WTF happened to personal responsibility?

[MrTrik]

Rant=on

Loc: Minnesota

19 year old college student goes to a frat party. Drinks too much. Discovered floating in a river 5 days later. No foul play is suspected.

Now we have 7 frat boys up on multiple charges. One charge is a felony. They involve providing/selling alcohol to a minor.

The party throwers could have their lives ruined for throwing frat party.

I don't get it. Now we want frat boys to police the population because it's too damn stupid to make correct decisions. This is BS.

Rant=off.

[splashpot]

Dude, they broke the law. What about taking responsibility for that? The charges are for selling liquor to a minor, not murder.

[dibbs]

Eh, if the kid was of age I may think the line was blurry, but if they sold booze to a minor they screwed themselves and were too stupid to make a correct decision.

Losing some frat boys to the correctional system isn't exactly a huge hit to society, either.

[DMBFan23]

so the frat brothers made the correct decision not to cut him off?

besides when guys get that drunk they end up chasing off the impressionable freshman girls, so they should have handled the situation before it got to that. or maybe that's what they did...

[PsYcHo-ScHnAuZeR]

Next time they should be sure to hide the body better.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
but if they sold booze to a minor they screwed themselves and were too stupid to make a correct decision.


[/ QUOTE ]

so you never went to a house party underaged in your entire life? never threw a house party which inevitably attracts minors?

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]


so you never went to a house party underaged in your entire life? never threw a house party which inevitably attracts minors?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know it.. Underage drinking is the best kind of drinking.

[splashpot]

[ QUOTE ]
so you never went to a house party underaged in your entire life? never threw a house party which inevitably attracts minors?

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not the point. The OP is saying that the kid who died should be personally responsible for his own actions. But what about the actions of the frat kids, they shouldn't be responsible for their actions? They broke the law, were caught, and now have to suffer the consequences. If I went to a frat party underage and was caught, I'd have to take responsibility.

[SL__72]

Its a ridiculous law in the first place and if it didn't exist things like this would occur much less often/not at all. Anything more then the standard $500 providing alcohol to minors fine that a liquer store or bar would be fined is going too far.

[Los Feliz Slim]

I see both sides of this issue, having been an officer of a fraternity in college. It should be noted that over 10 years ago, we had "social host liability" beaten into our heads over and over and over again. Right or wrong, the law (in some states at least) says that when you host a party you have some responsibility for what goes on when it comes to drinking. The point is, I have no doubt that somebody at some point completely ignored the instruction they were given to avoid this type of situation.

[JackWilson]

I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

But that aside - you have to respect the law. There's no getting around it.

[Sightless]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto

what after 21 you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol

[Dave G.]

[ QUOTE ]
so you never went to a house party underaged in your entire life? never threw a house party which inevitably attracts minors?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure the majority of people here have done this, but when the [censored] hits the fan, the frat boys can't really blame anyone else. It's a risk you take. I think that a lot of people don't really object to the idea of underage drinking as long as it doesn't affect them, but that's a moral argument. The law is quite clear and with anything, if you get caught, then the consequences are yours to face.

I agree that underage drinking is the best drinking, anyway. I went to a party when I was 17 (legal age here is 18) and everyone except for one 22 year old was underage. He came out and said to us, "okay, as the only responsible adult here, it's my duty to step in and say something: get absolutely [censored] blotto". We thought he was cool as hell, and we had an awesome party.

[Peter666]

It's a stupid law and should be ignored.

You takes your chances, you pays your dues.

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
Next time they should be sure to hide the body better.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, that's what college is for - learning from your mistakes.

[astroglide]

they're going to kill that poor woman!

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto

what after 21 you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid. Argue for or against there being a line, not the specific line of 21. If you think there should be a drinking age then the obvious reply to any age that you set is "what after [age xxx] you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol[?]" If you don't think there should be a drinking age then give arguments against one, not an irrational one against age 21.

Why is the speed limit 55? It's not like at 56 we all of sudden all become unsafe drivers.

