THE FAMOUS actor Will Rogers, mocking Prohibition in the 1920s, wondered, "Why don't they pass an amendment prohibiting anybody from learning anything? If it works as well as the Prohibition did, in five years Americans will be the smartest race of people on Earth." Rogers' quote points out the seemingly self-evident futility of attempts to prohibit alcohol consumption where alcohol consumption already exists. This fact, however, has not deterred the new Alcohol and Beverage Control officer in town, Kevin Davis, from launching a blitzkrieg on underage drinking in Charlottesville, thus effectively galvanizing students accommodated to the trust afforded to them by local enforcement policies.
Last year, upon his arrival, Davis stepped up ABC presence on the Corner and cancelled several drink options, including Jaberwoke's famous "Clam" drink.
Furthermore, Davis has made clear that he takes his job of eradicating underage drinking in the Commonwealth very seriously. This job implicitly includes eliminating underage drinking in fraternity environments. It is strongly suspected (although not confirmed) that the new approach to fraternities includes sending undercover, underage students to reconnoiter their underage serving policies. If the fraternity serves the student agent alcohol, then all members of the fraternity who paid for the alcohol as well as all underage drinkers can be arrested.
On one end of the spectrum, many students have (perhaps rightfully so) reacted with outrage. The recent and vigorous application of drinking laws in a college atmosphere seems not only arbitrary but overly ambitious as well. Underage drinking is an inevitability in big college campuses, one that even immoderate amounts of money and resources will probably not eradicate. College students, like Americans during Prohibition, cannot realistically be stopped from drinking. This leads to the conclusion that even the most aggressive efforts will only result in the capricious arrest of a few unlucky students.
These students will feel as though they were treated arbitrarily, given that many of their underage friends escaped the wrath of state enforcement, which, according to the ABC's Web site, can present itself in the form of fines of up to $500, loss of driver's licenses, 50 hours of community service and even up to one year in prison. However, it is considerably important for outraged students to understand that Davis is simply performing his job to the best of his ability.
On the other end of the spectrum are the quixotic and idealistic ambitions of Davis, who aims to eradicate underage drinking. In the pursuit of these implausible dreams, ABC is touching a dicey issue, mainly the traditional sense of trust within our community. With their increased presence, they are also putting undue stress on University students in the form of financial, physical and psychological harassment.
Most importantly, however, the increased presence and control exerted by ABC offends the much-hyped system of self-governance in place at the University. The University's policy is one that does not doubt the ability of students to govern themselves. The presence and overall effectiveness of University Judiciary Committee and Honor are a broad testament to this concept.
More specifically, however, fraternities as student organizations also have this ability. Dean of Fraternity and Sorority Life Aaron Laushway said in a phone interview that, "In the tradition of student self-governance, fraternities have their own structure in place. They have the responsibility of ensuring that their governing bodies are working efficiently and successfully." The IFC demonstrated this recently as they called on fraternities to increase vigilance in order to maximize safety in fraternities.
Ross Kimbel, president of the IFC, said in an interview that the IFC is "encouraging frats to work the door extremely tight." Kimbel also mentioned that party patrol (individuals that walk around from frat to frat ensuring IFC and University policies are being adhered to) will now go undercover "in order to simulate the new ABC policy and increase vigilance among brothers." He expects the new IFC policies not only to help cut excessive binge drinking but to raise overall safety and security at fraternity parties.
Ultimately, ABC has the jurisdiction and prerogative to make arrests and enforce drinking laws as they see fit. Students should realize that local and state enforcement officials are merely doing their job and that they should be afforded all possible respect. On the other hand, realistically speaking, increasing the intensity of arrest efforts will probably have little effect on overall underage drinking at the University. This goal can better be achieved by cooperating with organizations such as the IFC in order to allow self-governance protect our community. The primary concern behind drinking laws is safety, a concern which has historically been best addressed when done in collaboration with local communities.
Sina Kian's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at skian@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | YesterdayLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 3 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
