I'm almost 21, how strict is Vegas?

[kurtcobain]

Goin to vegas for the first time, and, unfortunately, I'll be 6 months shy of 21. I've heard they're not too strict with IDs, and I have a few older friends' IDs who look enough like me. I've been told its not too big a deal, but that I should have an older friend cash out for me just in case.

Here's my question: I really want to play some bigger tournaments, especially the Bellagio $500. How do you register/get chips/get paid (if you finish ITM) in touraments? Do they ask for identification when you register? If you place, do they give you a little ticket that you can bring to a cashier, or do you have to go with them somewhere and show identification and all that jazz. (By showing ID i dont mean proving you're over 21, I mean proving that you're the person who registered for the tournament.)

So, my friend Bob is 21. Do I have him, register, get the chips, then hand them to me, and then if i place have him get the cash? Or are there few enough ID checks that I'd be better off just using his ID.

I'm assuming they don't have ID scanners, so maybe I'd be best off with a fake ID with my real name and picture?

Also, on a fairly unrelated subject, where are the softest NL cash games (2/4 or 5/10 or so)?

[kurtcobain]

How rude of me...I forgot to thank you all in advance for your advice, for sharing the wisdom a 20 year old, such as myself, lacks.

[Dynasty]

Playing in fairly big tournaments is probably impossible. I've seen the Mirage check, and apparently photocopy, each final table player's photo ID.

[Your Mom]

crazy that you are allowed to die for your country, but not allowed to gamble or drink inside of it.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
crazy that you are allowed to die for your country, but not allowed to gamble or drink inside of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

crazy that you are trying to connect two completely unrelated things in attempt to logically attack the gambling/drinking laws, nice fallacy.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing in fairly big tournaments is probably impossible. I've seen the Mirage check, and apparently photocopy, each final table player's photo ID.

[/ QUOTE ]

didn't you see that full house episode where the family was in vegas, and DJ and Stephanie hit a slots jackpot only to realize they couldn't win and they were all sad, 'nuff said.

ok, a little more: yeah, you would basically be stupid to enter any big tourney, as walking out of the casino with $10,000+ would be certain to raise a few eyebrows about your age,

i'm guessing you are going to play the big buy in NL games that you were asking about in another thread, anyways regardless of what anyways tells you, my advice: wait 6 months, a bunch of my poker playing friends are planning on going to vegas over winter break this year, and that would make me about 7 1/2 months too young and i have no problem just waiting till it is legal, btw, if you are underage and are caught drinking, have fun with that MIP you will most certainly get, just don't risk it, i've heard they have the right to take your chips too, as you are too young to have "bought chips" from the cage?

[fsuplayer]

I was in vegas for five days in march and I only got ID'd twice, both times were at the Blackjack tables at the venitien (sp.). The rest of the time at the poker tables and strip clubs, I didnt get ID'd (although i was 21 at the time).

I doubt you'll have much luck with the tourney, but the cash games shouldnt be much of a prob. If you are concerned about it, just have a friend cash you out.

good luck

fsuplayer

btw when are you going, I will be there from july 31st for four days.

[Beerfund]

the first time i played in vegas i was 18,i had a really good fake i.d. and was playing 10-20 at the mirage. i didnt have any problems with the poker room guys but when i ordered a drink from the cocktail waitress she checked my id again "just to be sure" and quickly realised it was fake and called security. they threw me out AND kept the +$2000 i had on the table /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[Justin A]

I am 20, and I don't have a fake ID anymore. /images/graemlins/frown.gif However, that didn't stop me from going to Vegas last weekend, and I was never carded. Although I was careful to avoid situations where I might be carded. It also helped that my 23 year old fiance was with me, because a couple looks less suspect than a group of friends.

Stay away from the big tournaments. The risk is too great. If you do well and you're caught, you'll probably be in trouble with the police, and that's not the kind of trouble you want. If you try a fake ID with a casino just trying to play a cash game, the worst they'll do is probably take the ID and kick you out.

If you play in a cash game, get the chips yourself, and if they're cashed out in the poker room, cash them out yourself. If they see you passing chips it gives them all the more reason to be suspect of you. The most important thing is to act confident and they won't have a second thought about your ID.

good luck,
Justin A

[Justin A]

You must have looked really young.

