Num Lock wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:20:11 -0400, Radioguy
> <radioguy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>>YvonneinSonoma wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I think at one time it was 18 for beer and wine but I'm pretty sure
it's
>>>21 for everyone. IIRC didn't someone, maybe Dillon, have an actual
21st
>>>birthday?
>>>
>>
>>The drinking age used to be 18 in many states. Some states used to have
>>"baby beer" or 3.2 beer. There was a brief time that the drinking age
>>was 18 in many states, around 1982-85. Those in border states had some
>>real problems. NY drinking age was 18. In neighboring Connecticut, the
>>drinking was was 21. The roads between the states became very bloody
>>every weekend. Like the moon****ners down south, they used the back
>>roads, most of which were narrow, winding and rarely lit. It was a rare
>>weekend when some 18 to 20 year old wasn't killed via an alcohol related
>>motor vehicle accidents. With fake IDs everywhere and an 18 yr old at
>>the wheel, coupled with a packed vehicle of high school compadres,
>>problems ensued.
>>
>>The accident rate soared. On July 17, 1984, the Congress passed a law,
>>which included the withholding funds form any state that did not comply
>>with the minimum drinking age of 21. These funds were from the NHTSA,
>>thus no funds for road construction. The states weren't about to turn
>>down Federal money, so a uniform age of 21 was adopted.
>>
>>Interesting to note, military personnel could drink at 18, once upon a
>>time. Therefore it became possible for service personnel to drink in
>>the states, as military bases are Federal property, thus didn't fall
>>under any state regs. If personnel went off the base, they were subject
>>to the state's regs. 21 has been the age many years. thus no longer an
>>issue.
>>
>>Sticklers may note, that were a few limited exceptions, such as taking
>>wine at communion, ceremonies on Indian Reservations, or with a parent
>>in a private home and such.
>
>
> Wow - you really did your homework. I love the way the federal
> government constantly circumvents the 10th Amendment not by making an
> unconstitutional law, but threatening to withhold highway money.
That's quite a stretch to look at it that way.
Vox
|
