This is a "guns don't kill people" argument, but drinking isn't really the problem; the public health and safety issues surrounding chronic alcoholism, binge drinking, DUIs, and domestic violence are the problems. With college-age adults, the last one isn't a common concern, but the first two are still very real issues.
Ending DUIs requires a fundamental culture change. In Europe the designated driver doesn't drink. Period. Full stop. In America, it's culturally acceptable for the DD to have one or two at the beginning of the night, and of course in some circles the DD is just whoever happens to be the least drunk. There are other avenues for cutting down on drunk driving accidents: subsidizing late-night taxi service, building more SUPERTRAINS, etc., but to truly end the problem it must become completely socially unacceptable to drink and drive.
Binge drinking, on the other hand, has some obviious partial solutions. It was only two generations ago that young adults had legal access to "near-beer" in many states; stuff that was alcoholic enough to give you a buzz, but not strong enough to get anyone hammered. I say, bring it back! And while we're at it, allow bars to serve cocktails that are diluted enough to qualify as near-beer (though at that point a screwdriver is a glass of orange juice with a quarter-shot of vodka). It won't prevent freshmen from getting seniors to buy them drinks, but it does provide them an easier-access alternative that's almost as appealing.
It's cultural. And though god knows I agree with more education -- more education in general, anywhere, about anything, isn't a bad thing -- I still say that the culture has to change first, and it won't. Sorry, but it's primarily an Anglo-Saxon thing. And the U.S. has adopted the worst of their gustatory habits, which includes drinking. I grew up in a house with wine on the table every night. It was normal. It was natural. It was part of the meal. As children, we were allowed to have wine coloring our water or gingerale, and as we got older, we could have sips and then bigger sips. I never, in my entire childhood, saw anyone get drunk. Once I got to college, though, I saw plenty.
I don't get it, never have, never will. I'm all for a bit of Bacchic revelry now and then, but I think getting deliberately soused is one of the stupidest things people can do.
Posted by: Lisa Simeone | August 19, 2008 at 01:59 PM
Well, I don't know any place designated drivers aren't the ones drinking the cola...
...But there was once a time when a drink or so wasn't frowned upon before driving. I'm not going to be upset at the one glass of wine with dinner before a movie crowd.
How do we get away from binge drinking being popular at all? Lecturing doesn't work. Hectoring doesn't work. And even making it illegal doesn't stop these parties from happening.
Personally, I hate when drunks come on the train, sit in the wrong cars, yell and carry on - but I most certainly don't want them driving. I take care of my friends, but not everyone seems to have someone to babysit them.
Posted by: Crissa | August 19, 2008 at 03:09 PM
How do we get away from binge drinking being popular at all?
Here's a thought: Stop trying. Let people who want to get hammered do so and stop making such a big deal out of it. As someone who binge-drank my way through four years of college (and still gets shitty fairly regularly) I'm here to report it's not the end of the world. Yes, drunk driving needs to be strongly discouraged, but aside from that I think we'd be better off if people would stop getting all worked up over how much other people do or do not drink.
Posted by: Toast | August 19, 2008 at 03:17 PM
it does provide them an easier-access alternative that's almost as appealing
Just taking a stab in the dark, but you must not be much of a drinker. No, non-alcoholic/quasi-alcoholic alternatives are not "almost as appealing". I loves me some beer, for example, but I'd rather stab myself in the eye than drink near-beer.
Posted by: Toast | August 19, 2008 at 03:20 PM
In Colorado, there is a weird compromise whereby grocery stores and convenience stores are allowed to sell 3.2 beer, but only liquor stores can sell the real thing. In practice, this just means that it's hard to buy a non-tall-boy can of beer at a grocery store (because drinking 16 ounces of near beer is roughly the equivalent of 12 ounces of the real thing). I think Oklahoma is similar.
though at that point a screwdriver is a glass of orange juice with a quarter-shot of vodka
A shot of vodka (50mL) has about 20 mL of alcohol. A fourth of that would be 5 mL. Multiplying that out, to achieve a 3.2% alcohol level, you'd need about 160 mL of juice, or about 6 ounces. OK, that's a small "glass" of OJ (most small juice glasses are about 8 oz.), but close enough for goverment work.
