I’ve heard a few stories about the university and college presidents getting together to talk about lowering the drinking age because, after all, the drinking age of 21 isn’t stopping anyone from drinking, is it?
Sounds logical to me. Feels good too.
Now, while we’re talking about what does and doesn’t work, how about we reopen discussion on that other idea that doesn’t work? You know…
gun free zones…
There’s an idea that doesn’t even work as well as the 21 year old drinking age, and the same two arguments apply. The individual rights argument, as in, if they can go to war, vote, contract, and someday drink legally, then, if they can legally own and carry a firearm off campus they should be able to own it and carry it on campus as well. And the “gun free zones” don’t work argument, as in, only the law abiding leave their guns at home while criminals, the real threats, bring theirs right in. If you’re going to use the “doesn’t work” argument about drinking (or sex, or drugs, or whatever) then be prepared to be challenged on the gun issue.
update: David Codrea reminds us the same university presidents defend their no guns policy by pointing out the irresponsible underage drinking on campus… yup. They’re geniuses. That’s why they’re in charge.

Entries (RSS)