Welcome to Gaia! ::

[ B U R N :: the everything guild ]

Back to Guilds

The Everything Guild... For Everyone, Everywhere. Designed with you in mind, to help you make the very most out of your Gaia experience! 

Tags: charity, contests, reality, advice, gold 

Reply - Extended Discussion & Debate -
Do You Think The Drinking Age in the US Should Be Lowered? Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 [>] [»|]

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

DeathlyGreed

King Cat

12,725 Points
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Dressed Up 200
PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:14 pm


Actually, if it were up to me, things like alcohol, smoking, etc. would all be banned.
Personally, we have enough things you can buy to mess up your health, fast food being one of these things but atleast with fast food you won't get an irresponsible person consume it and then take someone else' life because they think they can handle driving or whatever.
Basically, things like that can be harmful to more than just the person who actually chooses to use it.

But hey, these are only my own thoughts.
PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:19 pm


It doesn't really matter. In my opinion, most young people will do anything regardless of what the law of the land is.

Banning would make it worse. We'd have bootlegging all over again.

Servant Reforged

Tipsy Consumer

12,450 Points
  • Mark Twain 100
  • Forum Junior 100
  • Partygoer 500

DeathlyGreed

King Cat

12,725 Points
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Dressed Up 200
PostPosted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:54 pm


The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.

I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.
PostPosted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:51 am


Deathgod of Legend
The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.

I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.


It is very difficult to ever gain respect through terror, as that respect will be artificial through your sense of power. Also, it is difficult to merely state that you'll kill anyone who breaks your rules if you do not have an all-seeing eye that detects any foul play. After all, the Prohibition is a good example of that, since the government can't be crawling everywhere arresting people who've had a single drop of hard liquor.

Furthermore, I'd like to quote you on your own contradiction:

"things like that can be harmful to more than just the person who actually chooses to use it."

"irresponsible person consume it [alcohol] and then take someone else' life because they think they can handle driving"

The first quote is to represent that you want to take anything that can affect multiple people from one person's actions. & in the second quote, you're giving an example of how harmful the effect of one person's actions can be. However, driving, with or without the influence of drugs, can be harmful to more than one person. In fact, it's just about the biggest danger on your life, and you deal with it just about every single day, I assume.

So you also want to ban driving, a means of transportation that the United States has depended on for over two centuries? And you'd kill anyone trying to drive or recreate another car after you take cars away?

ravenkitty776


King Tripp Veltryn

Original Lunatic

PostPosted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 3:07 pm


I would say yes, just as i would say yes to making marijuana legal. My point is this. In Europe the drinking age is lower and so is the cases of drunk driving accidents. The fact that it's 21 is supposed to be scientifically well, because at that age a person's brain is almost fully developed (Depending on Gender and race). But the fact is Teenagers in the US are still going to drink before the right age, so you might as well allow them so that they do it responsibly not.
"Aw dude Timmy's having a kegger at his place! I'm gonna get trashed then run his little sister over when I can't tell which side of the road i'm supposed to be on!"

I may be overreacting, but it's just my thought.
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm


faretheewell
If you are old enough to get drafted and die for your country, you are old enough to drink alcohol.

Just sayin'


Soldiers are allowed to drink on post at certain events. Regardless of age. I read up the this point. And I won't read anymore. I personally think it's stupid that people argue and bicker over it. Because the people that say what you just said aren't soldiers. Because if a Soldier gets caught in his barracks by his NCO drinking underage...his NCO is likely to join him. So don't worry about it.

Lord Redtail Rathan

Invisible Genius


Mads Hatter

Dapper Dabbler

10,350 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Full closet 200
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 5:13 pm


King Tripp Veltryn
I would say yes, just as i would say yes to making marijuana legal. My point is this. In Europe the drinking age is lower and so is the cases of drunk driving accidents.