Posted by: Joe | August 19, 2008 at 03:44 PM
But there was once a time when a drink or so wasn't frowned upon before driving. I'm not going to be upset at the one glass of wine with dinner before a movie crowd.
It does seem that the anti-drunk driving activists have decided that the most effective way to combat drunk driving is to continually redefine "under the influence" to reflect lower and lower amounts of alcohol, until eating a slice of plain white bread will, because of the yeast, be enough to warrant prison time.
One of my wife's colleagues used to work for an ant-DD group, and she said that if you go out drinking on a Friday night to the point of even what most people would consider a heavy buzz, your BAC on Saturday morning will still be high enough to get you a DUI conviction.
Driving while sick is far more common and, in terms of impairment, just as bad as driving while hungover. And that's without being medicated. And of course we can get into cell phones, fixing hair (men and women do that all the time), obsessing over one's radio, talking to passengers, reading and all the other dumb things we do in while driving. Somehow I don't think the answer to the danger faced on our streets is going to be setting the BAC level at .000000000000000000000001%.
I believe our dysfunction with alcohol is very similar to that with sex. If it's all dirty and naughty, then there simply is no responsible behavior in which to engage. So we have higher STD rates, more unwanted pregnancies, and higher rates of binge drinking and general drunkenness than other industrialized nations - though obviously not all others.
Posted by: Stephen | August 19, 2008 at 03:50 PM
As the Ancient Greeks preached, moderation. You can do almost anything in life, safely and happily, if you do it in moderation. But that's not "sexy" or exciting. So, again, uphill battle.
Posted by: Lisa Simeone | August 19, 2008 at 04:05 PM
And of course we can get into cell phones, fixing hair (men and women do that all the time), obsessing over one's radio, talking to passengers, reading and all the other dumb things we do in while driving.
Ah, but those things don't involve the Demon Alcohol, so nobody seems to be able to work up quite the same level of moral outrage over them.
Posted by: Toast | August 19, 2008 at 04:10 PM
I recall from my brief time there that the UK is pretty good about having relatively low-alcohol beers that are still tasty. But given the way that the craziest undergraduate binge drinkers are, they'd find some sort of way to get around that problem, even if you took extreme measures against them and all they could do was make their own much more dangerous illicit booze.
Does it really decrease driving ability if the DD has a drink or two at the beginning of the night? I've had DD's do that on occasion and I didn't think anything of it. (I've never been the DD, probably because I've never owned a car.)
Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 19, 2008 at 04:35 PM
'that problem' = what they'd face if you tried to give them near-beer and take away anything harder.
Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 19, 2008 at 04:36 PM
Try drinking, driving and putting on your makeup while talking on the cell phone. Then you know you're a pro.
This to me is just another argument for living arrangements that are not so car oriented. I actually take drunk driving very seriously -- it's incredibly dangerous and the thing that as a parent I fear the most. I am rather happy that Little Sir Charles can ride the subway or a bus or take a taxi to wherever he is going to misbehave.
I also think there is something to said for trying to teach your kids how to drink one or two drinks and call it a night. However, in today's America that will get you locked up.
As for near beer -- it's blasphemy.
Posted by: Sir Charles | August 19, 2008 at 04:46 PM
I think the protests against near beer miss the point. The proposal is to give under-21s access to near beer, right? And under-21s deserve crap beer. Who buys Old Mil?
Posted by: Matt Weiner | August 19, 2008 at 05:12 PM
Who buys Old Mil?
Ah, Old Millwater. The Official Beer of Spring Break 1990.
Posted by: Toast | August 19, 2008 at 05:34 PM
Well, here ya go:
"A Columbia man whose blood alcohol level was nearly five times the legal limit when he drove head-on into another car, killing a missionary and critically injuring her son, was sentenced yesterday to 18 months in prison."
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/howard/bal-drunkdriver0820,0,4882128.story
Another example of how "seriously" we take drunk driving in the U.S. The guy should've had the book thrown at him. But he didn't.
Posted by: Lisa Simeone | August 20, 2008 at 07:47 AM