Have you heard the latest?
There’s a list of college presidents who want the drinking age to be lowered to 18. It’s their view that the whole reason why young people are abusing alcohol is because it is illegal, and therefore the “forbidden fruit” theory applies: they just want what they can’t have. They believe that lowering the drinking age will help remedy this situation.
I just gotta ask. Are they drunk?
Plenty of things are desirable because one can’t have them, but this isn’t enough of a reason to invite the whole heap of trouble that legalizing alcohol for teenagers is likely to bring. Of course, I wasn’t around in the days of Prohibition, but there’s no way that the problems with enforcing the no-alcohol law were greater than the problems caused by people abusing the drug in the decades after the law was repealed. DUI deaths and injuries, binge drinking, domestic violence. Serious subjects were talkin’ about here.
So serious that this idea is almost laughable.
I think the poor college folks just don’t want to deal with the trouble that illegal drinking brings. Sounds as though they’d rather just let it all be legal than get tough on sororities and fraternities and kick kids out of universities for engaging in excessive party behavior.
Let’s see, where else can we apply this type of reasoning? Lots of people speed. Should we keep raising the speed limit to keep up with them? Kids skip school because it’s against the law to do so. Just let ’em be. Why have truancy laws? Will making stealing something legal keep people from taking things that don’t belong to them? I doubt it.
The whole idea is enough to drive a girl to drink.