[TheBlueMonster]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but if they sold booze to a minor they screwed themselves and were too stupid to make a correct decision.


[/ QUOTE ]

so you never went to a house party underaged in your entire life? never threw a house party which inevitably attracts minors?

[/ QUOTE ]
yeah, I know I wouldn't be with my gf if it weren't for an "illegal" house party* but when someone dies like that frats are the easiest to blame.
Not defending them cause they're tools and pricks /images/graemlins/grin.gif but blaming them is the easiest choice.











*not really true

[dibbs]

[/ QUOTE ]
so you never went to a house party underaged in your entire life? never threw a house party which inevitably attracts minors?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I am an alcoholic virgin. This rant was about accepting "personal responsibility", the dispensers of alcohol to minors can dispense it all they want, but they should do so realizing that there is an outside chance something very bad will happen, in which case they will have to accept personal responsibility. If these kids get away with it, the line gets pushed back, and when do you place blame if say dozens of kids are dying from this? Sometimes people are used to set examples for laws which sucks, but it's a risk they took, and therefore must face personal responsibility.

[Namdrahsirhc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time they should be sure to hide the body better.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, that's what college is for - learning from your mistakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

NH

[tonypaladino]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto

what after 21 you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid. Argue for or against there being a line, not the specific line of 21. If you think there should be a drinking age then the obvious reply to any age that you set is "what after [age xxx] you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol[?]" If you don't think there should be a drinking age then give arguments against one, not an irrational one against age 21.

Why is the speed limit 55? It's not like at 56 we all of sudden all become unsafe drivers.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a good point, but it can be argued that the age should be lowered to 16 or 18 in order to be consistent with other developed country's drinking laws.

In my opinion there should be no legal age requirment for beer and wine, and we would see a reduction of binge drinking problems within a generation. Unfortunalty the protestant/puritan mentality that formed this country still exsists in much of the population.

[tdarko]

meh, one less pink polo and popped collar to worry about /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[HopeydaFish]

[ QUOTE ]
meh, one less pink polo and popped collar to worry about /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts exactly. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Now we have 7 frat boys up on multiple charges. One charge is a felony. They involve providing/selling alcohol to a minor.


[/ QUOTE ]

What are the other charges?

May be more to this story than we are reading.

b

[Mason Hellmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
they're going to kill that poor woman!

[/ QUOTE ]
SHE KIDNAPPED HERSELF

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]

That is a good point, but it can be argued that the age should be lowered to 16 or 18 in order to be consistent with other developed country's drinking laws.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should this be a factor?

[MrTrik]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now we have 7 frat boys up on multiple charges. One charge is a felony. They involve providing/selling alcohol to a minor.


[/ QUOTE ]

What are the other charges?

May be more to this story than we are reading.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

The charges are:

selling liquor to a minor resulting in death (Felony)
selling alcohol without a license
providing alcohol to a person younger than 21

Edit: removed link, requires registration

[JackWilson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto

what after 21 you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid. Argue for or against there being a line, not the specific line of 21. If you think there should be a drinking age then the obvious reply to any age that you set is "what after [age xxx] you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol[?]" If you don't think there should be a drinking age then give arguments against one, not an irrational one against age 21.

Why is the speed limit 55? It's not like at 56 we all of sudden all become unsafe drivers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know your reply wasn't aimed at me, but just to clarify - my issue is with it being 21. It's 18 just about everywhere else in the world. With it being 21, you absolutely KNOW there are gonna be a lot of 18-20y olds breaking the law because they feel justified in doing so. Seems silly. I'm not saying people wouldn't break the law if it was set at 18, but I think you get what I mean.

[threeonefour]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto

what after 21 you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid. Argue for or against there being a line, not the specific line of 21. If you think there should be a drinking age then the obvious reply to any age that you set is "what after [age xxx] you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol[?]" If you don't think there should be a drinking age then give arguments against one, not an irrational one against age 21.

