Editor:
In the April 22nd Chronicle, Adam Nicholes wrote that, “The argument that if one can vote and fight for our country at age 18, then one can enjoy all other privileges of adulthood is based on a very narrow mindset…” He then continued to enlighten us by adding that, “The decision on where to go fight is not up to you, so why assume that because someone puts a gun in your hand you’re mature enough to decide who is to die and who is to live?”
Very few people who advance this argument claim that a military weapon is a license to kill in a combat situation. Primarily, very few people are dense enough to interpret this argument as Mr. Nicholes has. The simple fact made by the argument in question is that underage service people are put into situations that increase their likelihood of becoming physically injured or even killed because as Adam Nicholes tells us, “The decision on where to go fight is not up to [service people]”. The argument concludes that because underage service people voluntarily (and historically, involuntarily) put their lives on the line in defense of our country, they should be able to enjoy an alcoholic beverage at their leisure.
Now that we’ve properly and more logically interpreted this simple argument, I would ask Mr. Nicholes why he didn’t focus on the more concrete counters to it, such as the proven mal-development of the neurological system that results from underage drinking.
Instead of tackling the points at issue, Mr. Nicholes wrote that, “The decision on where to go fight is not up to you, so why assume that because someone puts a gun in your hand you’re mature enough to decide who is to die and who is to live? That decision is made by your superior officers who’ve had a bit more experience at fighting than you have.”
To this I ask Mr. Nicholes if these commanding officers decide when their soldiers die. Please explain this, Mr. Nicholes, to a University of Utah student and close friend of mine whose convoy was ambushed in the Middle East earlier this spring. His hearing is a little impaired but he’s still out there fighting, one Purple Heart heavier. I’m sure he would love to hear how his “superior officer who’s had more experience at fighting,” as you put it, decided to let that charge go off under the road. And why, Mr. Nicholes, didn’t the commanding officers in Iraq stop all of those suicide bombers over the past year?
These questions should illustrate just how obtuse and insulting Mr. Nichole’s understanding of the so-called “old enough to die for country but too young to drink” argument is. It seems that some mindsets are narrower than others.
Brandon DickersonAlumnus