Follow the Campaign
April 30th, 2010 at 4:38 pm by David FarrarIf you think putting the alcohol purchase age up to 20 is discriminatory, feel free to join the over 3,700 people on the Facebook page for the campaign, and/or follow the twitter feed.
Related posts:
- Purchase age not drinking age
- Drinking at age four
- 10,000 and growing
- Culture change is what is needed
April 30th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Should be 25 really.
Then there is no confusion in licensed premises.
Vote:April 30th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
If setting the drinking age at 20 is discriminating of those aged 18 and 19, then isnt setting the drinking age at 18 discriminitory to those aged younger?
And while I’m thinking about it, those of the younger generation who trumpet the ‘I can be sent to war and die so why can’t I have a beer’, ‘I’m allowed to vote, but not drink’ and ‘I can fuck but not drink’… How many of those have volunteered for military service (we dont have a conscription – so will never be “sent”)? And how many of those actually bothered to vote at election time? And quite frankly the I can have sex but not drink line??? Is the hidden campaign here to allow 16yo’s into bars as well? They can fuck, but still won tbe able to drink.
Vote:April 30th, 2010 at 6:50 pm
“If you think putting the alcohol purchase age up to 20 is discriminatory”
Of coarse it’s discriminatory.
Vote:It’s discriminating between those that can handle their piss and those that can’t.
The only people concerned about this are 18 year old piss heads and dirty old men upset that the supply off fresh young female meat may be interrupted.
April 30th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Oh yes, because there’s such a huge difference between 18 and 20 when it comes to handling one’s piss. It’s discriminatory because it’s removing a right that others who are legally considered adults have.
@Bevan: I and many others I knew at the time voted when we were 18/19, despite it not being perhaps the rational thing to do from the perspective that a single or even 100 votes affecting the outcome is highly improbable with such a large number of people already voting. As well as this, not voting is a valid choice for other reasons, such as a lack of candidates and parties one wishes to support. As for the armed forces, how many volunteer is irrelevant. What is relevant in both cases is that they can do so because they are considered adults.
Vote:@Shunda: I am neither an 18 year old piss head, nor a dirty old man.
April 30th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
Shunda,
Vote:18 year olds are interested in dirty old men? I must ask one.
You pay my hospital bill ok?
Oh the 18 year old think of themselves and so do dirty old men
April 30th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
I think you can drink at any age… If you have reached a education level to now better.
Vote:April 30th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
Someone needs to start a “20 Up” campaign. I’d join that.
Vote:April 30th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
nope no problems with Kiwi drinking culture.
Nothing to see here folks, move along……. move along.
It just proves that the social liberals care more about their selfish ideology than the safety of human beings.
Vote:Booze is absolutely stuffing this country, we have disgraceful drinking habits and are rapidly becoming an international laughing stock.
Kiwis can’t handle their piss.
Time to deal with why collectively we are all so pathetically insecure.
April 30th, 2010 at 9:16 pm
Oh yes, because there’s such a huge difference between 18 and 20 when it comes to handling one’s piss.
Ummm… yeah there is actually!.
Vote:April 30th, 2010 at 9:29 pm
“Ummm… yeah there is actually!”
Evidence? And that evidence should correct for the bias of lack of tolerance due due initial unfamiliarity at the younger age. Also should correct for a bias from a comparative lack of experiential understanding as to the dangers of alcohol which may be had at 20 if one has been consuming in the period between 18 and 20.
“It just proves that the social liberals care more about their selfish ideology than the safety of human beings.”
Evidence?
“Booze is absolutely stuffing this country, we have disgraceful drinking habits and are rapidly becoming an international laughing stock.”
Evidence?
Also, you note it’s the culture that’s the problem “nope no problems with Kiwi drinking culture.
Vote:Nothing to see here folks, move along……. move along.” yet fail to see that these measures don’t deal with the culture.
April 30th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
If you still need evidence of a problem Jive, I am afraid there is not much hope.
Vote:April 30th, 2010 at 9:41 pm
We have a range of alcohol related problems. One of the biggest problems is how to deal with it.
What about a positive approach? Put it to 16-20 year olds, see if they can deal with their part of the problem themselves. What the young polies should do is try and initiate a campaign for young people to lead an improvement in drinking habits. If they could demonstrate a reduction in alcohol-excuse crimes – especially violence, property damage and trashing the streets, then they would reduce the pressure to raise the purchase age.
If too many of them keep acting like immature yobbos then they deserve to be treated like immature yobbos. Twelve months would be a reasonable period to compare.