Why is the speed limit 55? It's not like at 56 we all of sudden all become unsafe drivers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know your reply wasn't aimed at me, but just to clarify - my issue is with it being 21. It's 18 just about everywhere else in the world. With it being 21, you absolutely KNOW there are gonna be a lot of 18-20y olds breaking the law because they feel justified in doing so. Seems silly. I'm not saying people wouldn't break the law if it was set at 18, but I think you get what I mean.

[/ QUOTE ]


this often fall into the if you set it at 18 then 16 year olds will drink. well why not set it at 0 and just start actually punishing people who drive drunk or harm people while drunk.

i don't drink. but i obviously believe in responsibility. i don't care if everyone else gets trashed, it doesn't bother me as long as they don't hurt me.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto

what after 21 you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid. Argue for or against there being a line, not the specific line of 21. If you think there should be a drinking age then the obvious reply to any age that you set is "what after [age xxx] you magically become a resonable human being who can handle drinking alcohol[?]" If you don't think there should be a drinking age then give arguments against one, not an irrational one against age 21.

Why is the speed limit 55? It's not like at 56 we all of sudden all become unsafe drivers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know your reply wasn't aimed at me, but just to clarify - my issue is with it being 21. It's 18 just about everywhere else in the world. With it being 21, you absolutely KNOW there are gonna be a lot of 18-20y olds breaking the law because they feel justified in doing so. Seems silly. I'm not saying people wouldn't break the law if it was set at 18, but I think you get what I mean.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you understand. I'm not arguing for the age of 21; I'm arguing against the argument the person that I replied to gave. There are obvious problems with your argument too.

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
selling liquor to a minor resulting in death (Felony)

[/ QUOTE ]

This law is results oriented.

[JackWilson]

No, I understood that your reply was to the other poster. I'm not presenting an argument against it being 21 either, all I'm saying is that it seems silly to me to have it at 21. I'm not backing that up with facts or evidence, it's just an opinion.

[SL__72]

Good point.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
No, I understood that your reply was to the other poster. I'm not presenting an argument against it being 21 either, all I'm saying is that it seems silly to me to have it at 21. I'm not backing that up with facts or evidence, it's just an opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

No matter what age you set it at, it's going to seem to silly.

[JackWilson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, I understood that your reply was to the other poster. I'm not presenting an argument against it being 21 either, all I'm saying is that it seems silly to me to have it at 21. I'm not backing that up with facts or evidence, it's just an opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

No matter what age you set it at, it's going to seem to silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

18 doesn't seem silly to me at least.

[B Dids]

The short answer is.

"21 year olds will buy 18 year olds beer, and that's probably ok".

"18 year olds will buy 15 year olds beer, and that might not be".

I can almost understand that.

A frat is an organization, and it is expected that the organization shall not provide under-aged kids (who are not responsible enough to keep under their limit), with alchohol.

This doesn't surprise me at all. Sure it sucks, but such is life.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
The short answer is.

"21 year olds will buy 18 year olds beer, and that's probably ok".

"18 year olds will buy 15 year olds beer, and that might not be".

I can almost understand that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure that the current age is not set on this basis nor will this ever be a factor.

[B Dids]

If it isn't, it's at least logic that I can slightly support. I have a feeling that this reasoning was used to some extent, but that's a total guess.

For instance, 18 year olds can drink on post/base, which removes them from the context of underage kids.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
If it isn't, it's at least logic that I can slightly support. I have a feeling that this reasoning was used to some extent, but that's a total guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seriously doubt it. The drinking age is almost surely predicated on issues of responsibility and safety.

[ QUOTE ]
For instance, 18 year olds can drink on post/base, which removes them from the context of underage kids.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by "18 year olds" you mean "18 year olds in the service", I think the expectation is that they are more mature and responsible than the average 18 year old because they've been through formal disciplining etc.

beer is +EV
dying is -EV

[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]
No matter what age you set it at, it's going to seem to silly.


[/ QUOTE ]

I would argue, though, that 21 is particularly silly because 21 hits most people smack in the middle of their college years. With the way everything is structured in the U.S. most of us show up to college at 18 almost 19. Ever been in a group where half of the people are 20 and the other half are 21, and want to go to a bar, its frustrating as all hell and is unfair to people who are slightly younger than friends.

