What do the decades of the 1850’s and 1920’s have in common? Those were the time periods of both failed attempts at prohibition. Although it differs from today because alcohol was prohibited to everyone, the essential ideas of these laws remain the same. The government doesn’t want people to drink, yet we all tend to find a way to do it anyways.
In the 1920’s it was speakeasies and bootlegging of liquor, today it is the local frat house kegger and fake IDs. Do you see a trend here? As a race, we find a way to break the laws to get what we want, and what we want is to be able to do as we please. Prohibition didn’t work them, what makes them think it’s going to work now?
Indeed, history does repeat itself time and time again. Whether it’s secretly making wine in your kitchen during the 20’s or drinking vodka out of that Aquafina bottle, we know that people are going to find a way to get around the rules. Can’t we just cut to the chase here and jump to the 21st amendment part of the story? We should just go ahead and admit that it isn’t the most logical regulation the government has ever made. Foresight? Not so much. Rules are made to be broken, people. Odds are if the government made a law stating everyone had to have 3 ½ drinks per day, we’d find a way to get around that one. “Maybe they’ll think this grapefruit juice is wine! I can just pretend like I’m drunk, they’ll never know!” Ohhh, how the tables would turn.
Is this little snippet of history just FASCINATING to you??? Click here to learn more about the failure of prohibition, and here for a general overview!
I love your blog!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting that you raised historical cases as evidence of how the judicial system has failed in some instances to regulate alcohol consumption. In light of your argument that the drinking age should be lowered, I have two further questions for your consideration:
ReplyDelete(1) By arguing historically that the law has failed in some instances to regulate alcohol consumption, what are your justifications that lowering the age limit from 21 to 18 would not result in similar consequences for people below 18 years of age? After all, arbitrarily defining the drinking age at 18 still subjects it to the rule, and inefficiencies of the law.
(2) While there is some truth in the adage that "rules are meant to be broken", isn't the fact that rules generally preserve a system of structure and orderliness proof of their inherent relevance?
Looking forward to reading your subsequent posts!
Nonlinearperpectives-
ReplyDeleteI love your comment, oh so thought provoking!
On another drinking age blog, I commented on a similar situation that you address in #1. I have thought repeatedly about this issue because, lets be honest, it isn't just 18 year olds that are drinking underage. This is why I bring up the question of whether or not there should be a drinking age at all (or a law that isn't necessarily enforced) but I think that would be far too much of a stretch. I don't think America or it's people are ready for that kind of culture change. So for now, I figure 18 is the happy medium until we can accordingly adapt. At least the change could possibly help those from age 18-20, but as for the drinking of minors, there is no magical answer.
In my next post I will be talking about the drinking age in other cultures and analyzing this problem. Thanks for your question!
People always find ways to break the law and then hide afterwards. Government officials can only catch so many people at one time...they cannot punish EVERYONE.
ReplyDeleteYou say that rules are meant to be broken...so what if there were no rules to start with? How would people react?
Ill have to agree with ItsAllOver? on this one. I love this blogs as well. Something abot laws make people want to break them. Especially one as silly as the drinking age being 21. As a college student I have seen these laws bein broken plenty of times. Just becaue the law says that us "kids" cannot drink does not stop many of us from doing so.
ReplyDeleteNatureNurture-
ReplyDeleteThe effect of there being no rules at all was something I lightly touched on in my other comment. I don't think we could handle there being no rules at all, especially after being so accustomed to having rules throughout the entire history of America. When it comes to the drinking age, I think if there were no rules to start with then everyone would be fine and there wouldn't be nearly as many binge drinkers out there. However, if after all this time we completely scrapped the idea of a drinking age, I think chaos would most likely ensue. Odds are that people would go crazy with alcohol but eventually this trend would die down. There really isn't a way to win with this one.