Vote:April 30th, 2010 at 9:52 pm
No, Shunda, what I asked for was evidence of a huge difference between the ability of 18 and 20 year olds to handle their piss. I wanted you to back up your assertions which you apparently can’t. See, I realise that the brain is more developed at 20 years old, but I don’t see that the difference between the ability of a 20 year old to deal with piss, once the statistical biases have been corrected for, is hugely different to an 18 year old.
I don’t see any evidence for the other assertions you have made. 1) that social liberals have a selfish ideology, 2) that social liberals care more for their ideology than the safety of human beings, 3) that booze is stuffing this country (the culture around it is a problem, but it “stuffing this country” seems an unfounded assertion), and 4) that because of the drinking habits, New Zealand is becoming a laughing stock internationally (most countries don’t seem to care or comment on what our drinking is like internally as it doesn’t really affect them and isn’t their business). Where is the evidence?
What we do agree on is that it is a cultural problem. Changing the drinking age doesn’t deal with this. It doesn’t even target it. It neither stigmatises irresponsible drinking, nor encourages responsible drinking. It avoids the problem in favour of making a token gesture – a sop in other words – which will alienate a relatively small group of people of which the proportion of voters is lower than in other age brackets. It’s also worth noting that at the age of 18 one has all the responsibilities of adults, and to disallow them the corresponding rights in full is incongruent with this.
At the age of 18, many are also leaving home. Add in the relative availability of other drugs, a ban on alcohol and a desire to get blitzed. What would be a logical consequence?
Vote:May 1st, 2010 at 9:01 am
This is a qualifyer for office issue for me now.
If they raise the drinking age they must as a matter of principle raise the age of voting and signing contracts as they are far more important issues marking adulthood.
similarly they must raise the age of entering universoty and joining the armed forces as they are for adults too.
it’s simple if you can vote (and put the stupid MP’s in a job) and sign contracts legally, detain people as a policeman and be killed or kill for your country you should be able to buy a beer anytime.
This is such simple common sense stuff that as far as I am concerned anyone who can’t see this doesn’t qualify to be in parliament.
The issue is drunk people behaving badly noot the drinking age.
The issue needs to be dealt to properly not some catch all lets nail everyone as well as the offenders (anti smacking) solution.
the law stands use it and stop complaining, put people in jail all weekend, bring them before the courts. if the judges and magistrates don’t deal to it sack them.
make a law that it is illegal to be drunk in public by all emans then enforce it.
change the drink driving laws too whilst we’re at it, no alcohol. get a taxi or a sober friend.
this is so simple we don’t need graded laws and rules.
if you’re 18 you’re an adult and must act like one, if not tough shit.
Vote:lets stop this namby pamby socialist shit.
May 1st, 2010 at 10:14 am
Shunda barunda 9:16 pm,
Dead right, Shunda.
I posted this a while ago, but it’s worth restating:
Vote:May 1st, 2010 at 10:26 am
Was the page name “Whaaa whaaa whaaa we want out bottle” already taken then?
Vote:May 1st, 2010 at 11:21 am
MikeNZ: “If they raise the drinking age they must as a matter of principle raise the age of voting and signing contracts as they are far more important issues marking adulthood.
similarly they must raise the age of entering universoty and joining the armed forces as they are for adults too.
it’s simple if you can vote (and put the stupid MP’s in a job) and sign contracts legally, detain people as a policeman and be killed or kill for your country you should be able to buy a beer anytime.
This is such simple common sense stuff that as far as I am concerned anyone who can’t see this doesn’t qualify to be in parliament.”
Totally agree. There must be consistency in thought around this issue.
Actually pretty much agree with everything you say, except for perhaps the drunk in public thing, depending upon how it was legally defined.
Kris K: “Many 18 year olds are still at college and socialise with mainly college kids. They generally do not socialise with adults over 18. Whereas 20 year olds are either working or attending tertiary education institutes. They generall associate with those their own age or older; especially if working. Those you socialise with, and spend time with hugely influence your world view and patterns of behaviour. Surely this is born out by the blow out in youth drunkenness statistics, and the relatively recent development of a youth drinking culture of those under 20, since the age was dropped to 18.
Why are we arguing about this – the stats speak for themselves.”
I thought the stats showed that it was parents doing the majority of buying for those underage?
Vote:May 1st, 2010 at 11:37 am
JiveKitty 11:21 am,
I think you’re looking at stats on a different issue.
At least if parents buy on behalf of their 18 year olds there are more likely to be stipulations attached (hopefully). And if the kids abuse the privilege then the parents are unlikely to oblige again.
Vote:Of course there will be irresponsible parents in this regard, sadly.