I think this is a great policy for two reasons 1) alcohol abuse has been a significant problem on campus and 2) the fraternity scene encourages binge drinking. This program will make it more difficult for students to access alcohol and consequently, and hopefully, shift the social scene from one based on irresponsible drinking towards one based on more appropriate activities such as Scrabble, Connect 4, IM Sports, Hop Shows, and other activities that most Dartmouth students are involved in for fun.

Dartmouth 11, what’s most important is that this eliminates the freedom of choice that students have. If you prefer those activities, then that’s fine since you can choose to do those things. How would you like it if your activities were no longer a choice. Dartmouth students already have the ability to go to shows etc, but in a free society, people should have the ability to choose what they want to do on any given night and go where they want.

It’s about time. I’ve seen too many students admitted to MHMH who have nearly died from alcohol poisoning and said their conditions were based on over-consumption encouraged by fraternities and sororities.

Dartmouth ‘11 was clearly being sarcastic. You could tell when they purposefully left parcheesi off the list of popular activities.

I would hope that the Hanover Police would be so kind as to get the appropriate warrants to enter these private institutions before barging in. I understand that it’s all the rage in the past few years to ignore all those “rights”, but unlike the Bush administration, I doubt that the Hanover Police Department and their taxpayers would enjoy writing checks for violating that silly amendment about search and seizures. If only the Hanover Police had some other commitment customarily worthy of their time to attend to, such as a kitten stuck in a tree, a game of connect 4(hi Dartmouth ‘11 above!), or even a ceremony where Safety and Security “grant” themselves ridiculous self serving titles such as Sergeant, General, or Master-of-all-that-this-green-van-sees. If you’ll excuse me, I’ve just appointed myself King, thus making me too important to talk to you. Call the detectives! I’ve heard a rumor that a 12 year old boy from across the bridge in evil Vermont brushed up against a can of Natty ice at the supermarket while shopping with his mother! Hope the SWAT team is ready with the tear gas. I mean, seriously? -A 90’s alum who just got the email and realizes that the D staff will likely just delete this legit commentary. They can enter houses anonymously, but I can’t post anonymously?

In accordance with Kevin, do you guys really think setting stricter regulations on frat scenes will actually drive underage drinking out of Dartmouth? I believe I speak on behalf of many peers when I say that these regulations will only make the situation worse. Longview, first of all, these kids make decisions to drink. People can peer pressure them and attempt to force them, but ultimately it’s their choice. If they aren’t strong enough to decline a drink handed to them, that is honestly their problem. Nobody is “forced” to drink anything on this campus. Second, with these regulations in place, students will take the social scene to dorm rooms where presumably everyone is as drunk, if not more drunk, taking care of each other. Good luck decreasing the risk of alcohol poisoning in that scenario.

Dartmouth ‘11, I won’t repeat what Kevin Dinh has already said, but really it’s the students choice to partake in any drinking activity. I was a part of your “ideal” situation for a LONG period of time so I can relate. And yes, I had a choice and stuck with it (I chose not to drink by the way). So don’t go blaming the greek system/scene.

Kevin, word.

Seriously, save the greek system and the sense of community the greek system brings to Dartmouth.

This will be very counterproductive. The result will be that fraternities will stop holding open parties, and the whole scene will change. There won’t be less drinking, it will just be less welcoming—only friends of brothers will be allowed in. Freshman and other unaffiliated students will instead drink in their dorms, where they are much less likely to be noticed if they are dangerously intoxicated. The reason for rising alcohol arrests is largely that students are responsible and GoodSam their drunk friends. Before what few open parties there will be, underage students will pregame really, really hard to be drunk the whole night. This will not help the problem.

In accordance with Kevin, do you guys really think setting stricter regulations on frat scenes will actually drive underage drinking out of Dartmouth? I believe I speak on behalf of many peers when I say that these regulations will only make the situation worse. Longview, first of all, these kids make decisions to drink. People can peer pressure them and attempt to force them, but ultimately it’s their choice. If they aren’t strong enough to decline a drink handed to them, that is honestly their problem. Nobody is “forced” to drink anything on this campus. Second, with these regulations in place, students will take the social scene to dorm rooms where presumably everyone is as drunk, if not more drunk, taking care of each other. Good luck decreasing the risk of alcohol poisoning in that scenario.

Dartmouth ‘11, I won’t repeat what Kevin Dinh has already said, but really it’s the students choice to partake in any drinking activity. I was a part of your “ideal” situation for a LONG period of time so I can relate. And yes, I had a choice and stuck with it (I chose not to drink by the way). So don’t go blaming the greek system/scene.

Kevin, word.

Seriously, save the greek system and the sense of community the greek system brings to Dartmouth.