Someone *I'm to lazy to look up specifically who* in this forum who lives in Europe pointed out they teach their kids how to drink responsibly. Like, small glass of wine with dinner. Here in the States, I see no sign of such an education. The most we teach kids is to not drive drunk, and even that doesn't seem to stick sometimes. Here, kids binge drink, which IS dangerous to their brain developement. That goes for everyone, not just teens. No, I'm not going to cite that because I don't remember where I saw it.
If there was a way to ensure it'd be done in moderation, I'd say do what you want. But because binge drinking is the popular thing, I think the 21 limit is the smartest option. But that's just my opinion. Don't like, get over it. That's all I have to say.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:29 pm


Deathgod of Legend
The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.
I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.

Are you serious? This idea is so ill founded and frankly absurd that before continuing I must ask if this is a statement made with any seriousness of if it is offered satirically.

Matasoga
Crew

Wailing Abomination

35,625 Points
  • Flatterer 200
  • Conventioneer 300
  • Alchemy Level 10 100

DeathlyGreed

King Cat

12,725 Points
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Dressed Up 200
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:31 pm


Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.
I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.

Are you serious? This idea is so ill founded and frankly absurd that before continuing I must ask if this is a statement made with any seriousness of if it is offered satirically.

It's an idea from someone who dosn't care for the human race anymore.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:37 pm


Deathgod of Legend
Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.
I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.

Are you serious? This idea is so ill founded and frankly absurd that before continuing I must ask if this is a statement made with any seriousness of if it is offered satirically.

It's an idea from someone who dosn't care for the human race anymore.

I completely understand the charms that you believe the devil-may-care misanthrope to possess, but posturing aside (and it is posturing: no real misanthrope joins a guild to engage in heated discussion with... People) let's consider this.
You are encouraging use of the death penalty to deal with anyone who imbibes or sells alcohol. In so many words, you acknowledge this as blatant and flagrant tyranny.
I question the wisdom of giving state government the right to decide who lives and who dies in cases of murder, but let's put aside the question of humanity and mortality. What about responsibility and cause & effect. Do you really think that you'd be ruling that way for more than (my longest estimate) a few months before you were dealt with?

Matasoga
Crew

Wailing Abomination

35,625 Points
  • Flatterer 200
  • Conventioneer 300
  • Alchemy Level 10 100

DeathlyGreed

King Cat

12,725 Points
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Dressed Up 200
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:43 pm


Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.
I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.

Are you serious? This idea is so ill founded and frankly absurd that before continuing I must ask if this is a statement made with any seriousness of if it is offered satirically.

It's an idea from someone who dosn't care for the human race anymore.

I completely understand the charms that you believe the devil-may-care misanthrope to possess, but posturing aside (and it is posturing: no real misanthrope joins a guild to engage in heated discussion with... People) let's consider this.
You are encouraging use of the death penalty to deal with anyone who imbibes or sells alcohol. In so many words, you acknowledge this as blatant and flagrant tyranny.
I question the wisdom of giving state government the right to decide who lives and who dies in cases of murder, but let's put aside the question of humanity and mortality. What about responsibility and cause & effect. Do you really think that you'd be ruling that way for more than (my longest estimate) a few months before you were dealt with?

You make everything sound too complicated.
The only reason why that wouldn't work is because people naturally don't like to follow rules and will fight against if possible the only real way to stop it would be to end the person altogether.
But because of this method, a coup d'état would be imminent.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:19 pm


Deathgod of Legend
Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.
I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.

Are you serious? This idea is so ill founded and frankly absurd that before continuing I must ask if this is a statement made with any seriousness of if it is offered satirically.

It's an idea from someone who dosn't care for the human race anymore.

I completely understand the charms that you believe the devil-may-care misanthrope to possess, but posturing aside (and it is posturing: no real misanthrope joins a guild to engage in heated discussion with... People) let's consider this.
You are encouraging use of the death penalty to deal with anyone who imbibes or sells alcohol. In so many words, you acknowledge this as blatant and flagrant tyranny.
I question the wisdom of giving state government the right to decide who lives and who dies in cases of murder, but let's put aside the question of humanity and mortality. What about responsibility and cause & effect. Do you really think that you'd be ruling that way for more than (my longest estimate) a few months before you were dealt with?

