When a male turns 18 in the USA, he is allowed to sign up for the Army, get a gun, go kill human beings in the Middle East and perhaps die for his country.
BUT if that man dares drink a single beer with his dad before being shipped off to war, he will be treated like a criminal. His dad may be taken to court and punished for letting a minor have alcohol. The 18 year old could face severe punishments, including not being allowed in the army.
WHY THE FUCK are 18-20 year olds not allowed to drink a beer in the USA, but they're allowed to kill and maim thousands of people?
Ageism goes both ways my friend. We may let our young kill others, but we sure as fuck won't let them drink a beer.
"BUT if that man dares drink a single beer with his dad before being shipped off to war, he will be treated like a criminal. His dad may be taken to court and punished for letting a minor have alcohol. The 18 year old could face severe punishments, including not being allowed in the army."
Heh, in Ontario it is legal for parents to have beer and wine at home (or any other private dwelling) when the child is only 14. By 18 we take a trip to Quebec to have our first drunken stupor at a bar (but that happened long before then at house parties) and sooner or later voila, you are 19 and drinking. The funniest was when I went to the states and ordered a beer nonchalantly at a pub when I was 20. When I was ordering my second beer the waitress asked if she had checked my ID yet. "No you haven't, but don't worry I'm 20." "Uhhh, the legal limit is 21" "Oh yeahhh, America..." "Ah don't worry, I'll bring you a second one anyways." Small town USA waitresses are awesome.
It just hit me that there's a rational explanation.
Being a good soldier and being a responsible drinker are two very different things. Just because you make a good soldier does not immediately imply you will make a responsible drinker.
Quite frankly, 18 is a pretty darn good age to start soldiering, but I know a TON of < 21yo who are not responsible, so my idea doesn't seem completely baseless.
There are also a ton of >21yo who are not responsible. That's not a good reason. Let's just ban alcohol because there will always be people that can't handle it.
Instead, why don't we look at the problem. The largest problem is that it's forbidden, so the majority of kids growing up have to sneak around and drink with other kids that are irresponsible. Telling a kid he can't do something just makes him want to do it even more.
If we introduce kids to responsible drinking at an earlier age, it wouldn't be so intriguing and they could learn a little bit about responsibility. You'd still have problems but I bet they'd be fewer and we could get back a little more freedom.
You are pretty much totally right. However, my only aim was to point out what I believe to be the fallacious nature of the argument that you should be able to drink if you can be a soldier. It plays off emotion well, but the criteria for making good soldier material are unrelated to the criteria for making a responsible drinker.
BUT if that man dares drink a single beer with his dad before being shipped off to war, he will be treated like a criminal. His dad may be taken to court and punished for letting a minor have alcohol. The 18 year old could face severe punishments, including not being allowed in the army.
WHY THE FUCK are 18-20 year olds not allowed to drink a beer in the USA, but they're allowed to kill and maim thousands of people?
Ageism goes both ways my friend. We may let our young kill others, but we sure as fuck won't let them drink a beer.