Is it just me, or does this proposed bill going through the Illinois Congress a dumb idea?

House Bill 5941, if passed, will allow for the revocation of the drivers’ license of persons caught in possession of alcohol or consuming alcohol while underage at a licensed establishment.

This revocation would take place without a hearing. Not allowing a hearing is against the Bill of Rights. You know, the document that prevents the government from taking away certain freedoms, like that of speech, press, religion or a fair trial.

While being able to drive is a privilege, not a right, when accused of breaking the law, the accused deserves a hearing. People who get speeding tickets can request a hearing if they believe they were not breaking the law. This should be the case for underage drinking as well.

What reasoning is there to go to such extreme measures? Underage drinking is a problem, but it’s just like speeding, you do it a lot more often than the few times you actually get caught, if you get caught at all. And who knows if getting caught and losing one’s license would make them stop drinking?

The purpose of this law is to scare those who are underage with the threat of losing their license. However, if they don’t get caught, they will continue to drink. If you don’t get caught speeding, you will keep doing it. Passing a law, whether it threatens loss of driving privileges or not, is not going to make the problem go away.

I’d be willing to bet such a law will make the problem worse, just as drug laws and gun control laws have made those problems worse. I’m not saying I’m against those types of laws, but lawmakers need to spend more time trying to make things better than just imposing more penalties for those who are caught.

How many people on this campus took part in the consumption of alcohol before they were of age? I won’t lie, I engaged in underage drinking, as did a great many people, I’m sure. I bet a lot of the people in support of this bill did the same things. The people within the state government were underage once.

I can see the intent of such a law. It’s well known that many people drink while they’re underage, and though the majority of the time it’s harmless, such activities can be harmful.

Instead of trying to punish those under the age of 21 for drinking, more time should be put into safety programs and campaigns. People who drink while underage face the same risks as those who are of age as far as health risks and accident risks. I’m not saying the minimum age should be lowered or abolished, I just think actions should be taken to prevent accidents and other problems that can result.

And just to clear one thing up, I am not against this as an underager. I made my rite of passage in December.

Underage drinking is not a new problem. And this isn’t the first time new regulations have been taken against it. The state just started a program this past fall called Project 21, to combat the problem of underage drinking in bars. However, it is only targeted at college towns, and inconsistently at that. Project 21 has only hit Charleston twice, so what has that told us? They won’t come into town when I go out.

Why not get the bugs worked out of that program before undertaking more actions? Is underage drinking a bigger problem than any of the other numerous problems our state and country are facing?