The Big O Weighs In On Drinking Age Debate
Today the Oregonian ran an editorial against the Amethyst Initiative and its proposal to debate lowering the drinking age (which I previously wrote about here). It was bad, failing to produce any real argument or evidence for its claim, but one passage in particular made me really scratch my head:
[C]ollege presidents are really just showing off a trove of conventional wisdom. In essence, they’re repeating the familiar refrain that banning drinking intensifies the allure of alcohol (and thus promotes a “culture of dangerous, clandestine” bingeing on their campuses).
[…]
But how “clandestine” is all this, really? At many colleges and universities, it’s not very. Students are fairly open in violating the law, and the universities either tacitly approve or look away. In effect, they’ve already lowered the drinking age on their campuses — but there’s no sign it’s helped.
Excuse me? I’m not sure what university the Oregonian editorial board attended, but maybe they should visit the UO, where the EPD’s infamous “party patrol” roams free, DPS is ever-vigilant and, besides the occasional burnt-out stoner, RA’s are vicious fiends. The UO “tacitly approves” of underage drinking like maltreated Rottweillers tacitly approve of small, doughy children.
Note to Oregonian editorial board: Removing your head from your ass might result in slightly more logical editorials.
P.S. Et tu, Reason?