Justin A

[bogey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
crazy that you are allowed to die for your country, but not allowed to gamble or drink inside of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

crazy that you are trying to connect two completely unrelated things in attempt to logically attack the gambling/drinking laws, nice fallacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

how exactly are they unrelated? they both deal with laws of our country and the age at which the government deems a person old enough to do certain things

[Justin A]

I'm being nitty now, but I believe that when you're in the military they let you drink at the age of 18.

Justin A

[kurtcobain]

FSU- I'll be there August 17 to 24, after Phish's coventry. (I love playing poker as a job...how else would I be able to take two weeks off and still get paid...)

Well, thanks for the tournament advice...I'll definitely stay away from those. I'm 6'2" and look like I'm about 22 and 7 months, and since I'll almost certainly be drunk at all times, there shouldnt be any confidence issues. Unless the paranoid guy writes the greatest post ever about waiting till I'm 21 (so that my honeymoon is all the more special) I'll just stick with 2/5 NL...

Do they take your chips if you pass out at the table?

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I saw some young looking fellers at The Mirage and Excalibur at the Small Stakes tables, and never saw anyone carded. Avoid big tourneys and big stakes until you are 21, and you'll have no problem.

[kurtcobain]

At the big casinos in Vegas, can't you just walk out with your chips? Aren't they basically currency around town? If you've ever read "Bringing down the house" about the MIT blackjack team, they just carry around chips in duffle bags they keep in their hotel rooms.

Unless poker chips are different, I'll be taking the chips back to my hotel room after every day anyway instead of buying in every day, so on the last day I'll just have a friend cash em out.

I'm not worried about cocktail waitresses or dealers. I'm quite charming. In AC, I asked the dealer, Holly, if she'd ever slept with Phil Ivey, and, if so, was he very aggressive in position? Come to think of it, she didn't find it very amusing. I think I'll tone down the charm in Vegas...

[Rick Diesel]

I was in Vegas twice when I was under 21, and was never carded. However, I stayed strictly in the poker rooms. I think that the table games have a greater chance of carding you. I am 26 now, so it has been a while since I was under 21. I guess it also helps that I am 6'2" and weigh 230. Most people think I look older than I am.

[John Deere]

Re: the military and drinking, it is true that the legal age of alcohol consumption on army bases is 18. My friend's dad is a doctor in the army, and when we were underage, we would always head to the base to do our liquor shopping (no tax, either!). The federal government does not legislate the drinking age to 21 -- rather, back when Reagan was president, they bullied the states into changing their legal ages, with the threat of withholding federal highway funds if they did not. As it turns out, there are still some places where the laws differ (New Orleans, I believe.. and in Texas, a minor can drink at a bar if accompanied by a parent).

Likewise, the gambling age is not legislated by the federal government. It's legislated by the state or municipality.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

For me it was a lot easier to buy chips when I sat down and cash out when I got up. $300is a lot easier to carry back to my room in cash than in 2 racks of blue and a stack of red.

[young nut]

Re: Age
I still find it contradictory though. In this country, you are deemed a legal voting adult at age 18. Most people live on their own at 18, deal with bills and work at 18, or fully support themselves. Why is it so bad if they have a beer or throw around a few of their hard earned dollars at gambling?
I mean, you can buy a lottery ticket at the age of 18, and the odds of lottery tickets are alot worse than my BB/100 hands odds.

The way I look at it, if I can vote for my leaders in this country, than I should have all of the priveledges that every voter has.

On the topic of fake ID's in vegas: I have been to Vegas two times underage, and Reno about 4 times. All of those times I had a fake ID, but I was never carded in Vegas. I mainly played at the craps and blackjack tables, and I was drunk the whole time. I was carded in Reno though, and had no problems. But on a side not, I had a very good fake ID that had my real info on it and hologram and all that. So I wouldn't suggest showing an ID unless it is really good. To be on the safe side, I wouldn't drink if I were you. Just go play poker, if they give you guff about your ID, just leave. Hopefully they won't take your money.