If it was 18, then most everybody in college would be good to go. Now, yes the line would be instead drawn when people are in highschool, but I think this would be less harmful becasue again, its not right in the middle of the highschool experience, and most people still live at home so a bar culture in highschool is unlikely to develop to the extant that it exists in college.

Basically, 21 is a particularly inconvenient age for most college kids in this country. If wise adults feel that 20 year olds can't handle drinking, then they ought to bump the age up to 23 and try to keep drinking out of college all together.

[sam h]

I have no problem for ringing them up on the charge of selling alcohol to a minor, but this additional charge of selling alcohol to a minor resulting in death seems like bullshit to me.

Seems like a case where you have to get the facts about what happened. If they funnelled vodka down his throat, that's one thing. But if the kid just went to the party, drank a bunch, and then wandered off and fell in a river that is an entirely different matter.

[Blarg]

Making 19 a minor seems pretty stupid to me. You're old enough for the electric chair, to die in overseas wars, to vote -- yet you can't buy a beeer?

This strikes me as an example of "feel-good law" that doesn't really make sense or have much of a chance of working, as certainly 19 year olds can and do get booze all the time. I realize there may be people who feel the law has good intent, but unfortunately, good intent isn't enough to make good law.

I think the frat culture can be way beyond stupid in many ways, including their hazing by making each other drink dangerous amounts of alcohol, and that the frat boys should be responsible for that. But providing liquor to a minor as a charge? If he's old enough to risk his life running into houses full of terrorists and at the same time decide in a split second who he's going to shoot, the dude is responsible enough to have a beer.

You can't childproof society by turning everyone into a child. And laws aren't the solution to every problem; they're often just a very clumsy feel-good type of false action.

[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no problem for ringing them up on the charge of selling alcohol to a minor, but this additional charge of selling alcohol to a minor resulting in death seems like bullshit to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The whole retributive theory of punishment is B.S. anyway. Punish to deter. It out to be dealt out according to expective value of the decision not the actual results. Is a drunk driver who slams into a tree any worse than one who slams into a car killing two. They both had the same state of mind; they both committed the same volitional movements. I say no.

edit: please swap "car killing two" and "tree"

[SL__72]

How about they just make a highschool degree the only qualification. Everyone in college would be legal, everyone in highschool would be underage and less people would drop out of HS!

[JaBlue]

Yes, this guy is dead and only he is truly responsible for it.

Too bad the law doesn't feel that way

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll never understand why you have to be 21 to drink in the U.S.

But that aside - you have to respect the law. There's no getting around it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't use to be. Reality didn't change, just the social trends constructed around it. The use of law not to deal sensibly with the realities at hand, but as a rallying point and crowd pleaser for popular social trends, can make for some silly, unenforceable "feel-good" laws.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
Making 19 a minor seems pretty stupid to me. You're old enough for the electric chair, to die in overseas wars, to vote -- yet you can't buy a beeer?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never ban a fan of this sort of argument. Let's not get philosophical and political here, but voting doesn't have grave potential to ruin lives and isn't surrounded by a culture of fun, wreckless, irresponsibile behavior. The very nature of the military and serving overseas forces people to be far more mature and responsibile than they would otherwise be.

[ QUOTE ]
You can't childproof society by turning everyone into a child.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is spot on. It's so sad how purtian based America still is.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]
so you never went to a house party underaged in your entire life? never threw a house party which inevitably attracts minors?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I am an alcoholic virgin. This rant was about accepting "personal responsibility", the dispensers of alcohol to minors can dispense it all they want, but they should do so realizing that there is an outside chance something very bad will happen, in which case they will have to accept personal responsibility. If these kids get away with it, the line gets pushed back, and when do you place blame if say dozens of kids are dying from this? Sometimes people are used to set examples for laws which sucks, but it's a risk they took, and therefore must face personal responsibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kids always drank underage, and underage used to be younger than it is now.

I think the main difference is, they used to drink to get drunk, drink while partying, etc. The object wasn't to drink just to drink, even when you drank to get drunk.

When you drink to get drunk, and get drunk, it's mission accomplished, and you only need to drink enough to keep the buzz flying, and may even want to drink as little as possible to keep the buzz going, so you don't get sick later.

But frats do seem to have gotten worse than they were even 20 or 30 years ago when it comes to drinking, and that culture seems to be spreading outside frats. Now there is regular what I guess you could call "power drinking," and drinking contests, where getting drunk strangely enough seems to be almost incidental to the process of drinking, and it's more like a matter of how much you can drink without getting really sick, barfing yourself, passing out, or killing yourself. The goals have totally changed, and the tone of what happens to the participants has changed drastically. Drinking used to be a fun trip, but it's veered over into being some kind of a weird death trip. I guess people in sheltered lives don't get enough danger, so they have to get a false macho going by creating the danger themselves out of thin air. You used to look out for your buddies more, but now you want to see if they sh*t themselves or get brain damage or something.

The control and concern with a decent outcome that even the stupidest guys used to take for granted seems to have been replaced with indifference at best, including people's indifference toward themselves. It's not like frats or young kids have ever been less than stupid, but it used to have a lot happier and much, much safer edge to it. I wouldn't worry too much about kids going to frat parties 20 or 30 years ago, when competitive drinking, including competitive drinking of hard liquor, wasn't so popular. Now, I'd feel nervous about it if I had a kid that age. Having a drunk kid come home isn't so bad, and at least he comes home. Finding out your kid's friends all helped him poison himself is something different.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Making 19 a minor seems pretty stupid to me. You're old enough for the electric chair, to die in overseas wars, to vote -- yet you can't buy a beeer?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never ban a fan of this sort of argument. Let's not get philosophical and political here, but voting doesn't have grave potential to ruin lives and isn't surrounded by a culture of fun, wreckless, irresponsibile behavior. The very nature of the military and serving overseas forces people to be far more mature and responsibile than they would otherwise be.

[ QUOTE ]
You can't childproof society by turning everyone into a child.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is spot on. It's so sad how purtian based America still is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do think it makes perfect sense to argue about what defines maturity, and that my argument is perfectly valid. We don't want to subject children to the responsibilities of adults, so we define what adults are.

Contradicting ourselves to say, well, at this age you're an adult, but then changing our minds, and our laws to say -- Just kidding! No, you're not!, makes no sense. You're either an adult or you're not.

It's particularly ironic and nonsensical to make someone legal responsible as an adult for the most immensely dangerous, difficult things possible, like life and death in wars, or legally responsible in the most punitive way possible, that is, subject to capital punishment, while then denying they could be legal adults in any other way at all. If they can suffer the most responsibilities and punishments levied upon adults, then by granting them the full adult status necessar to suffer as an adult, they should be granted the full privileges that come along with those terrible responsibilities, without question. For better or worse, they've earned them.

It's particularly bizarre and petty to grant citizens the responsibility to kill or be killed yet not allow them discretion over comparatively quite harmless activities, like buying a beer or playing a game of cards.

There is no false logic going on here. And until recently, Americans recognized that fact, and 18 was the common legal drinking age throughout most of the country. Then some new laws went sweeping through the nation. These laws were based on hsyteria and social pressure, not from a logical consideration of what it is to be a minor vs. an adult. Apparently all the previous generations were wrong about what it means to be an adult, and we now have somehow suddenly become enlightened? No. We've just become addicted to throwing more and more laws on the books whether they could possibly work or not, and whether they make any sense or not.

It's law as social rallying point and palliative; law as self-help fad. Passing new laws provides a false sense of security that social issues are being addressed, but rarely addresses them. Parents won't find their kids under control because of laws; they'll just feel like they've done their jobs without actually paying attention to their kids, and at the same time turn their kids into criminals. Putting up some dumb law is just an escape hatch from responsibility, not a way to get much positive done.