Teen drinking has long been a touchy issue in the United States. On one hand, it is part of popular culture; on the other hand, it is illegal, and its consequences result in countless tragic accidents. Keeping these opposing norms in mind, it would be logical to have a drinking law that takes the middle ground. Yet Palo Alto recently passed a harsh law that holds property owners responsible if four or more teenagers drink on their property. In other words, if minors drink while their parents are home, parents could pay up to $1000 and even serve jail time. The law is intended to lessen the drinking issue, but this unimaginative, old-line piece of legislation will only make the existing problem worse.

Most people agree that teens are going to drink, no matter what. But even though the new law will make it risky to drink when parents are home, teenagers will simply resort to drinking when parents aren’t home—and that situation is a recipe for irresponsibility and disaster. Parents can at least mitigate the level of drinking and help intoxicated minors; with parents out of the picture, minors are even more likely to overdrink and suffer from alcohol poisoning, especially without any responsible adults to drive them to a medical center. In such a situation, there would be no adult to guarantee that whoever was driving the intoxicated teen was sober. Teens are known for underestimating the effects of alcohol, and one heedless teen could cause a devastating crash. In a KRON4 article about the ordinance, Palo Alto City Manager Emily Harrison cited “several tragic automobile accidents” as the main reason for the new law. But by banning parents from parties with teen drinking, the law prevents parents from making sure kids drive—or get driven—home safely.

Drawing more attention to teen drinking is the legislators’ intent, but in this case, is negative attention. The law perpetuates the stereotype that any kind of drinking—anything beyond a sip—is some huge, repulsive offense. Legislators must not lump all alcoholic consumption under one giant umbrella. Doing so simply demonizes the act and gives more motivation for rebellious teens to drink.

Finally, the law completely disregards parents’ responsibilities as role models. Yes, some parents allow reckless drinking, but all parents have the potential to teach their kids proper alcohol use. Unfortunately, the law does not provide any help for heedless parents to reform themselves, while barring perfectly reliable parents from teaching their kids to handle alcohol in a social setting. Allowing a kid zero alcohol experience increases the possibility that he will get plastered upon turning 21. Drinking to absurd extents at 21 is no better than drinking responsibly at 17—actually, it is worse. While the brain only reaches maturity by 21 years of age, 21-year-olds are still susceptible to alcohol poisoning and addiction. According to a study supported by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), overdrinking by college students contributes to 1,400 deaths, 500,000 injuries and 70,000 cases of sexual assault and date rape each year. It is wise for teens to learn how to evade such problems before they go to college, even if they drink a little in the learning process. It is wiser for teens to do so under the guidance of responsible parents.

Palo Alto can still alleviate teen drinking without being quite so brutal. If the city adopts more reasonable solutions, its drinking laws will garner more respect—especially among teens. Instead of giving parents harsh fines for any alcohol at gatherings, the city could give fines based on the amount of alcohol present. There is a significant difference between a few beers and 12 bottles of vodka. The city could also put more work into educating parents about the importance of teaching proper alcohol use—not just abstinence.

A law can only be fruitful if it is sensitive to cultural norms. Palo Alto assumes that it can eliminate tradition armed only with a stern law, but to reduce the drinking problem, it must look beyond traditional American methods and get more creative.