Nanny-Staters In Fargo Would Like To Outlaw Cheap Drinks
Banning bars from offering certain drink specials could be one way to reduce high-risk behavior among college students, higher education officials said Tuesday.
In North Dakota and Minnesota, university representatives have suggested to lawmakers that happy hours, all-you-can-drink specials and other promotions be restricted.
Karin Walton, director of the North Dakota College Consortium for Substance Abuse Prevention, brought up the issue Tuesday while speaking during the Gov. George Sinner Public Policy Symposium at Concordia.
The third annual event organized by the Tri-College University addressed substance abuse prevention.
Walton said specials like three-for-ones encourage excessive drinking at a reduced price in a short amount of time. . . .
Laura Oster-Aaland, director of orientation and student success at North Dakota State University, said although it sounds controversial to outlaw drink specials, 27 states have legislation that prohibit happy hours or drink specials
“I don’t think it’s the only solution, but it’s a step in the right direction,” Oster-Aaland said.
I just don’t see this having any sort of impact on alcohol issues. By making drinks more expensive in bars all you’re going to do is force people out of the bars and into the liquor stores, something that will have them getting drunk at house parties, camp grounds, etc. instead of in bars. Is that a better situation? I don’t think it’s any better or worse.
And if these people do switch from the bars to the liquor stores what’s the next step in the plan…ban cheap beer and wine? Raise taxes on booze so that it’s less affordable? How about we just ban booze altogether, since that worked so well the last time we tried it.
I sometimes think that’s exactly what these nanny-state, “you can’t take care of yourself” people (who I’ve heard called, fittingly, neo-prohibitionists) really want. Another ban on booze.
Much like the gun control issue, though, the problem with alcohol abuse lies not so much with the availability of alcohol to the public but rather with a small portion of the publics’ inability to handle alcohol responsibly. If you deny citizens access to guns some citizens will still be thieves and murderers. If you deny citizens access to booze some citizens will still be substance abusers. The key is to address root causes of a problem rather than simply treating symptoms of that problem.
So what is the root cause of binge drinking among college kids? I’d say it’s because most college kids are immature, living on their own with a bunch of other people their own age and away from their parents for the first time in their lives and enjoying their first window of legal access to booze. Those three factors combine to create a perfect storm of inebriation and stupid behavior.
So how do we fix it? How about giving these kids access to booze at a younger age? Such a suggestion will likely cause heads to explode among most neo-prohibitionists, but I think it makes sense. Booze in college is a novelty. If you remove its status as a novelty you’ll get less drinking just for the sake of drinking. I say we let kids start drinking booze earlier in their lives, while they’re still living at home and under the control of their parents. Then, once they’re grown up and living away from their parents, alcohol is going to seem like less of a treat.
Plus, the drinking age should be at 18 at least anyway. If 18 - 20 year olds are old enough to vote and/or enlist in the military to die for this country then they’re old enough to have a beer.