[bogey]

do you mean everywhere or just overseas?

its definitely not everywhere, ie. just cause you have a military id and are 18 you cant go into a bar in the states

maybe if your overseas, they let you, i have no idea

i remember hearing on fox news or something though that right now the troops in iraq arent allowed to drink any alcohol though

[Beerfund]

[ QUOTE ]
Re: the military and drinking, it is true that the legal age of alcohol consumption on army bases is 18. My friend's dad is a doctor in the army, and when we were underage, we would always head to the base to do our liquor shopping (no tax, either!). The federal government does not legislate the drinking age to 21 -- rather, back when Reagan was president, they bullied the states into changing their legal ages, with the threat of withholding federal highway funds if they did not. As it turns out, there are still some places where the laws differ (New Orleans, I believe.. and in Texas, a minor can drink at a bar if accompanied by a parent).

Likewise, the gambling age is not legislated by the federal government. It's legislated by the state or municipality.

[/ QUOTE ]


wrong, i just did 4 years in the army and the legal age for drinking depends on where the post is. in germany its 18, korea 20, and all US posts except ft bliss its 21. (ft bliss is 18 bc its on the border of mexico and the army doesnt want soldiers going across the border to drink)

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
how exactly are they unrelated? they both deal with laws of our country and the age at which the government deems a person old enough to do certain things

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, how about this then, this is my belief:

when you are 16, i think you should be allowed to drink, because if the governments says that is the minimum age for driving a car, then i think the drinking age should be lowered to that.

it doesn't make any sense to connect these things, and your justification for them is "well on this other issue", just because its "dying in a war" you believe it is correct, give me a break.

or, how about this, the government makes businesses pay sales tax, so if i open a business when i am 9 years old, i should be able to drink.

i could keep going.

[Justin A]

To tell you the truth, I don't know exactly what the rules are. I think it's along the lines of being on a military base and being allowed to drink. Maybe someone who has military experience can help correct my obvious ignorance of the subject.

Justin A

[bogey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
how exactly are they unrelated? they both deal with laws of our country and the age at which the government deems a person old enough to do certain things

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, how about this then, this is my belief:

when you are 16, i think you should be allowed to drink, because if the governments says that is the minimum age for driving a car, then i think the drinking age should be lowered to that.

it doesn't make any sense to connect these things, and your justification for them is "well on this other issue", just because its "dying in a war" you believe it is correct, give me a break.

or, how about this, the government makes businesses pay sales tax, so if i open a business when i am 9 years old, i should be able to drink.

i could keep going.


[/ QUOTE ]

I get your what your saying about just because the government says your old enough to do one thing doesnt necessarily mean you should be old enough to do something else. But you can't just say that you can't draw any logical conclusions between these types of laws.

I think the laws about military service and drinking are ironic due to what the laws implicitly state. Basically, that at 18 you are responsible enough to kill other human beings and be killed to protect your country and the freedoms it represents BUT you are not old enough to consume alcohol.

I don't see anything ironic about being able to drive at 16, but not drink until 21 because it is logical to me that someone can be responsible enough to drive a car but not drink at 16. (this can be disputed) If someone wanted to make an argument about being able to drink at 16 due to this law, that is perfectly valid, but they would need to prove that driving a car requires more or the same amount of responsibility as consuming alcohol. I do view it as ironic that you can be responsible enough to kill someone else and/or give your life for your country, but not responsible enough to consume alcohol in the eyes of the law.

If you don't see the irony or think there isnt any there, then fine. But it is perfectly logical to base arguments on the premise that if you are old enough to do one thing then it follows that you should be old enough to do this other thing. Whether or not you accept the argument or not is another matter entirely.

[renodoc]

But 25 years ago I played Blackjack on the strip at the ripe age of 14. Won $37. Dealer finally asked my age when I was too naive to tip her properly. Scurried off and gave the chips to my folks who cashed em for me. LOL.

[Cubswin]

THE CORRECT ANSWER: The drinking and gambling age should be moved down to 18 while the driving age should be moved up to 18. Of course, this makes sense so it would never happen.

[Cubswin]

I use to ride my bike to arlington park to play the ponies... i think i had to be about 14-15 too but we used the automated tellers so it really wasnt a big deal.

[Dav123]

I'm 25 and I swear Charlene at Bellagio cards me everytime she directs me to my seat.

[EjnarPik]

With freedom comes responsabilety, but isn't it fair that, with responsabilety, freedom should come too?

Ejnar Pik, Southern-Docks.

[RydenStoompala]

Why not wait six months, play legally and avoid getting on anyone's [censored] list? Dont be in such a hurry to get older. Spend your waiting time doing useful, age-friendly things like sleeping with girls 47 times per week.

