Comments by "Sar Jim" (@sarjim4381) on "The Charlie Birger Gang and Little Egypt" video.

@pmvaldez1 And how do you "know" this? What does being a truck driver have to do with gathering statistic on drinking and auto accidents? It's pretty clear you have your feet in cement when it comes to your ideas about the government so I won't pester you any longer. Enjoy your world of conspiracy.
3
No, I don't think the drinking age should 18. 18 year olds can already drive and vote, and those tow privileges have already caused us enough problems without adding booze into the mix..
2
@rutabagasteu Yes, and the same was true in most states for the Cold War, Korea, and WWII. What's your point? That Vietnam was somehow special, so we should have changed the voting and drinking laws because men were being drafted again? That's not a very solid argument.
2
@RTmadnesstoo I understood the sarcasm, but maybe you're too dense to understand California was a poor state to use as an example.
2
@xxOmponxx The drinking age has changed how many people under 21 die in alcohol related accidents. I don't know where "here" is, but this is provable true on a nationwide basis. Some other countries have a lower drinking age than the US, although some only allow under 21 drinking when the alcohol is purchased by an adult and the consumption is monitored by an adult. There are also cultural differences between some countries and the US that make under 21 drinking more traditional and supervised. Many of the countries that allow under 21 drinking also have laws that the legal blood alcohol limit for those under 21 is either .04 or none. That is a big factor in decreasing underage drunk driving. I absolutely believe the voting age should be 21 again. Many of the comments I read from people between 18 and 20 I read here convince me of that. The Constitution allows age 18 voting because the 26th amendment was passed in 1971 giving them that right. Just as with the repeal of prohibition, another amendment could change that again. There's nothing sacrosanct about an amendment.
2
@Erin-Thor California raised the minimum legal drinking age to 21 at the end of prohibition in 1933. Since then, it has never been legal to drink at age 18 in California. The evidence is overwhelming that when the MLDA was raised to 21 in those states that allowed younger drinking that both alcohol related traffic death and overall consumption of alcohol declined. See https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/feweryoungdrivers/iv__what_caused.htm for details.
1
@pmvaldez1 Did you actually read the study in my link from the National Highway Safety Administration about drinking age? No, of course you didn't, which would be appropriate for a guy with a screen name of buttwhisker. I'll play along though. Give me a link to your study showing those statistics are false. Just calling it false without evidence isn't an argument.
1
@Full_Otto_Bismarck That's true, but it has nothing to do with the drinking age and drunk driving deaths. You are erroneously attempting to make a reasonable argument into an absurd one by taking the argument to the extremes.
1
@pmvaldez1 Well, Harry, that's your story. Others have different stories with some foundation in fact. I'm done with you now.
1
@RTmadnesstoo No, I didn't. My point was to use a state that actually increased the drinking age for 18 to 21 if you're going to make up a complete lie.
1
@Full_Otto_Bismarck LOL. Nice try, but I assure you I'm not the only that thinks lowering drinking ages is a bad idea. And your liberty ends right at my front bumper when you're 18 and driving drunk.
1
@Full_Otto_Bismarck Well, you can read the stats at the link I posted. If that doesn't change your opinion about 18 year olds being legal to drink, so be it. Even libertarians need some laws to limit behavior.
1