drinking age

[citizen_142002]

I would advise legislators to look at reducing/eliminating the age for consumption of alcohol on private property, first. This can be done without a loss of funding, and thus would be more favorably received by the legislature. Then we can work on completely disregarding the federal mandate.

[earthhaven]

I would advise legislators to look at reducing/eliminating the age for consumption of alcohol on private property, first. This can be done without a loss of funding, and thus would be more favorably received by the legislature. Then we can work on completely disregarding the federal mandate.

I like this idea. Working towards true property rights would definitely be a step in the right direction.

In NH you can be arrested and charged with underage possession if you are the designated driver at a party where alcohol is present. One of my friends was in this situation last year. She blew a 0.0 and still got charged with underage possession and had to pay a $300. We have start by doing away with laws like this.

[d_goddard]

I would advise legislators to look at reducing/eliminating the age for consumption of alcohol on private property, first. This can be done without a loss of funding, and thus would be more favorably received by the legislature. Then we can work on completely disregarding the federal mandate.

Awesome!

[burnthebeautiful]

I would advise legislators to look at reducing/eliminating the age for consumption of alcohol on private property, first. This can be done without a loss of funding, and thus would be more favorably received by the legislature. Then we can work on completely disregarding the federal mandate.

I like this idea. Working towards true property rights would definitely be a step in the right direction.

In NH you can be arrested and charged with underage possession if you are the designated driver at a party where alcohol is present. One of my friends was in this situation last year. She blew a 0.0 and still got charged with underage possession and had to pay a $300. We have start by doing away with laws like this.

That's the stupidest thing I've read today. Why on earth does the state want to discourage sober people from driving drunk teenagers home? You'd think drunk teenagers being responsible enough to bring designated drivers to parties would be encouraged. Would they rather sober underage people avoid their drunk friends like the plague because of feer of being arrested, and then have the drunk teenagers drink and drive?

[d_goddard]

I would advise legislators to look at reducing/eliminating the age for consumption of alcohol on private property, first. This can be done without a loss of funding, and thus would be more favorably received by the legislature. Then we can work on completely disregarding the federal mandate.

I like this idea. Working towards true property rights would definitely be a step in the right direction.

In NH you can be arrested and charged with underage possession if you are the designated driver at a party where alcohol is present. One of my friends was in this situation last year. She blew a 0.0 and still got charged with underage possession and had to pay a $300. We have start by doing away with laws like this.

That's the stupidest thing I've read today.

I assume you're talking about the current law, not the wise and exciting suggestion of taking a very do-able incremental step towards better laws

[earthhaven]

Of Course. Although the average college student doesn't care all that much about fighting for freedom, I think lowering, or better yet, abolishing the drinking age is something we could get college students to rally around.

[Spencer]

To read why the withholding of federal highway funds from states that allow the purchase or public possession of alcohol by persons under 21 years of age is "constitutional," read South Dakota v. Dole (then-Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole).

It is interesting (and by interesting I mean hypocritical) that the so-called champions of "smaller" -- at least federally -- government Republican President Ronald Reagan and his Secretary of Transportation supported / enforced this law that effectively federalized (through extortion) a drinking age, rather than allowing states to be "laboratories of democracy."

To read the offensive federal law, entitled "National minimum drinking age," click here.

All that New Hampshire would lose if it imposed a drinking age of under 21 is 10% (the 5% referenced in the case was for the first year that the law went into effect) of its share of federal highway funds; NH already loses 3% for not having a mandatory seat belt / motorcycle helmet law (see: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/notices/n4510605.htm).  I believe that the amount of revenue that would be generated by people who came to NH to buy alcohol would off-set a significant portion of the 10%.  BTW, NH is set to get (pre-deduction of 3%) approximately $155 million in federal highway funds (see the chart here).

So, anyway, that was my little rant about freedom, etc. as it relates to our overbearing and paternalistic federal government.

Live Free or Die!

[scheck]

Please push this issue as hard as you can, there are so many pro-lower the drinking age groups that do next to nothing. 

It would be amazing if it at least got onto a bill this election season. 

[d_goddard]

It would be amazing if it at least got onto a bill this election season. 

Heh, that part is easy. Gotta love the Free State!!

[scheck]

Has there been any thought as to how NH would replace the lost funds in highway budget?  Because as we all know the morality of the legislation wasn't even considered in VT. 

[Dave Ridley]

It or something like it did make it into a bill last session; got voted down in committee.  It was a bill to allow military personell under 21 to drink.  I and a couple others testified in favor of it, 7 or 8 busibodies testified against it including Department of Safety employees who most likey made you pay for the time they spent keeping your chains on!

[citizen_142002]

Funding will only be lost if the "public possesion or purchase" of alcohol is allowed. I believe that Conneticut has passed a law that allows consumption on private property.
I believe that this is very doable in NH. Most people don't agree with the current drinking age anyway and this solution can't be attacked  from the money side of things. Safety and public order will be the rally cry of opponents, and this is what we will have to be prepared to counter with point about property rights and personal responsibility. What can a 'fiscally conservative' legislator say to disregard property rights when he is on the record?
I have written to several legislators about taking up this issue. I have not received a single reply. I think that any of you who places importance on this issue and live in New Hampshire should write to your state rep, senator, and executive councilor.
This is something that we CAN DO if we put some energy into it. If anyone has any interest in designing a petition for this issue, please send me a private message. I'm sure that we could get several hundred signatures from Keene State alone.

[d_goddard]

we will have to be prepared to counter with point about property rights and personal responsibility

That line of reasoning worked on the smoking ban!

I have written to several legislators about taking up this issue. I have not received a single reply. I think that any of you who places importance on this issue and live in New Hampshire should write to your state rep, senator, and executive councilor.

It's too early to get anything started. Wait till after the elections (or better yet, help get good people past the Primaries happening in just a few weeks!!)

Oh, and there's no point pinging Senators on this till it gets past the House.
And there's no point contacting the Exec Council, AFIK this issue wouldn't even touch them.

[KBCraig]

Funding will only be lost if the "public possesion or purchase" of alcohol is allowed. I believe that Conneticut has passed a law that allows consumption on private property.

In Texas, it's legal for a parent or spouse of someone under 21, to give them alcohol. Even at a restaurant, it's legal for me to purchase two drinks and give one to one of my teenagers. The restaurant cannot serve a drink to anyone under 21, but it's perfectly legal for me to give it to them, and for them to have it and drink it so long as I'm present.

Texas is in absolutely no danger of losing any highway funds, and they get billions.

Something like the exception above would be a good compromise. Meaning, you go for a whole lot more, then settle for this as a first step.

And we have got to get rid of this "internal possession" nonsense.

If NH completely eliminated any age restriction on purchase or possession, I suspect that private stores would impose their own, as is their right. They'd certainly be forced to do so by their insurance companies, upon the inevitable lawsuit from the family of a 16 year old from a neighboring state who was "lured" to NH to buy alcohol that he couldn't buy at home.

Kevin

[FTL_Ian]

Exactly, KB.  The market can handle sales restrictions.

I don't drink, but I'm totally behind deregulation of alcohol.

-End the State's monopoly on liquor distribution
-Abolish govt drinking age