A recent grant by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board to the State College Police Department, in a large-scale effort to curb underage drinking, is a misallocation of resources toward a battle that cannot be won.

Those state resources could -- and should -- be allocated to other, more effective measures to curb crime within the State College borders.

This funding has only been given to State College police as part of a pilot program to gauge its effectiveness. If the program is a success in slowing the problem of underage drinking in the area, allocations may begin statewide.

The money is specifically earmarked for the use of combating underage drinking.

It cannot be used for anything else. Officials from both state agencies and local police cite the rising crime statistics in the areas of driving under the influence (DUI), and sexual and non-sexual assaults as proof that the problem of underage drinking warrants an $80,000 grant.

However, attempting to end the activity of underage drinking is a huge undertaking, especially at Penn State.

A few more dollars and a few more hours of patrols that target one of the most common student activities -- regardless of moral judgement -- is a David and Goliath battle that will distract manpower and resources away from measures that directly address the issues of assault and DUI.

Taking an officer out of private party raids and putting he or she on the streets to protect students or to run more DUI checkpoints would be more effective uses of police efforts.

Officials may say that underage drinking is a cause of these illegal activities, and therefore, combating it would help end more severe offenses.

But that logic leaves out drinkers who are legal. Once an individual turns 21, he or she is not automatically endeared with a higher alcohol tolerance or better conscience.

Underage drinking is not the cause of all of society's ills.

Although the effort is well-intended, state money should not be pigeon-holed into such a specific purpose, in that State College police can have their hands untied to combat the crime issues in the area as they see fit.

When Penn State is hurting for money, this type of narrow approach with tax dollars, which fails to directly confront serious problems facing the university community, is totally unacceptable.