Survey: Parents Fed Up With ‘Party Schools’ and Politicians

August 20, 2008

  • August 20, 2008 at 1:41 am
    MRB says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I lived through this in the 70’s and every class had someone who had stayed back a couple of years – so you had high school sophomores buying alcohol for anyone who wanted it. It was an absolute mess and we’re lucky we survived. As a potential solution, under age solders should be allowed to drink while on base only.

  • August 20, 2008 at 1:43 am
    Spiffy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If people want to drink at 18, them up the driving age to 21. You can have one or the other — but not both.

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:00 am
    Scott says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    A minimum drinking age law doesn’t serve it’s intended purpose. The law itself tends to stigmatize alcohol which inturn can lead to abuse, particularly among minors.

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:11 am
    Randi says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Any college can be a “party school” if the kid wants to party. Parent’s should start asking themselves why their brats go berserk once they hit campus. Could it be poor up-bringing? I don’t want to hear the “peer pressure” argument. A majority of kids don’t have a problem. The fact is that many parents, and consequently their kids, lack good judgment, common sense, discipline, personal responsibility, and haven’t been held accountable for their behavior. Kids go to college for an education and to grow up. If they fail on the basic level of being unable to control their drinking they don’t belong in college. They should be home with mommy and daddy so they can be watched.

    They used to make 3.2% beer available to kids between 18-21. That seemed to be a reasonable compromise. It also helped “ease” the young adults into drinking responsibly.

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:13 am
    A drunk Ins Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You are correct in this assumption. If you remove the minimum drinking age, then the younger crowd will not find it as “adventurous” to break the law by drinking underage. The thrill is breaking the law, in addition to taking the person to a whole different world with no worries.

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:16 am
    Billy Bong says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Yes, you’re right. After all, look how the “War on Drugs” has so successfully ended the use of drugs! Of course, some might suggest that the reason for the war on drugs is to allow “law enforcement” to more easily seize property and either keep it themselves or sell it for cash-that they keep. I however would not make that claim-only the most realistic-oops! I mean cynical-would.

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:17 am
    Blame Game says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It is easy to blame parents and even colleges for an age-old issue. When I was in college–and it is the same today–any underaged person with a few dollars could purchase alcohol by getting a wino to do the buying in exchange for a couple of dollars or a cheap bottle of liquor. If teens have to hide their drinking, it only encourages them to drive to locations away from parents/school with their wino-purchased bottles, thus increasing the risk of traffic accidents.

    Does the illegality of certain drugs stop teens from using them?

    Does anyone really think that parents, as well as schools, don’t educate on these issues?

    If the drinking age is 18, then there is more room to work with teens to control the drinking and address problems with it, rather than to deny that it is going to occur.

    Did Prohibition work? No, and no amount of legislation is going to work on this issue.

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:17 am
    Hunter Thompson says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This is terrible! Don’t people know the main reason for going to college is to drink non-stop for four years!

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:23 am
    SWFL Mark says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Yea, I agree. Why not allow people to smoke pot, quit school before age 16, and screw animals. The Gov’t shouldn’t try to legislate anything should they. We’re all responsible and know what to do. Even when we’ve had a little too much to drink. Or why not lower the drinking age to 14. Your reasoning is ridiculous.

  • August 20, 2008 at 2:28 am
    Dawn says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    ITA

    I grew up when age was 21 in Va, 18 in DC. I do admit that we were very lucky we got home some nights. I started drinking around 14, got a fake ID at 17, went to FSU- (top ten party school)- and still managed to avoid DUI or any alcohol related injuries. My parents were adamant about me calling for a ride home for myself and any of my friends if we’d been drinking. They picked us up and took us home and for that, I’m grateful.

    I did, however, watch a lot of my friends and college freshman whose parents had been ‘100% NO ALCOHOL’ binge drinking until they flunked out of school.

    And the 21 age makes no difference in college. Alcohol is easy to get in any dorm, frat or sorority house, or party.

    Does anyone bother to study the NUMBER of alcohol related deaths or injuries that have nothing to do with driving? I might not have been paying much attention back then, but there seems to be a whole lot more of them now. There is nothing to do for under 21 drinkers to do these days except sit around and consume. Alcohol becomes the center of the evening. We went out- we danced, ate, whatever, drinking wasn’t the center of our evening.

    Or maybe it was the way we were brought up. I don’t know.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*