This is preposterous. The Hanover Police exists solely for the purpose of enforcing vice laws in this small town, it seems. It’s time to lower the drinking age to 18.

LEST THE OLD TRADITIONS FAIL!!!

Most greek houses serve beer. Granted, playing drinking games like “ship” can occasionally result in dangerously high levels of consumption. But the majority of true alcohol poisoning is probably due to consumption of hard alcohol, most of which takes place outside greek houses. I will not be surprised if this policy leads to more hospitalizations by driving drinking underground.

The keystone cops strike again….

This police chief is a hazard to students and others alike. He should be fired as soon as possible. The only reason there are a number of underage drinking arrests in Hanover is because of the ridiculous policies of Giaccone. I suggest that every Greek organization prominently display a sign at each of their doors stating as follows: “Those working with or for any law enforcement agency are not welcome and will be considered trespassers. We hereby expressly do not give our consent to the entry of such persons on our premises.”

I agree that stopping underclass drinking at frats is a bad idea — had I not learned (by trial and error) how to drink responsibly during my years at Dartmouth, I imagine that I’d have had that lesson instead after I graduated, when even “minor mistakes” could have serious side effects. I don’t think anyone would argue that out of control parties in dorms is a bad idea (particularly for the hall mates of the hosts), so somewhat-controlled, well-contained open parties really seem to be the best option.

Hanover police is responsible for upholding the law, however silly the law is. I respect the fact that they’re going to try to do their job more effectively. Good luck to them.

However, here’s my prediction: Dartmouth students will make a brilliant move in this cops and robbers game and will get around this. I’m imagining underage attendees entering only through windows. (Windows aren’t a normal egress, right?) Or maybe alcohol will only pass from friend to friend (passing through more hands to get to the drinker, but only through trusted lines). You’ll come up with something. Dartmouth students always do.

So they arrest you if you’re intoxicated at the hospital and now they’re going to do sting operations in greek houses? Sounds like head-in-the-sand prohibition policies to me. Kids are going to drink, they need to let off steam, so sending them away to dorm rooms means more hard stuff and more potential problems. Hanover Police should spend their time working on more important things, like washing their cars and giving each other those cool military haircuts.

Last I checked, we inhabit a civil society where individuals submit themselves to laws that have been determined through a (more or less) democratic process to be for the greatest overall benefit. It is necessary for such societies to employ some of its members for enforcement of these laws – for constraining the behavior of those few who, through selfishness, arrogance, hatred, or whatever other cause, would hold themselves “above” the law and endanger others in ways unacceptable to the majority.

Underage drinking is illegal. The “choice” to drink under age 21, emphasized in some of the comments here, is the choice to break the established law – in principle no different than choosing to damage personal property, drive 50 mph down Wheelock Street, or commit other crimes that the community as a whole is not willing to tolerate.

Contrary to some misleading comments above, enforcement does nothing to “eliminate the freedom of choice”. However, consequences with enforcement do reduce crime. This fact is not only proven from empirical evidence across the spectrum of human behavior (including substance abuse), it is simply common sense. Enforcement sends a message from society that these rules and guidelines are not meaningless; they are what we collectively have established for the common good. Those who suggest otherwise, that driving this behavior “underground” somehow makes the problem worse, are seriously misguided.

Statistically speaking, the risky behavior accompanying excessive drinking harms others. As the parent of a ’13, I can personally attest, after only one brief term, to the significant pain and suffering alcohol inflicts on innocent fellow-students and their families. A number of Dartmouth brothers find themselves homeless after their fraternity needlessly burned halfway to the ground. A student (who was not drinking excessively) is taken to the hospital for stitches after a violent confrontation; he is now living with that scar. Another (who was not drinking excessively) is raped and will live the rest of her life with those invisible, emotional scars. One does not have to go back many years to find an on-campus death – a promising young life tragically extinguished – due to reckless drunk driving. So I must disagree with Justin Tzou’s opinion on this page that “if they aren’t strong enough …” (to resist binge drinking pressure) “… it’s their problem.” Nope, sorry, but it’s OUR problem, and the costs are immeasurable.

So the issue is not where the drinking occurs (e.g., frat versus dorm), nor does it seem fair to imply that Good Sam activity would be less prevalent in dorms than “open” frat parties. And, Joe Asch ’79 and Justin Tzou, no reasonable person is suggesting that the goal here is to magically eliminate underage drinking altogether. How about just reducing the number of student deaths from alcohol poisoning? Could we all agree that is desirable? If so, I’d like to encourage people to look at the actual data showing that a modicum of enforcement (i.e., beyond the anemic prevalent level), balanced with education, moves us toward that objective.

