No vote on alcohol for soldiers under 21
A House subcommittee took no action on a bill that would have allowed military personnel younger than 21 to buy beer and wine in S.C.
The state's legal drinking age is 21. But Rep. Fletcher Smith, D-Greenville, introduced the measure that would relax the law for military personnel, citing an elevated level of maturity among young members of the armed forces.



I have a problem knowing that our mature 18 year olds can fight and die for our country but can not purchase a beer. Change the law for them. I doubt our immature 18, 19 and 20 year olds are gonna join the military just to drink. They will continue to do so illegally.
Posted by: Tippy Cameron | 27 March 2008 at 11:50 AM
Who is going to apologize to a family when a "mature soldier (18-20)" drives after drinking one to many and kills or maims himself or someone else in an accident? We can't assume that every 18-20 year old who serves in our armed forces is mature enough to drink responsibly.
Posted by: Jay Beasley | 27 March 2008 at 08:06 PM
Let's call leaving the drinking age at 21 what it really is--age discrimination. It is just as arbitrary as saying people age 40 to 50 can't drink. I wonder how our legislators would feel about such a restriction. People in the 18-20 age group can vote, buy a rifle, guard convoys in Iraq, and be tried as adult and sentenced to death. In light of how our society treats people in that age group in other ways, it is ABSURD to leave the drinking at 21.
Posted by: J. Phillips | 27 March 2008 at 08:26 PM
I totally disagree with lawmakers that our young men and women serving our country are not "mature" enough to drink responsibly. How ridiculous to entrust these same citizens with defending our very existence and operating equipment worth millions of dollars, then saying, "But sorry, we don't think you can handle actually buying or drinking a beer." Huh? Our lawmakers have just proven once again that they are hypocrits. In response to the above post, who is appologizing to victims of alcohol related deaths now? No one. There are so many instances of "mature" adults who have received multiple violations of DUI and are still driving! Lawmakers should concentrate on doing something about that problem. My son is in the Marine Corps and they are required to complete a one week Defensive Driving training course in boot camp. Why not institute a mandatory Responsible Drinking class as well, and allow them to purchase beer and wine? In fact, that would be a course that would be beneficial to every teenager, not just those in the military.
Posted by: R. Alford | 28 March 2008 at 08:48 AM
The laws raising the age limit from 18 to 21 were enacted to stop underage drinking. In reality, it made things worse as instead of immature 18 year olds drinking in a supervised public setting, they went to drink in unsupervised areas often leading to much more tragic results.
Regardles of the whole if I can join the Army, I can have a beer feelings...(as there is a lot of flaws in that "logic") the underage drinking laws of today do not work and need to revised.
Posted by: wtf | 28 March 2008 at 11:15 AM
Why do we allow our soldiers to drink anyways? At least the law now makes it so that some of them aren't intoxacated while armed.
Posted by: Bianca Jones | 28 March 2008 at 01:30 PM
wtf said "why do we allow our soldiers to drink anyways?"
Interesting question. Lets see, hmmm, why do we allow them to marry? If the Army wanted them to have wives, they would have issued them. Why do we let them play video games? Why do we let them off of the military base? Why do we let them own civilian clothes?
The answer--there has to be a balance. Soldiers give up many rights when they become soldiers, but they don't give up being people. You can only take so much away from a person that is used to being "free" before they will resist.
So lets see, maybe we can start up a draft again when people quit joining the all-volunteer Army because we took away all of their freedoms. Or we can just spend a greater part of our budget paying them tons of money so they still join.
WTF--you have to have balance somewhere. You don't sound like you have ever served in the military, but taking away alcohol from soldiers that aren't training or working or deployed would not work in this day and age in America.
Posted by: nyl | 28 March 2008 at 04:23 PM
If a soldier can drink at age 18 then anyone should be able to drink at age 18. They are no better than anyone else. Putting on a uniform does not make you responsible. Putting on a uniform does not make you any better than anyone else. Either change the law to reflect the age of 18 or dont change it. Stay safe and God Bless to all those serving in harms way.
Posted by: S. M. | 28 March 2008 at 10:00 PM
So Rep F Smith wants to lower the drinking age for those who joined the armed services to 18.
I think a better idea would be to raise the legal age to enlist in the armed services to 21.
That way, hopefully, by the time our youth are 21, they'll have more sense than to join up!
The military now is a farce - fighting a useless and senseless "war" against the Muslims to appease an idiot president who happens to be Baptist (he thinks he is on a mission from God) and oil hungry - his weapons manufacturer buddies are making a fortune on weapons and munitions.
If we are helping stabilize the MidEast with our precious blood, why are we being rewarded by the adjoining nations by having a barrel of oil go for $100.00+.
If the Arabs are so grateful, and this "war" is not costing one ounce of Saudi or other Arab blood, why don't they give us the oil instead of punishing us with higher prices.
I can't wait to vote for one of the candidates for President in November who has pledged to get us out of that quagmire in less than a year.
I'll be glad when an international tribunal indicts ex-President G W Bush, R Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the other Republicans who got us in this mess for war crimes of a high and aggravated nature.
In the meantime, anything we can do to keep our young adults out of the military will be helpful, like raising the age of eligibility to 21.
There is no glory in joining the armed forces and losing your life or losing your leg - only foolish sacrifice!
Posted by: Don B | 28 March 2008 at 10:15 PM
Wow....What an "foolish" statement to make. The so called "farce" you refer to protects every right you have, to include your freedom of speech. So before you make comments think about those who make sacrifices to allow you to speak. It is your right not to agree with the current war we are fighting, but show some respect to those of us who are fighting it and protecting you. And by the way there is plenty of glory in serving our country in uniform and not one soldier I know who has gave his life for this country was foolishly sacrificed.
Posted by: JM | 29 March 2008 at 08:16 AM
To JM:
So what is a "war" in Iraq protecting us from? The so-called "enemies" we are murdering and the Iraqi society to which we are inflicting so much damage does not have submarines, air craft carriers, and bombers to come over here to attack us. The 9-11 killers were from Saudi Arabia anyway.
Today's US military in Iraq is not protecting us from evil warriors landing on the Grand Strand.
I support the armed forces protecting our shores. Our military should all be within the borders of our country. To go to Iraq to murder Muslims for no good reason is only a financial drain on our youth and our economy.
If the people of the Middle East are upset with the Iraqis, let them buy equipment from us and send their own youth to die for their cause.
Our economy is going broke because we are purchasing so much military hardware and spending so much keeping troups all over the world. Meanwhile, all the countries that we are protecting only have to spend a small percentage of their budgets on their military while draining us with products that we import.
What goes on in Iraq affects us little, except to pad the pockets of Big Oil companies like Exxon/Mobile.
Don't tell me the military, with its current Bush/Cheney inspired mission is saving my right to free speech. The only thing the current "war" is doing is making Arms Dealers and Big Oil filthy rich.
Active duty service people who have to go to Iraq are simply pawns in this fiasco.
We need regime change in the White House!
Posted by: Don B | 29 March 2008 at 02:44 PM
Don.B and the rest of the Democrats have not idea of what is going on in this country or in the world around us. I like to see Clinton or Obama gets elected so this country can see first hand what other countries have to put with all the time. when these " so called 9-11 killers " start coming over here all the time you and the other Democrats will be wanting bush and all his knowledge back.
Posted by: Tony S. | 30 March 2008 at 06:03 AM
Tony S.... That argument won't stand up against anyone with an able mind. You can put fear in the sheep that surround you, but the truth is that anytime someone want to attack us on U.S. soil...they can. We can't even shore up our on boarders...and if something was to happen here...our troop strength would be so weak that it wouldn't be a pretty site. And FYI...i'm not a Democrat...let it soak in.
J.M., Don B and others...we can go back and forth all day about this. But i will say this...out of all the wars we have fought...why is this the only one that hasn't stimulated the economy? I mean that's one of the reasons Bush sent the over there anyway. Then what's the point in asking a General what they feel like they can do during a war. Every day they use to train for war situations...now they have one...why not keep them over there and actually perform the task in real time instead of paying them to only train. The fact remains that we are over there and now our options are limited. They drummed up support by this war saying it would be over w/ in 5mths to a year...5yrs and 4000 deaths later, nothing has changed. I know people over there and all of them will tell you they are ready to come home. They will tell you that what is seen on the T.V. ain't really how it's like...even with the "Surge". They can't tell the media how they really feel because they will get in trouble by their superiors. They are tired...stretched thin...and stressed. Many come home to children that don't know them, marriages or relationships that are in shambles and with overall trust issues.
Do i support the troops...I sure do...i'm still attend FRG meetings and send care packages to them. Do i believe in the reason we are fighting this war...no because the true area of battle isn't being focused on [Afghanistan]. Do i like when people try to use the troops to hammer their beliefs home...NOOOOO and i think that's what is going on on all sides...but mainly from Republican's...and i dislike it....
Posted by: C.L. | 30 March 2008 at 01:44 PM
How did this topic morph from alcohol sale to army personnel under 21 to the war in Iraq? I guess you Dems just can't pass up an opportunity to bash Bush.Before I forget, I support 18 year-olds who are willing to forfit their lives the right to purchase an alcoholic beverage.
Posted by: John Rust | 30 March 2008 at 09:40 PM