I'm not so sure about the debate on lowering the gambling age in certain jurisdictions. One look at the zombies lined up in the slots area and I'm thinking "raise it."

[Wayne]

[ QUOTE ]

Basically, that at 18 you are responsible enough to kill other human beings and be killed to protect your country and the freedoms it represents BUT you are not old enough to consume alcohol.


[/ QUOTE ]

How many 18 year olds have the right to kill other humans? Only those that have military training and are following orders of their commander and only in limited battlefield conditions. Anyone can drink and gamble at 21 without any supervision or training.

Apples and oranges...

[Your Mom]

It's silly for a country to allow you to pay the ultimate price of your life but not allow you all of the privleges inside the country. The two are related.

[Your Mom]

If a country can mandate you to go to war, they should also recognize that you should be entitled to all the rights a citizen has.

[The Hammer]

Hey dude, here's a suggestion --- why not wait the 6 months until you're 21 and go then. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Sheesh.

[boedeker]

1. I get ID'd every trip I make to vegas, and I have the ability to grow a full beard no problem. They WILL ask.
2. If you use a fake ID you will not be allowed to play.
3. I would get a friend that looks like you and use theirs.
4. Have fun.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
If a country can mandate you to go to war, they should also recognize that you should be entitled to all the rights a citizen has.

[/ QUOTE ]

last time i checked military service is 100% voluntary.

anyways, the point is simple: just because the government does one thing, does not mean they should do another, all this "oh he can go kill someone" is just a stupid front for a bad argument, replace "war" with some other age limit thing and nobody gives a [censored].

age limits and laws are different for different reasons, should congress get together and rethink laws on the lines that "well he can kill someone but he can't drink, hmm i think he should be allowed to drink" that is retarded.

[bogey]

[ QUOTE ]

anyways, the point is simple: just because the government does one thing, does not mean they should do another, all this "oh he can go kill someone" is just a stupid front for a bad argument, replace "war" with some other age limit thing and nobody gives a [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is it a bad argument? You just keep saying its a bad argument or "retarded", but theres really nothing of substance to what you've said. I am fine with replacing war with any age limit law provided you can find a common ground between the two. In the war and drinking argument, the common ground is how responsible you are and at what age.

[ QUOTE ]

age limits and laws are different for different reasons, should congress get together and rethink laws on the lines that "well he can kill someone but he can't drink, hmm i think he should be allowed to drink" that is retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe they should. There is absolutely nothing retarded about that.

Also, I really dont care about at what age people are able to drink or want to have that argument. But, its really annoying to see you just dismiss people's arguments as bad or retarded on some higher ground when they are making perfectly logical inferences.

[young nut]

Well what about our court systems? Our courts allow a person to be charged as an adult, sometimes as young as 13 years old. Now that seems a little fishy. Our courts are claiming that at 13 years old, a person has enough responsability that he/she has to act like an adult. They are basically contradicting themselves.

Just imagine this scenario in a courtroom:
2 cases are being heard today in the courtroom . The first is a 15 year old who stole a car. The court deems that at the age of 15 he is old enough to act like an adult, therefor he should be tried and punished as an adult.

The second case is a 20 year old college student. He was caught drunk somewhere and charged with minor possesion. In his case, the courts somehow thought that he wasn't responsible enough for his actions, so he should be treated as a minor?

Just look over this and ask yourself if it makes sense.

[sucka]

I'm being nitty now, but I believe that when you're in the military they let you drink at the age of 18.

That depends on where you are stationed. When I was in SoCal (at Mirimar NAS in San Diego) they let anyone with a green ID card (active-duty) drink on base (beer only). This was mainly to keep us out of Tijuana.

Every other base that I was on, which I lost count, including Air Force bases in Panama - you had to be of 'legal age' to drink in the E-clubs on base and for the most part it was strictly enforced, particularly on the bases where people attend their first training school after boot camp.

[Jurollo]

Just a quick thought...
The drinking age should NEVER be moved down from 21, and the gambling age isn't really 21, it is 18 but casinos comp alcohol so almost all states have made the legal casino age 21. But kids already drink at the ages of 15 or 16, lowering the drinking age to 18 would only start kids drinking earlier and also it is a good idea to let kids have their license for a few years before being able to drink legally as any hinderance to cause a disconnect between drinking and driving is a VERY good thing.

