Similar to last year's 40-Day Challenge, Twenty-One Debunked is participating in the fairly new Australian tradition of FebFast. To wit, it involves no drinking at all during the entire 28 days of February. Or one can choose the "half-arsed" option, and go a mere two weeks without drinking. Just about any drinker would benefit from a good detox period, and the benefits include improved health and energy, a better bank balance, and a better quality of life overall. As the FebFast folks would say, it's just the tonic for you.
If you have read a previous version of this post, please disregard the second paragraph. The idea outlined therein was admittedly silly and kind of takes away from the overall mission of Twenty-One Debunked. I'm sure that anyone who wants to see a cached version will just Google it anyway, but remember that it is no longer the case, and we apologize for such inane logorrhea (i.e. diarrhea of the mouth or keyboard).
Saturday, February 8, 2014
Monday, January 20, 2014
What About Weed? (Part Deux)
With the recent legalization of recreational cannabis (for those over 21) in Colorado and Washington, and likely at least a few more states to follow, we at Twenty-One Debunked feel the need to update and clarify our official stance on the cannabis issue. Previously, Twenty-One Debunked has been officially neutral on the issue of cannabis legalization, with our only position being that if and when it becomes legal, the age limit should be 18 instead of 21. In the meantime, our affiliated political party, the True Spirit of America Party (TSAP), has always been 100% in favor of legalization. However, after careful evaluation and deliberation, as of January 2014 Twenty-One Debunked has decided to take up the cause of cannabis legalization as well, albeit as a lower-priority issue relative to our main cause of lowering the drinking age to 18. Our new stance on cannabis can be delineated as follows:
To all the prohibitionists and drug warriors out there, we have one question for you: How does it feel to be on the wrong side of history? Because we wouldn't know anything about that.
- Cannabis should be legal for everyone 18 and older, period.
- No one of any age should be arrested, jailed, or given a criminal record for simple possession or use of cannabis.
- Passing around a joint or bong should not be treated any differently than passing around a tobacco cigarette or a bottle of beer.
- While not completely safe for everyone, cannabis is a safer alternative to alcohol by just about any objective scientific measure, and as harm-reductionists we need to get the word out about that fact.
- While driving under the influence of cannabis can be dangerous and should remain illegal, drunk driving is much worse, and the penalties should reflect that fact.
- As with alcohol, blood THC limits for driving should be based on science, not zero-tolerance.
To all the prohibitionists and drug warriors out there, we have one question for you: How does it feel to be on the wrong side of history? Because we wouldn't know anything about that.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Should Bars Set Their Own Drinking Ages?
In response to the latest news about a NYC bar setting a minimum age of 25 for patrons, we at Twenty-One Debunked realize that we haven't been all that clear about whether bars should be allowed to discriminate based on age. And it's perfectly legal too, believe it or not. We have mixed feelings about the issue overall, and if the founder of Twenty-One Debunked ever owned a bar, he would not set the age limit any higher than the legal drinking age (whatever it may be at the time). In principle, it is ageist to do so, and it is far better to crack down on all troublemakers regardless of age and put better safeguards in place for everyone.
However, there are some fairly strong arguments in favor of allowing bars to set a higher age, particularly if the legal drinking age is lowered to 18. First, it is worth noting in that some countries with a drinking age of 18, such as Sweden, several bars (and especially nightclubs) set an age limit of 20, 23, or even 30 in some cases. Puerto Rico, with a drinking age of 18, has bars that are 21 to enter as well. Also, there is anecdotal evidence that when many states lowered the drinking age to 18 in the 1970s, at least some bars lost business (and even went out of business) due to the supposedly rowdy 18-20 year olds flooding the bars and scaring off the older patrons. The irony of the Brooklyn bar was that the age was raised to 25 because the 21-24 year olds were apparently the ones causing too much trouble, so it seems that raising the legal drinking age to 21 just shifted the problems to a slightly older age group. Finally, there's the free market argument that private businesses should be allowed to do as they please, within reason of course. While none of these arguments by themselves are strong enough, when put together they make a rather compelling case in favor of allowing bars to remain free to choose their own minimum ages. And most importantly, if bars are allowed such freedom, they would be much more likely to get on board with our movement to lower the drinking age since they would not feel "forced" to accomodate "rowdy teenagers" if they don't want to. So there's a strong argument from practicality as well.
Thus, while Twenty-One Debunked believes that the legal drinking age should be lowered to 18, we feel that individual bars should be allowed to choose a higher minimum age if they wish. And if they did, it would be more likely to be 21 rather than 25, since 21-24 year olds would likely be a lot mellower if they grew up under a drinking age of 18 than if they grew up under the status quo.
However, there are some fairly strong arguments in favor of allowing bars to set a higher age, particularly if the legal drinking age is lowered to 18. First, it is worth noting in that some countries with a drinking age of 18, such as Sweden, several bars (and especially nightclubs) set an age limit of 20, 23, or even 30 in some cases. Puerto Rico, with a drinking age of 18, has bars that are 21 to enter as well. Also, there is anecdotal evidence that when many states lowered the drinking age to 18 in the 1970s, at least some bars lost business (and even went out of business) due to the supposedly rowdy 18-20 year olds flooding the bars and scaring off the older patrons. The irony of the Brooklyn bar was that the age was raised to 25 because the 21-24 year olds were apparently the ones causing too much trouble, so it seems that raising the legal drinking age to 21 just shifted the problems to a slightly older age group. Finally, there's the free market argument that private businesses should be allowed to do as they please, within reason of course. While none of these arguments by themselves are strong enough, when put together they make a rather compelling case in favor of allowing bars to remain free to choose their own minimum ages. And most importantly, if bars are allowed such freedom, they would be much more likely to get on board with our movement to lower the drinking age since they would not feel "forced" to accomodate "rowdy teenagers" if they don't want to. So there's a strong argument from practicality as well.
Thus, while Twenty-One Debunked believes that the legal drinking age should be lowered to 18, we feel that individual bars should be allowed to choose a higher minimum age if they wish. And if they did, it would be more likely to be 21 rather than 25, since 21-24 year olds would likely be a lot mellower if they grew up under a drinking age of 18 than if they grew up under the status quo.
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Happy Drink Nothing Day!
You have probably heard of Buy Nothing Day. Celebrated on Black Friday, the day
after Thanksgiving and the biggest shopping day of the year, this
self-explanatory holiday is meant to be a protest against consumerism. But
perhaps you didn't know that the biggest drinking day of the year is
the day
before Thanksgiving. That's right, it's not New Year's Eve,
but Thanksgiving Eve, also known as "Blackout Wednesday."
Thus, three years ago we at Twenty-One Debunked have decided to create our own protest holiday, Drink Nothing Day. It is designed as a way for people 21 and over to show solidarity with those under 21 by not drinking any alcohol that day. To observe this holiday, which can only logically be done by folks over 21, one must not drink any form of alcohol at all during the entire 24 hours of that date, as well as the following day until sitting down for Thanksgiving dinner (or until the sun goes down, whichever occurs earlier). Then, one may drink, but one must give thanks that prohibition no longer applies to him or her. Other ways to observe include wearing two black armbands: one to symbolize those soldiers who died before being able to drink legally in the very country they served, and another to symbolize those under 21 who were killed by a drunk driver over 21.
We will continue to observe this holiday until the drinking age is lowered to 18 in all 50 states. And remember, whether you choose to observe it or not, never drink and drive. If you plan to drink, don't drive, and if you plan to drive, don't drink. It's just not worth the risk.
Thus, three years ago we at Twenty-One Debunked have decided to create our own protest holiday, Drink Nothing Day. It is designed as a way for people 21 and over to show solidarity with those under 21 by not drinking any alcohol that day. To observe this holiday, which can only logically be done by folks over 21, one must not drink any form of alcohol at all during the entire 24 hours of that date, as well as the following day until sitting down for Thanksgiving dinner (or until the sun goes down, whichever occurs earlier). Then, one may drink, but one must give thanks that prohibition no longer applies to him or her. Other ways to observe include wearing two black armbands: one to symbolize those soldiers who died before being able to drink legally in the very country they served, and another to symbolize those under 21 who were killed by a drunk driver over 21.
We will continue to observe this holiday until the drinking age is lowered to 18 in all 50 states. And remember, whether you choose to observe it or not, never drink and drive. If you plan to drink, don't drive, and if you plan to drive, don't drink. It's just not worth the risk.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
NYC Raises Tobacco Purchase Age to 21
Much to our chagrin, Mayor Bloomberg has finally signed the bill that would raise the tobacco purchase age to 21 in New York City. He was originally against such a move in 2006, but the City Council finally convinced him, which was really not that difficult to do considering his history as a jerk and a nanny-stater.
The bill, which bans the sale of tobacco products and e-cigarettes (but not paraphernalia) to anyone under 21, takes effect in 180 days from today, which will be on May 19, 2014. NYC Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio will be in power then, and it remains to be seen how he will handle such a law. We hope he will listen to reason and repeal it before it goes into effect.
As we have previously noted unequivocally while the issue was first being discussed, Twenty-One Debunked does NOT support raising the age limit for cigarettes to 21. The one bright spot to the new law is that, unlike with alcohol, it does not apply to possession or use of tobacco (currently no age limit), or to the sale of paraphernalia (which will remain 18). However, that does not make it any less ageist, and it will only expand the city's already extensive black market for untaxed/out-of-state/stolen/counterfeit cigarettes. What allegedly works in the small town of Needham, MA (which is debatable) would be unlikely to work in a place like NYC. While another bill was passed today to increase penalties for black-market sellers, it does not get to the root of the problem: extremely high cigarette taxes compared to surrounding areas. And the 21 age limit only pours gasoline on the fire. I would bet that cigarette retailers in Westchester County (where the age is 18) and Long Island and New Jersey (where it's 19) would probably be the greatest beneficiaries of the new law, in addition to the mobsters and terrorists that profit from the black market in the city.
As a result, Twenty-One Debunked is calling for an all-ages boycott of all tobacco products in the five boroughs of NYC, beginning on May 19, 2014 when the law takes effect (and lasting until repeal). If you live in the city and smoke, be sure to (legally) buy your smokes elsewhere--or better yet, quit. Tourists should also avoid buying tobacco while visiting. The more die-hard boycotters might even want to include alcohol on the do-not-buy list, for obvious reasons. Watch the tax revenue shrink precipitously.
For this and many other reasons, we hereby say "good riddance" to lame-duck Nanny Bloomberg when he finally steps down on New Year's Eve. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
The bill, which bans the sale of tobacco products and e-cigarettes (but not paraphernalia) to anyone under 21, takes effect in 180 days from today, which will be on May 19, 2014. NYC Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio will be in power then, and it remains to be seen how he will handle such a law. We hope he will listen to reason and repeal it before it goes into effect.
As we have previously noted unequivocally while the issue was first being discussed, Twenty-One Debunked does NOT support raising the age limit for cigarettes to 21. The one bright spot to the new law is that, unlike with alcohol, it does not apply to possession or use of tobacco (currently no age limit), or to the sale of paraphernalia (which will remain 18). However, that does not make it any less ageist, and it will only expand the city's already extensive black market for untaxed/out-of-state/stolen/counterfeit cigarettes. What allegedly works in the small town of Needham, MA (which is debatable) would be unlikely to work in a place like NYC. While another bill was passed today to increase penalties for black-market sellers, it does not get to the root of the problem: extremely high cigarette taxes compared to surrounding areas. And the 21 age limit only pours gasoline on the fire. I would bet that cigarette retailers in Westchester County (where the age is 18) and Long Island and New Jersey (where it's 19) would probably be the greatest beneficiaries of the new law, in addition to the mobsters and terrorists that profit from the black market in the city.
As a result, Twenty-One Debunked is calling for an all-ages boycott of all tobacco products in the five boroughs of NYC, beginning on May 19, 2014 when the law takes effect (and lasting until repeal). If you live in the city and smoke, be sure to (legally) buy your smokes elsewhere--or better yet, quit. Tourists should also avoid buying tobacco while visiting. The more die-hard boycotters might even want to include alcohol on the do-not-buy list, for obvious reasons. Watch the tax revenue shrink precipitously.
For this and many other reasons, we hereby say "good riddance" to lame-duck Nanny Bloomberg when he finally steps down on New Year's Eve. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
