Defaix The Drinking Age In America Summary

. In an attempt to reform the drinking age to 18, she provided her audience that many teens today are given a lesson of “the benefit of teen abstinence” and as well as to practice it because the results could be problematic at such a young age. She includes this analogy because sex activities are know by society as inappropriate for teens. Even though that sex should be done when you are an adult yet many teens do it anyways. Which goes for drinking as well, many teens do it and yet they are not taught to properly drink. Which results into teens are not able to control themselves around alcohol. This analogy are very similar activities that society taught to teens to not do because there are major consequences. However, only sex education is provided to teens and not to properly drink. This analogy conveys a valid argument that made the argument

It has been a rising issue within the past century to have the drinking age set at 21, but many people are more in favor of having the age set at 18. For instance, “’Raising the drinking age to 21 was passed with the very best of intentions, but it’s had the very worst of outcomes,’ stated by David J. Hanson, an alcohol policy expert” (Johnson). Many people believe that having the drinking age set at 21 was a smart idea, but it has caused many more deaths and injuries over the years. Most of these fatalities are cause from people who are underage and choose to consume alcohol. Again, “Libertarian groups and some conservative economic foundations, seeing the age limits as having been extorted by Washington, have long championed lowering the drinking age” (Johnson). These groups see that keeping the drinking age set at 21 is dangerous as it causes more problems to the Untied States. If the drinking age was lowered, or set at 18, there would not be such unforgiving outcomes, like deaths and lifelong injuries, which are usually caused from people who are under the age of 21 drinking alcohol. Although there are numerous groups that are fighting to keep the age

Every year, thousands of minors die from the use of alcohol. Many young adults abuse the drinking age policy. It is put in effect for substantial reasons, which contribute in making the safest environment for all. Drinking underage is not only illegal, but also damages one’s health tremendously. Furthermore, drinking in large amounts is extremely dangerous and can cause detrimental things to occur. There have been numerous attempts to create a law to lower the drinking age, but none have gone through. In contrast to what some people may say, the drinking age should not be lowered because it would decrease maturity, promote poor behavior, and damage reputations.

Lowering the drinking age will result in life and death consequences. By keeping the drinking age at 21, the rate of fatalities for drinking and driving decrease drastically. During the short period during the late 1980’s when the drinking age was lowered to 18, the number of fatal car crashes involving young adults who were under the influence dropped from 61% to 31% (Wil Fulton). By bringing the age down to 18-years-old, alcohol would be more accessible to the lower age group. For example, an 18 year old, who is still in high school, is more likely to sell alcohol to a 16 year old than a 21 year old, who is away at college. In recent studies, researchers found that 77% of the population are opposed to lowering the drinking age to 18 (Brandon Griggs). MADD is supported by influential government companies such as the American Medical Association, National Transportation Safety Board, National Safety Council, International Association Chiefs of Police, Governor's Highway Safety Association, Surgeon General of the United States, and U.S. Transportation Secretary to name a few (John H. Barnhill, PHD). Overall, young teenagers lack the proper wisdom collected to make right judgments about alcohol. The 3 years between the age 18 and 21 are filled with change and responsibilities, making one more suitable to make appropriate

The government is conducting an idea to whether lower the minimum legal drinking age in the United States or not. Many Americans forbid the idea of legalizing the drinking age so that it would be profitable to the businesses. Likewise, there have been many advantages and disadvantages of why should the government allow young adults drink under the age of 21. To prevent this issue, many Americans have provided reasoning that will support the idea of keeping the minimum legal drinking age where it is now. The government should maintain the minimum legal drinking age in the United States at the age of 21.

The legal drinking age in the United States will always be a point of contention. No one can settle upon a drinking age that everyone is in agreement with; should it be 18 or 21? Ages 18 and 21 are the most popular options, yet neither one has 100% of the vote. With the current legal drinking age in America standing at 21, meaning that people under the age of 21 cannot purchase or consume alcoholic food or beverages, there is the question of whether or not to lower it to 18 or 19 years old. This paper will argue that the drinking age should be lowered, and examine its impact on State University.