[Cubswin]

Jurollo

I think that your argument is a bit of a slippery slope. Lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18 does not necessarily mean that kids under the age of majority will drink at a younger and younger age. But... even if more kids started drinking at a younger age i dont think that that this is necessaily a bad thing. Look at France, Spain, Germany and Italy. They all have very laxed drinking laws but because responcible drinking is taught at a young age they do not have high rates of alcohol abuse in younger kids or in the adult population. These countries also have lower per capita rates of drunk drinking accidents. When you set the drinking age so high this just acts to encourage kids to want to drink more... kids want to be "grown-up" afterall. Instead of being open about their drinking, kids will find the need to hide the fact that they drink and when they do drink they will more often binge drink. So when kids go away to college all they know about drinking is how to binge drink and get really drunk. My parents were very liberal about alcohol and i learned about drinking early in life... i barely touch the stuff nowadays and when i do i am smart about it. I credit this to my early exposure to the stuff.

The fact is that there should universality in laws. It makes no sense to have one law say your responcible for your actions when your 13, another say your responcible at 18 and yet another when your 21. A 16 year old shouldnt be given the keys to a car because he is not fully responcible for his/her actions should he get in an accident and injure someone. An 18 year old is responcible for his own actions so s/he should be allow to have an alcoholic beverage... and a 13 yr olds should not be tried as an adult...this is just plan silly.

I understand why you might think that staggering the age of drinking and driving may be a good thing but evidence simply does not support that this lowers rates of drunking driving. The US has these ages set some 5 years apart but yet continues to have one of the highest rates of drunk driving fatalities.

regards
cubs

[oddjob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Basically, that at 18 you are responsible enough to kill other human beings and be killed to protect your country and the freedoms it represents BUT you are not old enough to consume alcohol.


[/ QUOTE ]

How many 18 year olds have the right to kill other humans? Only those that have military training and are following orders of their commander and only in limited battlefield conditions. Anyone can drink and gamble at 21 without any supervision or training.

Apples and oranges...

[/ QUOTE ]

that's funny, i don't remember any drinking or gambling training when i turned 21. no wonder i'm so bad at both.

[oddjob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If a country can mandate you to go to war, they should also recognize that you should be entitled to all the rights a citizen has.

[/ QUOTE ]

last time i checked military service is 100% voluntary.

anyways, the point is simple: just because the government does one thing, does not mean they should do another, all this "oh he can go kill someone" is just a stupid front for a bad argument, replace "war" with some other age limit thing and nobody gives a [censored].

age limits and laws are different for different reasons, should congress get together and rethink laws on the lines that "well he can kill someone but he can't drink, hmm i think he should be allowed to drink" that is retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]


you have heard of a draft right? just because it hasn't happened in a lot of our adult llifetimes, is not to say it won't happen. when our government, all of a sudden realizes that they are willing to sacrifice their young adults, for some reason or another. it's not voluntary. i believe it's usually adults that are between 18 and 25. so althought the military is 100% voluntary at the moment, who's to say our governement tomorrow, won't realize that there are still cultures out there that haven't been tainted by the american way of thinking, which would coincidently be inforced by the same people who do not reap the full benefits of these freedoms.

but, you're right, the gov't should just arbitrarily assign age limits to things. you can drink at 21, but you have to wait till you're 27 to have a baby, because, really how many people under 27 are mentally responsible to have a kid? you shouldn't be able to buy a house till you're say, 35. perhaps you have some suggestions of your own, since you feel that age restrictions have nothing to do with each other. perhaps, you can't go into online chat rooms, if you're over 21, because you're not longer responsible enough to chat with young kids in a non sexual manner?

so you can replace the stupid war thing with something else, and it still makes sense to me. if you're going to classify and 18 year old as an adult, then it should be the whole way.

it's not a matter of what you're doing. it's a definition. if you're deemed as an ADULT at 18, then your rights, priviledges and responsiblity as an adults should be complete. which includes, military services, drinking alcohol, or being tried as an adult for crimes you commit.

the driving age argument you bring up is completely ridiculous. it is not a matter of being an adult. it's a matter of being responsible to drive a car.

but i don't think anyone will ever convince someone like you that the gov't might be wrong. you're probably the same guy who votes for censorship.

