Benson uninformed on issue

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • CHris Plummer
    Aug. 24, 2008 12:27 a.m.

    ONce again the rest of the world is wrong and the USA is right.

  • to: MEB @ 5:05 p.m.
    Aug. 23, 2008 11:58 p.m.

    Who said anything about Democrats or Joe Biden?

  • MEB
    Aug. 23, 2008 5:05 p.m.

    For all you Dems, Biden strongly opposes dropping the drinking age to 18.

  • level head
    Aug. 23, 2008 2:42 p.m.

    If a young person can give his or her life for their country at age 18 they should have all the privileges accorded to adults. If they can't drink, then they can't serve in the military.

  • Jud
    Aug. 23, 2008 12:10 p.m.

    Teenagers drinking is a bad idea. The Amethyst initiative is well intended but truly wrong headed.

  • MEB
    Aug. 23, 2008 12:11 p.m.

    Domenick - Why don't you put forward anything of value to the debate? Didn't you just do the same thing that you accuse Benson of doing?

    The single biggest reason for not moving the drinking age to 18 is that many High School Students turn 18 during their Senior year. I believe this would just increase drinking by High School Students, since many Seniors could now buy alcohol for their underaged students. How would this somehow encourage responsible driking?

    And the argument that you can vote but you can't drink is hollow. How come you can drive a car when you are 16, but you can't rent a car from any rental agency until you're 25?

    Moving the drinking age to 18 is a huge mistake!

  • Domenick's response
    Aug. 23, 2008 11:17 a.m.

    I don't call him uninformed because I disagree with him. I don't know that I do disagree with him. I wrote because I found his column lacking in real substance. Read his column again, and consider the arguments he presents. He questions the petitioners ("small, private, liberal arts schools - heavy on the liberal"). He assumes absurd consequences to follow ("school sponsored keg parties"). He presumes that Bassis is telling his students that underage drinking is OK (when Bassis was quoted on Tuesday saying "Westminster vigorously upholds the drinking laws of the state"). This is why I called his column specious. It sounds nice, but doesn't actually address the issue. I invite Mr Benson to write another column that actually puts forth information on the effects of drinking on young adults between the ages of 18 and 21.

  • Stewart
    Aug. 23, 2008 10:54 a.m.

    Domenick, since his position is weak, decides to attack Benson the writer, rather than the original argument. He presents nothing to support his opinion concerning the lowering of the drinking age.

  • Benson was right
    Aug. 23, 2008 8:47 a.m.

    The reason you think Benson is uninformed is that you disagree with him.

    I thought that he presented plenty of quality information to back up his argument that reducing the drinking age from 21 to 18 is a generally bad idea.

    Particularly, it is humorous that those hyping this grand idea say that they do it to encourage "responsible drinking."

    If those encouraging dropping the drinking age really think that it would encourage more "responsible drinking" then they need to have their heads examined.

    It won't encourage "responsible drinking" it will only encourage more drinking. It will make these people's lives easier, that is all. Many of these college presidents have "wet" campuses. Every time they throw a function with alcohol, they feel a tremendous liability. They are scared, because they know how much they encourage drinking.

    All it will take for them is a 18 year old student to kill a family on the way home from one of these parties. Oh, where did you get drunk? At the university presidents house? Huh? He/she didnt ask your age? Huh?

    You better bet that they want to reduce the drinking age. The reasons arent noble, though.