SpawnPoint - Where Game Begins

Was perusing this article about lowering the drinking age in Alaska to 18 for service members, and found it to be a very very interesting subject, with endless amounts of variables both in support and opposed to the thought. Being only 17 years old upon enlistment, I'll have a different viewpoint than most people. But bottom line is, this is a horrible double-standard that absolutely needs to be fixed.

The most common argument is, if a 18 year old can legally bear a weapon, kill another human being, and see his fellow soldier get torn to pieces, he should be able to legally drink a beer. (On a side note) In some places it's just a law, if you live in a small tight-knit community like I do, people generally understand and you'd have to do something pretty damn stupid to get in any trouble. I don't take advantage of it, but it's a little relaxing knowing that my town isn't as backwards as our federal government.

People argue its a violation of our Constitution, and that DUI laws have saved tens of thousands of people every year. Of course programs like UMADD and the services Chain of Command will have problems with it, but there are ways to avoid many of their accusations.

For starters, all the statistics presented by UMADD and other supporters of 21 are based on the entire general population, of which a very minor percentage is made up of service members under 21. Not a very legitimate excuse.

They also argue that troops shouldn't be encouraged to drink, and that it will only exaggerate psychological problems and PTSD already plaguing the returning units. Suicide prevention has become a very common subject among us, but suicide itself isn't so much prevalent that drinking would explode the current suicide rates. Another poor argument.

Looking at ways to solve these accusations, maybe you would be forbidden to operate any machinery with ANY alcohol in your system. Keep drinking on-post, and have repercussions of these laws aren't followed. If a higher enlisted suspects any abnormal (dangerous, abusive etc.) behavior related to alcohol, flag them and have the system deny them service.I know several underage kids serving that absolutely would abuse it, but I also know many higher-enlisted OF age, and NON-deployed that abuse it.

It gets complicated, I read somewhere that maybe entry into the military should be raised to 21, so that the term "adult" has no confusion and is set in stone. But there goes any college incentive and ROTC, JROTC programs right out the window. It would suck but it seems the most logical answer.

And considering the past behind similar proposals, this one will probably burn out like the rest, and Civil Liberties would have a field day if it made any ground. Not to mention you'd have throngs of 17-20 yr old morons enlisting for the mere opportunity.

Thoughts?

Pssst, there's an edit function. ;)

I really didn't intend to comment on the article itself or the subject, but considering I'm posting, I might as well make it relevant to the thread.

In Alberta, where I'm living, the currently legal age is 18 and, really, there are no more injuries or deaths as a result of drinking than any other location. I guess it's a terrible argument, but "it's better they learn sooner than later" kinda works here. Let them get that out of their system before they become responsible adults.

That doesn't make sense...

I have always thought that if they are willing to go to war and die for this country, that makes them old enough to order a beer IMO. Drunk driving and drunken disorderlies should be slammed dunked though just like in public.