100,000 people die a year from alcohol related accidents so Lowering the drinking age would just increase the amount of drinking, but if we raise the legal drinking age it would reduce the amount of car crashes, abusive relationships, and illegal underage drinking. It’s medically irresponsible to do under-age drinking, it’s actually medically irresponsible to do it at all.
If we would lower the legal drinking age the amount of car crashes would increase. A 1975 study showed that when 2 U.S states and a province in Canada lowered the legal-drinking age it increased fatal car accidents. Since the 1970’s young drinking in the U.S has declined, most of the decline happened in the 90’s. And decreases the amount of drunk drivers. Researchers say
Once the issue of lowering the minimum legal drinking age arose, many individual states began to review their drinking laws. Some chose to lower the legal age to eighteen, while others remained at twenty-one. Between 1970 and 1976, 29 states had changed their legal drinking age to eighteen (Main 35). What this caused was teenagers travelling from one state to another where they were allowed to drink at the age of eighteen. This travelling led to an increase in highway accidents due to drunk driving (Main 35). This was quickly brought to the federal government’s attention. In the article, “Turning 21 and the Associated Changes in Drinking and Driving After Drinking Among College Students” by Kim Fromme, Reagan R. Wetherill, and Dan J. Neal, the problem with alcohol related highway accidents was addressed. The states realized that the differences between legal drinking ages was causing a problem and by 1988, each state had set their legal drinking age back to twenty-one (Fromme, Neal, and Wetherill 22). Now, the question is whether or not this change has had a positive or negative effect on drinking habits amongst teenagers.
A lower drinking age law would save even more lives and also stop minors from drinking under the limit. Having it higher will result in more traffic injuries and fatalities among youth. A lower drinking age is effective in preventing alcohol-related deaths and injuries among youth. Young people are particularly vulnerable to the effects of heavy drinking age. According to John McCardell, founder of Choose Responsibility, the legal drinking age does not eliminate consumption among young people. Instead, it only drives underage drinking underground, creating a dangerous culture of irresponsible and extreme drinking. Although the legal purchase age is 21 years of age, a majority of college students under this age consume alcohol but in an irresponsible manner. This is because drinking by these youth is seen as an enticing "forbidden fruit," a "badge of rebellion against authority" and a symbol of "adulthood."Keeping the minimum legal drinking age at 21 will not dissuade young people who want to indulge in reckless alcohol intake. If anything, the age limit encourages binge drinking. Lowering the drinking age could make it easier to regulate consumption among younger adults as well as encourage healthy drinking habits. “For example, 22% of all students under 21 compared to 18% over 21 years of age are heavy drinkers.” “Among drinkers only, 32% of underage compared to 24% of legal age are heavy drinkers.”
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
According to Drew K. Saylor, he writes that studies from a meta-analytic review showed that "Raising the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) is associated with a 16% median decrease in alcohol-related crash outcomes while lowering the MLDA result in a 10% median increase in such crash outcomes" (332). The essence of this argument is that having the law of the drinking age to be 21 has a positive effect in the country because there is a decrease in car crashes. This is why the author Drew K. Saylor also agrees when he writes "A solution to this problem is not a simple as lowering the drinking age and asking young people to choose responsibility" (332). Saylor's point is to make the people understand that lowering the drinking age won't fix much because accidents will still happen, but with more frequency. Since in the past, the argument was deciding whether to raise or no to raise the drinking age to be 21 because of the danger youths had to live through if something happened to them. Drew K. Saylor argues that the drinking age has led to create a change in the people who are 18-20 years old because college students now a days tend to consume more alcohol than any others. When this happens among college students, it’s called binge drinking. According to Drew K. Saylor, a professor from the University of Virginia with a BA degree, he states that “Binge drinking is the consumption of an excessive amount of alcohol in a short period of time”
Every year, thousands of deaths occur as a result of drunk driving, and every day people are facing the consequences of irresponsible drinking. Because of the issues caused by irresponsible drinking, the US government passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984 which raised the minimum drinking age to twenty-one to prevent drinking-related accidents and violence. Despite the intent of its passing, it was a counterproductive decision. Because of the higher age restriction, high school upperclassmen and college underclassmen see drinking as an exciting, rebellious act. Consequentially, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act resulted in an increase in dangerous and irresponsible drinking which continues to this day. Not only does the
Sub point B: Drinking under the influence is perhaps the most detrimental subject when it comes to lowering the drinking age. Many are scared that these 18 year olds will take the streets and cause horrific accidents but According to www.chooseresponsiblity.org last accessed May 18th ,2014 "... twice as many 21-year-olds died in alcohol-related auto accidents as 18 year-olds.”
