I would say that it is government's job to protect people from making potentially fatal mistakes...

However, the drinking age doesn't magically stop underage drinking.

So they're failing and the law should be removed.

__________________
"Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds."



~Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Uhhhh......can you show me where that has ever been the case historically?
How can 'government' protect someone against themselves?

__________________
The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish! - Frederick Bastiat

No, actually, the government does not have the authority to protect people from themselves.

Do you realize just how damned STUPID this sounds???? Your idiotic argument (and that of the idiot professors) is that since people aren't obeying the law, the law should be repealed. Let's see how far we can take that stupidity, shall we?

People murder anyway, so let's repeal laws against murder.

People rape anyway, so let's repeal laws against rape.

People extort anyway, so let's repeal laws against extortion.

People steal anyway, so let's repeal laws against stealing.

And on and on it goes.

While I don't think government has any business legislating for or against what substances people choose to ingest, trying to repeal a law just because people don't obey it is really stupid.

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

It is the same argument used to repeal prohibition. I disagree with their argument but would agree with the outcome. The fed.gov has no authority to regulate the age of enablement (except for voting).

__________________
The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish! - Frederick Bastiat

And the Democrats want to force their egalitarian bull**** notions down our throats by regulating our economy to the point where its impossible to make a buck. You want to regulate my health care, regulate my retirement, hell, you push your agenda into my life more strongly than the GOP. I can IGNORE laws against underage drinking (well, I COULD several years ago anyway), I can't ignore taxes deducted from my paycheck to pay for programs that "help those who need it". How can you possibly criticize the GOP for pushing morality on people when the DNC has been forcing people to be charitible since FDR? Hypocrites one and all.

Open-minded, intelligent people vote LP.

__________________
"Bring me that horizon".

They don't, states do because they're whores for federal highway funds.

__________________
"Bring me that horizon".

What an adult does with his liver is his choice.


Edit: or her.

__________________
"Have you no decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
-Joseph Welch

You already tried this exact same argument and it got shot down.

All of the crimes you mentioned are crimes that one person commits against another person.

Underage drinking and illegal drug use is something you do to yourself.

Big difference.

__________________
"Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds."



~Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

You must've missed the part where he said the government has no place regulating consumption of anything, including alcohol.

He agrees with you, but your rationale of "it's not working, so repeal the law" is idiotic.

__________________
"Bring me that horizon".

Laws are laws and the argument remains valid. It doesn't matter whether we're talking about drinking age or murder: it's still STUPID for you to argue that a law should be repealed simply because people disobey the law.

There are valid reasons for eliminating the very concept of drinking age but your idiotic argument (and that of the professors in question) isn't one of them.

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."