On February 3, 2017, Tim Piazza, a sophomore here at Penn State, tragically lost his life at the Beta Theta Pi fraternity house. This horrific event was a result of irresponsible consumption of alcohol and binge drinking. Sadly, this is not an isolated incident. Around the nation, countless young adults have lost their life due to the thoughtless consumption of alcohol. Unfortunately, the common census between the majority of the average day Americans is that the most effective way to make drinking safer for young adults is enforcing a minimum drinking age of twenty one. This law, as well as the common census, are a direct result from the efforts of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) more than thirty years ago (“Drinking Culture”). MADD’s objective and goal is quite understandable; they want the young adults of today’s world to be safe and not put themselves into dangerous situations with alcohol, but they doing more harm than good. (“The Problem”). Safety is the single objective from each side in this argument, but MADD’s flawed logic and ignorance to reality has formed a belief that results in an unsafe drinking culture, resulting in more deaths, such as the tragic passing of Tim Piazza, unless the drinking age is lowered to eighteen, as well as establishing an open dialogue about drinking itself.

Consuming alcohol is considered a rite of passage for the average young individual. The minimum drinking age required to legally consume alcohol varies in each country, ranging from it always being legal to drinking being illegal at any age, but most countries have set the age at 18-19. In the United States, as of 1988, the MLDA is 21 throughout its entire territory, while the age of majority starts at 18. This paper analyzes the arguments to lower the minimum drinking age and unify it with the age of majority. The factors discussed are alcohol-related traffic accidents, encouragement of unsafe drinking habits, and inconsistency between the perception of adulthood and the MLDA.

~ The topic and claim are basically stating that the higher you raise the drinking age the worse off all the college kids are going to be, If we did lower the drinking age it would take away their sense of rebelling and adrenalin rush that they get from doing something illegal.

In the U.S. News opinion piece, A Lower Age Would Be Unsafe, Laura Dean-Mooney states, “Lowering the drinking age would have dangerous long-term consequences: early teen drinkers are not only more susceptible to alcoholism but to developing the disease earlier and more quickly than others” (Dean-Mooney n.pag.). Despite this, getting rid of, or at least decreasing the lure of the forbiddenness of alcohol and bringing the consumption

But tighter enforcement of the minimum drinking age of 21 is not the solution. It's part of the problem.” (Paragraph 3). This statement was a bit eye opening as to what side the author was choosing to write from. The author clearly believes that the legal drinking age is too high and should be lowered. In my opinion the law should not be changed to a lower age but a higher one. The reasoning behind this is that if we raise the legal drinking age to 25 or 26 let’s say, then it would be harder for the younger college students to approach someone out of college to buy them the

There has been a debate going on about the minimum legal drinking age, or “MLDA”. Some people believe it has no impact on our youth, and should thus be lowered to the standard age of adulthood, age 18. They refuse to acknowledge the true significance of this law, however, and continue to see it as a futile attempt to control the inevitable. Yet in reality, having an MLDA of 21 has many benefits, and stands for a healthier view of alcohol consumption, regardless of the way people perceive it. It is for this reason, that the minimum legal drinking age should not be lowered to age 18.

Without a doubt, the United States has been facing serious national problems with underage drinking. Depending on personal ideologies, some people might not agree that the current minimum drinking age of twenty-one is based on scientific facts rather then ideology of prohibitionism. For example, since 1975 over seventeen thousand lives have been saved since the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) was changed to age twenty-one (Balkin 167). This shows that even over a short amount of time, a higher MLDA helps decrease the risk of teen suicides, accidents and overdose deaths. However, this widely debated topic has inevitably brought attention to the plethora of supporting and opposing viewpoints. The minimum legal drinking age of twenty-one

In the year 1984, President Ronald Reagan enacted a law that increased the minimum drinking Age all U.S states to 21 years. As a result, it is believed that the mortality rates due to road accidents reduced from 5,000 in the 80’s to 2, 000 in 2005 (Dean-Mooney). However, the issue of binge drinking remains unsolved with learning institutions having to deal with it every semester. In response to this, 134 college presidents formed the Amethyst Initiative, which is, a proposal allowing persons aged between 18 and 20 to consume alcoholic drinks Conversely, the Mothers against Drunk Driving (MADD), which pushed for the enactment of the law in 1984 believes that the Amethyst Initiative is misplaced. The push for a lower drinking age is a battle between the parental community and the student fraternity. For the drinking age too be lowered the Amethyst Initiative must compile concrete research and facts to support its findings. Nonetheless, historical data shows that increase in the minimum legal drinking age results in a decrease in the amount of deaths. As argued by Barry, Stellefson and Woosley, “the MLDA clearly reduces alcohol consumption and its associated harms” (8). In light of this, one can argue that the minimum drinking age should remain at 21 as lowering it may cause fatal consequences.

The laws concerning the minimum drinking age in this country sometimes seem ridiculous and unnecessary. In this paper, I will discuss why certain laws are unfair and I will provide alternatives to certain problems concerning underage drinking and binge drinking.