[jmark]

[ QUOTE ]
At the big casinos in Vegas, can't you just walk out with your chips? Aren't they basically currency around town?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes they are just like currency. When I lived there I would just keep a few racks in my trunk and use them to buy groceries and stuff. I don't know why, but it was always funny watching the checker count down your stacks, and then after the bagging guy hands you your groceries he claps his hands and waves them at the camera to show he didn't palm your milk.

It is kind of annoying though because the ticket machine for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Subway has trouble with accepting some chips from downtown.

[jmark]

PS When I bought in at the $1-3 at Excalibur they carded me and my girlfriend. I couldn't believe it, it was the 1st time I've been carded gambling in like 7 years. I think women like to card much more than men.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]

I understand why you might think that staggering the age of drinking and driving may be a good thing but evidence simply does not support that this lowers rates of drunking driving. The US has these ages set some 5 years apart but yet continues to have one of the highest rates of drunk driving fatalities.

regards
cubs

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have any sources for these claims or are you making them up? I spent five minutes searching on Google and it seems the evidence does support keeping the drinking age at 21. Here are some links:

www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/drving.htm (http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/drving.htm)

www.cspinet.org/booze/mlpatalk.htm (http://www.cspinet.org/booze/mlpatalk.htm)

www.alcoholpolicysolutions.net/sb_addressing.htm (http://www.alcoholpolicysolutions.net/sb_addressing.htm)

Of course these could all be junk science and propaganda, but I am inclinded to think the center for disease control is not on a moral crusade.

As far as whether the US or other countries has higher drunk driving rates, that is an open question according to NHTSA. It really doesn't matter though, the issue is whether drunk driving is lower when the drinking age is raised to 21 in the USA. What happens in other countries is irrelavent.

NHTSA Study (http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/research/AlcoholCountries/executive_summary.htm#3%20results)



Paul

[Cubswin]

[ QUOTE ]
I spent five minutes searching on Google and it seems the evidence does support keeping the drinking age at 21

[/ QUOTE ]

While the pages you referenced give arguments for keeping the drinking age at 21, I dont think they give evidence that suports this thesis. The major argument seems to revolve around this statistic:

[ QUOTE ]
Age-21 has resulted in decreases, not increases in youth drinking, an outcome inconsistent with an increased allure of alcohol. In 1983, one year before the National Minimum Purchase Age Act was passed, 88% of high school seniors reported any alcohol use in the past year and 41% reported binge drinking. By 1997, alcohol use by seniors had dropped to 75% and the percentage of binge drinkers had fallen to 31%

[/ QUOTE ]

Now, this quote seems to be a powerful argument in favor of maintaining the drinking age at 21 but as a social scientist i know the logic here is not sound. Just because binge drinking and drinking in general have decreased since the age was raised to 21 does not mean that this change in law caused this outcome. We have to look and the array of other variables which might have influenced this decline in the number of drinking youths. For instance, tougher penalties for underage use and better education on alcohol issues could have had an effect on lowering drinking rates in high school seniors. We also need to compare and contrast youth drinking trends to the drinking trends of the adult population during the same time period before we draw any conclusion about the influence of Age-21. I think you will find that drinking rates of both those of the majority age and those under this age decreased over this time period which would weaken the argument that the Age-21 initiative produced these lower rates of alcohol use in those under the drinking age.

If anything, i think the evidence of the links you provided supports that tougher laws and penalties have had the most profound impact on the decrease of drunken driving incidence. While alcohol use reported by seniors decreased from 88 to 75% during the last 20 years "alcohol-related fatal crash rates have decreased by 60 percent for drivers ages 16 to 17 years and 55 percent for drivers ages 18 to 20 years". With a 13% decrease in alcohol use among high school senoirs we would expect to see a similiar drop in fatal crash rates for this age group but actually fatal crashes decreased an amazing 60%. I think this should lead us to the conclusion that tougher penalties and better education and awareness have had the most profound impact on decreasing the number of fatal accidents among 16-20 year olds. Teens are still drinking at high rates today but they are now drunk driving less then they use to.

To sum up, your arguement that "It really doesn't matter though, the issue is whether drunk driving is lower when the drinking age is raised to 21 in the USA" is really not sound because you fail to address other variables that have had an influence on the lower rates of drunk driving. You have committed the all too common "false cause" fallacy.

regards
cubswin