say the same thing. They started gambling when the riverboat casinos came here. They could have gone the rest of their lives without having that switch flipped in their brain. But they're compulsives.

Research points to most of the people who commit DWI's as being alcohol abusers, not alcoholics, not compulsives. Alcohol abusers are distinguished from alcoholics by the fact that they can quit if they want to. They are making a more rational choice. So unlike the crack cocaine addict, they're not likely to bash someone over the head for a bottle of cisco. If they can't get their drink lawfully, they'll just go home. But even the mind of an alcohol abuser is compromised with the use of alcohol, so at the time they're getting in their car to go home, they're not making as rational a choice as they would in other circumstances.

The salience of the DUI penalty comes to their decision making process after that process has already been compromised, so the DUI penalty's salience is often lost from that particular decision, and it becomes salient (only if punishment is carried out) on later trials. If the person is not punished, if they're sent instead to a class, the absence of punishment is learned as well. But don't get me started on that.

The salience of the original illegality of a prohibited beverage to the sober mind is not lost. I in sober reflection never drove to Florida to get a drink. But there were many times going to Tulane I contemplated going to Florida to get another drink. So if we want to intervene, we have to do it when people are sober, or we have to do it when people sober up, so they can think about that the next time they're sober and thinking of what could happen next time they drink.

Personally, I don't see many draconian DUI penalties enforced. We had someone in Louisiana a few months ago who'd had a dozen DUI's, got in a wreck and killed some people. If you have money, you can pay the right lawyer, who has the right "relationship" with the right judge, who gets you sent to classes for the umpteenth time, and the DUI charge gets kicked down to a lower one. It's like with gun laws. Until you make the effort to enforce the ones on the books and see how it turns out, why change the laws you already have?

Posted by: Morris at August 30, 2008 11:44 PM | PERMALINK

It's about access.

They already have access, no? Most any 18-yr-old who wants booze can get it now. Do you want them getting it from their friends or stealing it from dad's liquor cabinet, or getting it in a bar, where a responsible grownup can shut them off and call them a cab if they have too much?

FWIW, I see lots of reports of heavy penalties imposed for DUI, but maybe that's a difference between LA and MA rather than perceptions. It wouldn't be the first time that my day-to-day experience of something was vastly different from the Coupers because of where I live.

Research points to most of the people who commit DWI's as being alcohol abusers

Okay, that makes some sense. What does the research say about kids who become alcohol abusers, specifically the number of young abusers in the US (where alcohol access is restricted for the young and laden with taboos) vs in developed countries where teens can drink openly in bars etc and it's not a big deal? How's Norway's DUI problem, for example?

Full disclosure: I have no data at hand, just a hunch here.

Posted by: jacflash at August 31, 2008 06:49 AM | PERMALINK

"They already have access, no? Most any 18-yr-old who wants booze can get it now. Do you want them getting it from their friends or stealing it from dad's liquor cabinet, or getting it in a bar, where a responsible grownup can shut them off and call them a cab if they have too much?"

First of all, why would they need a cab if they steal it from dad's liquor cabinet? Second, I think you overestimate how many "responsible" adults attend college age parties and supervise them, and I would think all the reports of sexual assaults might indicate to you the degree to which these "adults" are actually supervised. You're right, if they go to brunch with a family member who isn't drinking, they could drive you home. But finding a bartender in a restaurant who will kick people out for drinking too much is like finding a casino employee who will kick out a customer if they're losing too much; it's rare. And if the people you go out with drink too, they're impaired in their judgment.

"How's Norway's DUI problem, for example?"

The ETSC evaluated European DWI's:
"The European Commission had a cost-benefit analysis undertaken which found that with increased enforcement of drink driving, 3,900 deaths could be prevented in the EU 15 (ICF 2003)."

"Some countries have introduced a lower legal limit, usually 0.2 g/l, for this group of drivers. Available evaluation studies show a substantial reduction in alcohol related deaths in those age groups where such a limit has been introduced."

"There is ample evidence that reductions in BAC limits, supported by effective enforcement and publicity, can reduce drink driving at all BAC levels. Recent changes in Switzerland once again confirm this. In Switzerland, the number of road deaths decreased by an estimated 20% from 2004 to 2005. Preliminary findings show that one of the main reasons for this is a 25% reduction in alcoholrelated deaths in 2005. On 1 January 2005, the legal BAC limit was reduced from 0.8 to 0.5 g/l and random breath testing was introduced."

Posted by: Morris at August 31, 2008 09:47 AM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?