Minors in possession of alcohol in Oregon will face stiffer penalties, a result of the passage of new legislation that would suspend the licenses of underage drinkers for at least 90 days upon the first offense and a full year upon the second.
The legislation is not perfect. It punishes 13-year-olds in the same way as 20-year-olds, leaving little room for distinction. This only underscores the arbitrary nature of drinking laws in the United States. A 16-year-old high school student is not the same as a 20-year-old adult.
The Eugene Police Department reported 675 cases of alcohol possession by minors in 2005. In large part, this is because of the EPD’s stringent patrolling of the West University neighborhood, using its so-called “party patrol.” This generates a lot of money for the police department, despite its lack of effectiveness in preventing underage drinking from occurring (MIP citation numbers have consistently increased).
Nonetheless, the Oregon Legislature’s decision to pass House Bill 2147 is not unprecedented. Other states, including Washington, have passed similar legislation. Reducing the risks involved in teen drivers is admirable; according to the National Safety Council, 44 percent of all teen deaths are the result of traffic fatalities.
Further, the law is not overly stringent. Offending minors will be given the opportunity to avoid the adjudication process by taking, and passing, a deference program. If they do not pass, however, they will still lose their driving privileges.
Still, it is unsettling that the Oregon State Legislature is willing to treat 13-year-olds the same as 20-year-olds. It is also unfortunate that there is no Blood Alcohol Concentration component to the legislation. By making the making the legislation so broad, the government is restricting the rights of people who are old enough to vote, old enough to join the military, by taking away their licenses.
But there are teenagers who, under the previous laws, could afford to pay their MIP tickets, and there was little culpability – kids could pay their fines and nothing else would happen. This bill would prevent that from happening. It would be nice if the legislation treated different age groups differently, but in the long run the passage of the legislation was good, in order to make teenage drinkers and their parents cognizant of the dangers of drinking and driving.