To the Editor:

“Binge Drinking on Campus” (editorial, July 1) suggests “stronger bans on under-age drinking.” What does this mean? Imposing curfews? Checking students’ bags at the entrances of dorms? You can’t really influence students’ drinking habits without turning campuses into police states.

It seems that the Amethyst Initiative signatories  a group of college presidents who are urging reconsideration of the drinking age  recognize the futility of an outright ban on student alcohol usage and want to address the issue without criminalizing the majority of their undergraduate populations. This is a reasonable goal, regardless of how the drinking age affects 18- to 21-year-olds who do not attend school.

Matt Hoffman

Wallingford, Conn., July 1, 2009

The writer is a student at Boston University.



To the Editor:

By what standard is a law successful if it is consciously and repeatedly broken by nearly half of the citizens it is intended to govern? In every regard but one, we as a nation have determined that 18-year-olds are ready to assume the rights and responsibilities of adult citizenship.

By withholding adult status with respect to responsible drinking, we consign our 18- to 20-year-olds to a superannuated childhood, without the benefit of parental supervision. Is it a wonder that some choose to act irresponsibly, when that’s the behavior our legislation anticipates?