Posted on 08/11/2005 5:30:56 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
A legislator who earlier introduced a bill that would reduce the drinking age from 21 to 19 for Wisconsin soldiers is now circulating a measure under which soldiers 19 and 20 would be fined no more than $5 for underage drinking.
The earlier legislation by Rep. Mark Pettis, R-Hertel, would become law in Wisconsin only if federal authorities pledged not to withhold federal transportation funds because of the change.
Pettis said he drafted the new bill because of opponents' continued focus on that potential loss of federal money, and was seeking co-sponsors before formally introducing it later this month.
"It should take their arguments away," he said of the new effort.
Pettis said anyone who can be sent to war should be able to enjoy a beer or shot of liquor.
"I think it's unconscionable we can expect our 19- to 20-year-olds to fight for our freedoms and upon their return they have none when it comes to drinking," he said.
First-offense underage drinking now carries a fine of as much as $500 and can lead to a suspended driver's license for up to 90 days.
Army Reserves Pfc. Jake Covill, 20, of Chippewa Falls, said that he believes members of the military should be able to drink before they turn 21 because "we're pulling more responsibility than your average civilian."
But he said he was ambivalent about Pettis' latest proposal because it does not grant those soldiers new legal rights and he worried that the infractions would stay on a permanent record.
Rep. Chuck Benedict, D-Beloit, a retired neurologist, said he opposed both Pettis bills because young people's brains are not fully developed until they are 21 or older. Those younger than that, even those with military discipline, would exercise poor judgment if allowed to drink, he said.
Well, who amongst us hasn't been THERE?
Trust me, if a soldier wants a beer, s/he's gonna get a beer. I was in Basic Training when I was 17 years old...they had vending machines full of beer in our Day Rooms!
We don't need yet another law, no matter how well intentioned this Pubbie is trying to appear. (Must be up for election and is counting on the Liquored Up Soldier Vote, LOL!)
The reason for not drinking until the age of 21 is because the liver is not fully developed until that age ... can't separate the alcohol from the blood thereby poisoning the body ... OTH if someone can be killed for their country, they should be able to drink for it .....
Methinks that reason is bogus. Most European countries have the drinking age at 16. They seem to lead perfectly long lives. (Not that we necessarily want to be more like Europe, but it is food for thought).
A military ID should suffice to buy beer regardless of local laws regarding the legal age. Old enough to fight, old enough to drink. I grew up in a state where the age was formerly 18, until "Il Supremo" Mario Cuomo, and his "Sfachim Machine" began their PC nonsense.
Yur right there Sheik...if a man or woman is old enough to die for their country...they're old enough to take a drink.
I thought the nationwide drinking age (21) was from President Reagan?
In Madison they'd fine the soldier $5.00, then take the bar owners license away.
No split for me. I was in at 17. Couldn't legally drink, vote, or buy smokes. Overseas, nobody cared how old you were. In New Zealand, it was 21 to drink unless you were married, then it was 20. Now that's wierd. In the PI (Phillipines), if you could climb onto the stool you could drink. Heck, even here in the states it was like buying milk (from '88-'92).
This is not an issue unless a servicemember gets busted for underage drinking. So if there's a new law it should be that there's no such thing as underage drinking for servicemembers. Any punishable activity they commit can still be enforced w/o the charge of underage.
"In Madison they'd fine the soldier $5.00, then take the bar owners license away."
LOL! You got that part right. ;)
Some of my friends who served over in Iraq, and came back are still under 21 (but turning soon), I threw them a welcome home party and let them drink all they wanted.
Screw the law, its stupid and more worthy of contempt then anything else.
hmmm, don't know .... my rabbi told me that ....
jane
You're welcome, I think? I grew up in Wisconsin. If you're in a bar or supper club your folks can buy you an alcoholic drink if you're still a minor and they want to for whatever reason. I'm not kidding.
That's why we don't need any more LAWS. A Mom or Dad can take their underage soldier/sailor/airman/marine/coast guarder out on the town anywhere in WI and buy them a drink, and some smokes and even a hooker if need be, LOL!
This "Bill" is Bogus and cashin' in on our wartime status. I hate this type of pandering, especially where the majority of voters are uneducated about Wisconsin Law to begin with.
Until they break the law...then they're "experts." *Rolleyes*
If they are old enough to take a bullet defending our Country then they should definetly be able to have a frikkin beer...imho.
No argument from me. It's just that it's ALREADY LEGAL in Wisconsin for minors to drink, if they're with their parents. (This is a STATE issue, not a Federal one.) Any Wisconsin Mom or Dad can take their returned warrior to the local VFW or American Legion and fill 'em up with beer, should they desire to do so.
My beef is that we don't need yet ANOTHER law on the books concerning the legal drinking age in Wisconsin.
With all due respect, that's simply not true.
What about the problem of people younger than 21 exercising poor judgment if allowed to vote?
Even if it were true (and I believe you are correct that it is not) there's no denying that alcohol, cigarettes, and soda pop all do lots and lots of damage to bodies of all ages that were designed for the hunter/gatherer life.
But we live in a country where we're supposed to have the freedom to make our own choices when we're 18, even they aren't "good" choices in the eyes of others. Driving drunk is not allowed because it endangers others besides the chooser.
It is completely absurd to send out young people with weapons to make life or death decisions in a split second and then argue they can't buy a six-pack of Coors. Simply absurd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.