You make everything sound too complicated.
The only reason why that wouldn't work is because people naturally don't like to follow rules and will fight against if possible the only real way to stop it would be to end the person altogether.
But because of this method, a coup d'état would be imminent.

I don't make anything more or less complicated. I just point out how things are.
But yes, that is my point, exactly. If not a coup, then an assassination. Point being, such a leader would be quite dead in short order... Though that's far from the only thing that makes this a terrible idea.

Matasoga
Crew

Wailing Abomination

35,625 Points
  • Flatterer 200
  • Conventioneer 300
  • Alchemy Level 10 100

DeathlyGreed

King Cat

12,725 Points
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Dressed Up 200
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:26 pm


Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
Matasoga
Deathgod of Legend
The only difference is that I would kill if my rules were broken.
I'd rule through terror and through terror I'd gain respect.

Are you serious? This idea is so ill founded and frankly absurd that before continuing I must ask if this is a statement made with any seriousness of if it is offered satirically.

It's an idea from someone who dosn't care for the human race anymore.

I completely understand the charms that you believe the devil-may-care misanthrope to possess, but posturing aside (and it is posturing: no real misanthrope joins a guild to engage in heated discussion with... People) let's consider this.
You are encouraging use of the death penalty to deal with anyone who imbibes or sells alcohol. In so many words, you acknowledge this as blatant and flagrant tyranny.
I question the wisdom of giving state government the right to decide who lives and who dies in cases of murder, but let's put aside the question of humanity and mortality. What about responsibility and cause & effect. Do you really think that you'd be ruling that way for more than (my longest estimate) a few months before you were dealt with?

You make everything sound too complicated.
The only reason why that wouldn't work is because people naturally don't like to follow rules and will fight against if possible the only real way to stop it would be to end the person altogether.
But because of this method, a coup d'état would be imminent.

I don't make anything more or less complicated. I just point out how things are.
But yes, that is my point, exactly. If not a coup, then an assassination. Point being, such a leader would be quite dead in short order... Though that's far from the only thing that makes this a terrible idea.

Assassination is out of question, if I were to take over in such a way, I would only have the most loyal be by my side, this said, if I were to die, who's to say someone worse won't fill my place?
It's not a good idea to do things in this way, but the world isn't much better now.
If it's not the government being brutal it's the people under it.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:35 pm


i think thatthat bars should have a breathilizer test before you leave whether you had anything to drink or not, that anyone can see. and at parties theres bound to be someone who wont drink (myself would be that person as i would most likely be one of the most responsible) and stand at the door if someone sounded/looked/smelled too drunk to drive trying to leave wouldn't let them out >.>

Banshee Cupcake

Magical Wife

20,790 Points
  • Magical Girl 50
  • V-Day 2011 Event 100
  • Married 100

Matasoga
Crew

Wailing Abomination

35,625 Points
  • Flatterer 200
  • Conventioneer 300
  • Alchemy Level 10 100
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:38 pm


Deathgod of Legend
Assassination is out of question, if I were to take over in such a way, I would only have the most loyal be by my side, this said, if I were to die, who's to say someone worse won't fill my place?
It's not a good idea to do things in this way, but the world isn't much better now.
If it's not the government being brutal it's the people under it.

There's more to be said, but it is especially unseemly for a crew member to derail a topic.

I will say on the thought of topic, that I really cannot say anything in support of the ages that our country has chosen. A boy or girl is trusted to guide around a few tons of steel at speeds up to 60 miles per hour for two full years before some states allow them to decide who they want to take to bed. It is absolutely baffling.
As for drinking, though, I have little to say against the age limit in regard to alcohol. I took my first drink about a week before my 21st birthday and can definitely say that I didn't need it significantly sooner.
Reply
- Extended Discussion & Debate -

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 [>] [»|]
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum