|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 12, 2009 13:27:19 GMT -5
Anyone know what European countries have experienced with NO drinking age limit and minimal restrictions on alcohol? Anyone know why underage drinking skyrocketed after the drinking age was increased to 21? Anyone know why college have to deal with unprecedented alcohol abuse cases since the drinking age increased to 21?
Using the opposition's logic, why not re-institute Prohibition?
|
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 12, 2009 14:10:33 GMT -5
 lol!!!!!!! That'll probably happen when they get done crucifying the smokers. 
|
|
Just The Facts
Newbie
Step outside, If I am not out there in 5 min then start without me.
Posts: 26
|
Post by Just The Facts on Dec 12, 2009 14:37:58 GMT -5
Thank You Swimmy for calling me a prude. I actually take that as a compliment. I would rather be known for morals, values and character rather than a member of the "if it feels good, do it" club.
As Ralph stated, the cost of law enforcement will most likely counter the profits that may be made from keeping bars open until 4am.
I will gladly summon up research and facts for you, just give me some time.
I live near a few bars and I have a right to voice my objection. I live near Spilkas.
Further, I am not telling you how to run your life, I simply state good advice. If you or anyone does not wish to take it, then look away.
Again, I will say that the sad state of the world today is from years of moral neglect. The more bad things that happen, the less of a shock they are. We have become immune to recognizing right from wrong. We have become lazy regarding upholding the morals and values that this country was built on.
I am sure that people who allowed bars to remain open until 2am(when they once closed earlier) thought that it would be a good financial choice. I am sorry but I don't see that cash flow now. What makes us think that there will be a cash flow if bars stayed open until 4?
I have always been a person that agrees with the quote " You learn from history". Progressive thinking is good but as long as it doesn't negatively affect society and the local community to a point that it was not worth it in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 12, 2009 15:42:24 GMT -5
WOW!!! You go girl! Excellent and very truthful post. Can not disagree with any of your points. Good for you for saying it like it truly is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Dec 12, 2009 15:58:45 GMT -5
Gee, when I drank I found myself going to bed with a 10 and waking up with a 4 more than once. Probably if the bars had been open longer, I would have gone to bed with a 10 and woke up with a 1 or 2.  I have come to a few conclusions though. 1) Swimmy is an extremely smart young man and a gifted attorney. 2) Swimmy likes to stay up late. 3) Swimmy likes to drink beer and other alcoholic beverages. 4) The majority of the rest of us don't agree with he and Larry. 5) I find Just the Facts and Swimmy are slightly incompatible and most likely should not date.   Gotta love the google ad that popped up at the top of the page, advertising "Sober College, not your ordinary rehab", haha. |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 12, 2009 16:13:42 GMT -5
No, I guess you're right: you're telling college students how they should live.
I too have values and morals. But how moral is it to shove your point of view down another's throat? It's no different the pro-lifers telling everyone they sin for having an abortion. Or the people against having the Christmas tree renamed the holiday tree.
What ever happened to, "if you don't like it, don't do it"? I don't particularly care for smoking, so I didn't go to places that allowed smoking. I don't care to gamble, so I don't go to the casino. I respect the law and the fact that this is a country of freedom and opportunity, so I'll be the last person supporting any legislation that restricts or tells my fellow Americans what they can and cannot do based on my own viewpoints.
No one seems to care about the key component to anything in life: education! Educate people on the woes of drinking and the dangers of abusing alcohol. Let them decide how best to use that knowledge. Warn them that if they harm someone else, then they pay a stiff penalty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 12, 2009 16:22:10 GMT -5
2) Swimmy likes to stay up late. |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Dec 12, 2009 16:30:59 GMT -5
Swimmy asked the following:
Anyone know what European countries have experienced with NO drinking age limit and minimal restrictions on alcohol?
Nope, but I can say that in the addiction literature, one seldom sees serious comparison between the alcohol and drug practices on either side of the Atlantic, due to great differences in the culture. E.g. methadone treatment works extremely well in the UK, not so in the US.
Anyone know why underage drinking skyrocketed after the drinking age was increased to 21?
You're kidding, right? Arithmetic. It criminalized those who drink from 18 to 21, a very large group of people.
Anyone know why college have to deal with unprecedented alcohol abuse cases since the drinking age increased to 21?
Many colleges complained about raising the age. Many wanted the drinking age reduced, to relieve the college's responsibility for students' drinking. This has been a controversial subject. Could be arithmetic, again. Not sure exactly what your point is here.
Using the opposition's logic, why not re-institute Prohibition?
Very different practices, control versus complete ban on a chemical.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Dec 12, 2009 16:40:43 GMT -5
A thought, although slightly to the side .... this proposal has been made to increase tax revenue. Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, done to increase tax revenue is a good idea, except when it can be tied directly to the welfare of the people. Sorry, but collecting more money so that "we the government" can fund more programs is never a good idea. Larry should have spent time thinking about how OC could save the same amount as he wants to raise.
|
|
|
|
Post by corner on Dec 12, 2009 21:29:24 GMT -5
A thought, although slightly to the side .... this proposal has been made to increase tax revenue. Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, done to increase tax revenue is a good idea, except when it can be tied directly to the welfare of the people. Sorry, but collecting more money so that "we the government" can fund more programs is never a good idea. Larry should have spent time thinking about how OC could save the same amount as he wants to raise. they can start by eliminating about 15 to 20 county legislature seats |
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 12, 2009 23:21:02 GMT -5
Swimmy, I don't like supporting legislation restricting me on what I can or can not do either, so let me know what places you've been avoiding because of smoking cause I don't know of any. Doesn't necessarily have to be a bar cause I don't drink.
|
|
|
|
Post by tanouryjr on Dec 13, 2009 0:37:26 GMT -5
I have talked with a lot of Bosnians when I was attending MVCC and they were shocked at the binge drinking in the U.S. Bosnia doesn't have a drinking age limit or time limit, yet very few young people drink there. The logic they gave me was that it was "no big deal" because no one was telling them "don't do it" their whole lives. Basically, the more you tell kids not to do something, the more they will rebel. That's a concept we can't seem to get in this country.
Think about it. All we hear about is how bad crime is, how bad drugs are, how bad drinking is, etc. Yet, politicians have been adding new laws to criminalize everything under the sun for centuries. Has it worked? According to what I'm hearing here, it hasn't worked one bit. How about we try something different for once? You know, I read a great analogy in a book about the decline of the American family. It talked about Progress and asked, if two people are walking on a road and come to a fork, they both go left and keep walking for miles. They finally realize they made a wrong turn. One turns back to to go get on the right road and the other keeps moving forward on the wrong road. Which one is making more progress?
I would agrue the one that recognizes that he made a wrong turn and is willing to turn back to get on the right path.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ralph on Dec 13, 2009 0:38:31 GMT -5
I guess Dave hit on the best point. No reflection on Larry, but it seems politicians in general are always looking for ways to make more money than they are in saving or cutting what they need.
This may cost us more in the long run.
Yes, I know there are Frat parties that go on until the wee hours. There is one right down the street from my DD, but it does not require the presence of UPD the entire time they are having it either. And with the exception of one incident this past summer it has been relatively quiet.
A house party and an open bar are two different animals, especially in a place such as Varick Street where there is such a small area packed with them.
But on another note, it is not necessary to have bars open that late to pull in DWI's either. Last week they had a DWI road block in place just down the street from us on Oriskany Blvd. and pulled in 11 of them between 6 and 10 PM!
But if it is just money you want.......raise the tax on alcohol for a change. Lord knows that smokers are getting tired of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tanouryjr on Dec 13, 2009 0:52:05 GMT -5
I see what you're saying, Ralph. Also, Corner mentioned cutting the legislature. Keep in mind that I was ranked the #1 Fiscal Conservative in my freshman year. Not only did I propose cutting the board by 10 members (which was defeated), I also voted against over $37 million in spending, which would equate to a 51% property tax DECREASE. So, I see what you are all saying, but keep in mind that I have certainly been fighting for the other side of this equation too. Unfortunately, I'm just one vote and the rest of the board has proven to me (with the election results) that it is much safer to just go along with the crowd instead of proposing bold ideas (even if people disagree with some).
I just think this sends a bad message to future leaders/politicians. I hope I'm wrong, but if anyone is watching, they are saying "I better not rock the boat or I'll end up like that." And, as we all know, that is the attitude that has got us where we are. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by tanouryjr on Dec 13, 2009 1:03:28 GMT -5
Also, in the interest of full disclosure.... Not that anyone here has made these claims, but some people I've spoken with have claimed I have a personal interest in this.
I have absolutely no interest to ever purchase or open a bar. I have no family or close friends that own a bar - a cousin did own 12 North for a while but sold it over a year ago. To my knowledge, I don't even have a family member that works as a bartender. The one family member that is the manager of Route 69 Steakhouse, she actually disagrees with me. Not because she thinks it's a bad idea, but she doesn't want to work until 4am. Also, I don't even drink. Even if I am at a bar with friends, I drink Gingerale. Trust me, they all make fun of me. So again, I have no personal interest other than I thought it was a new idea that could raise revenue and possibly give us a competive edge.
I know, understand and respect the opposition to this. I knew full well that there would be a lot of it before I proposed it. Actually, I thought there would be more opposition. I've been surprised by all the calls from people of all walks of life that are in support of it. This includes an elected official from Syracuse. It sounded more like this person was trying to feel me out for how much opposition I was getting because they are scared to try it there but they want to.
|
|
lol!!!!!!! That'll probably happen when they get done crucifying the smokers. 