I recognize that many 18-year-olds can and do drink responsibly; this fact certainly complicates the challenge for society of balancing individual freedom with community health and safety. I drank to excess as a college student in the 1970s; I do not recall ever really fearing arrest. I recognize now that my drunken behavior hurt some others (fortunately only in minor ways). So my “trial and error” with drinking turned out OK, just like that of “An older alum” in the post above. But think about the other cases I just mentioned, which obviously did not escape “serious side effects” as we did. Consider the 47 self-inflicted hospitalizations (or Dick’s Housizations) last term alone! Listen to Longview, above, saying “too many … have nearly died from alcohol poisoning.” From my perspective, the on-campus alcohol culture and profile today seems more entrenched, even brazen, seemingly oblivious to the significant human carnage being caused.

I find it particularly sad that the “freedom of choice” hostility is misinterpreting enforcement efforts which are, at their core, messages of love and concern from society. Motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death for U.S. college students, with alcohol involved in one-third to one-half of the cases. Add to that the significant role of alcohol in youth suicide, homicide, drowning, and other accidents. Dartmouth families including mine are sacrificing mightily for their sons and daughters to have the best possible educational preparation for a happy and successful life. For the community to take a stand against something perceived as a threat to this purpose should be expected. Dartmouth students represent our best and brightest hopes for the future. Please, cut us (adult society) some slack for sometimes acting on the side of caution (just like 25 mph limits) to keep you alive and healthy as you navigate the rites of passage to adulthood.

And make no mistake: Dartmouth is an intrinsic part of the Upper Valley community, not an island that can have different laws or be exempt from laws. On any given weekend, local high-school students can easily be found among the many underage drinkers gaining easy access to alcohol at the Dartmouth parties. Some may be posing as applicants or have legitimate on-campus connections. So this issue is not just a matter of the judgment or maturity level of college freshmen. Are 15-year-olds also required to be “strong enough” to make wise choices in this paradigm?

Returning to my initial point, it seems to me that the sarcastic bombast against the Hanover Police Department is misguided: the enforcers do not make the laws more than any other citizen. To say that enforcement will “increase the dangers associated with drinking” (as unnamed sources do in the article’s first paragraph) is as ludicrous as saying that speed-limit enforcement increases the dangers of speeding. Do I always drive under the speed limit? Of course not. Am I irritated with a sense of oppressive enforcement, of injustice, when I receive a speeding ticket? Yes. But does the presence around Hanover of conservative speed limits and police cruisers enhance public safety? Absolutely! Society has calculated that the deterrence of even a few idiots wanting to drive over 50 on East Wheelock is worth the “oppression” to the rest of us. I encourage those students still unconvinced on this point to register for GOVT 030 next term and strengthen your conceptual understanding of the social compact. Then turn your energies on this issue toward the ongoing debate about the appropriate legal drinking age, as suggested in the post above by Alumnus … or better yet, toward the cultural attitudes and norms that are fostering destructive behavior that threatens the Dartmouth environment that we all value.

Last I checked, we also inhabited a civil society with a long history of civil disobedience against unjust laws. Methinks that, each time you jaywalk, go five miles over the speed limit, or engage in oral sex (illegal in most jurisdictions), you are probably not contributing to the decline of Western civilization. Excessive policing of private individuals and the overzealous application of the law against non-violent offenders, on the other hand… well, that’s another story!

So H-Po has always had an exaggerated sense of its own importance. I mean it must be kind of tough living in a town where no one respects you, and honestly for good reason. The only evidence of their presence being stopping students from touching the bonfire and stopping kids from drinking. It is no surprise that they wish to increase the validity of half of their existence. While I feel the arguments posed by those in favor of this initiative have validity, I think that you are only looking short term. Is reducing underage drinking good? Yes, emphatically. Is introducing secret police to a college campus good? No, emphatically. I notice alot of people above are using flowery language to try add weight to their points. Let us speak plain, however. SECRET POLICE! STUDENTS BEING AFRAID OF THEIR FELLOW STUDENTS! Are you serious? Say it aloud, and see how plausible it sounds. The students at Dartmouth College are the future leaders of the most powerful country in the world. Dartmouth trains future CEO’s, lawyers, politicians and world leaders. Is this really the lesson to instill in them? That the practices of a police state aren’t “so bad.” I know students are extremely afraid of what this might mean. While I do not believe Dartmouth will allow this, don’t wait. Every single frat, sorority and concerned student should sign up to be a secret policeman. Make sure that you point out at least 20 students each night that have been seen possibly drinking. If H-Po wants suspects lets give them thousands, and please don’t forget Timmy O'Toole. He was always a shifty kid!