Many arguments against lowering the drinking age are legitimate arguments. Science has proven that alcohol can have adverse effects on the frontal lobe of the brain, which is the part of the brain that makes decisions. The frontal lobe is not fully developed until a person’s mid-20’s. “The potential for chronic problems such as greater vulnerability to addiction, dangerous risk-taking behavior, reduced decision-making ability, memory loss, depression, violence, and suicide is greater.” (Drinking Age ProCon.org). Statistics have proven that the younger you are, the more likely you are to binge drink. In the United
Teenagers are irresponsible. Young adults can not handle real life situations. New generations do not know how to use things in moderation. These are all stereotypes of America’s youth, yet they all seem to refer to teachable things. They are all things that need to be learned. Most of the time, the young are looked down on for messing up in life, yet the reality is that anyone can screw up, it just is more likely to happen to someone who has less experience as opposed to someone who has more. The more time a person is given to learn about something, and the more guidance they have, the more experienced and reliable they will become. This applies to many things, but one specific example is alcohol. Typically teens are seen as too irresponsible to have access to substances containing alcohol, but if they were to legally have it in their lives, it may educate them sooner as to how to use it properly and in moderation. In the United States of America, the drinking age should be lowered to eighteen years old.
In the United States the legal drinking age is 21 years old, while quite drastically all over the world the drinking ages in many countries are 18. If these countries have lower drinking ages and statistically better education scores and crime rates it could be beneficial for the government to lower the drinking age from 21 to 18, or it may be detrimental to the society.
In all 50 states the minimum legal drinking age is 21 and has been since after the Vietnam War (“Addressing the Minimum Legal Drinking Age in College Communities”). During the Vietnam War, arguments spread about how the legal drinking age should correspond with the draft age of 18 (“Addressing the Minimum Legal Drinking Age in College Communities”). After reports of drunk driving accidents and deaths with younger ages, President Ronald Reagan issued to have the MLDA raised to 21-years-old (“Addressing the Minimum Legal Drinking Age in College Communities”). “In 1984, 23 states had minimum alcohol purchasing ages of 21 year old, and on July 17th of that year, President Ronald Reagan signed legislation to withhold federal highway funds from the
My experiences in high school and college have taught me that restricting young people from drinking does not stop them from consuming alcohol. However, is this a good reason to lower the drinking age? People’s actions should conform to the law, as the purpose of laws is to maintain order in society. If the community could eliminate or alter laws simply by consistently breaking them, then legislation would become obsolete. Although the “21 law” does not completely prevent underage drinking, it has helped to reduce the number of incidents of underage drinking. Research studies conducted between 1960 and 1999 have been reviewed by University of Minnesota epidemiologists Alexander Wagenaar and Traci Toomey. Their conclusion is that the law has “reduced both youth alcohol use and alcohol-related traffic crashes” (DeJong 3). Furthermore, in 1999, New Zealand lowered its legal drinking age from 20 to 18. The result was a “big increase in traffic crashes and injuries among 15- to 19-year-olds” (DeJong 3).
Simultaneously, accidents involving automobiles without a doubt are devastating. How would one feel if a loved one was killed in a collision due to an intoxicated driver? Wouldn’t the individual want to do something about it? The death of the Candy Lightner’s daughter lead to her development of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and the 1984 National Minimum Drinking Age Act. This act gave full federal highway funds only to states that set the minimum age to purchase or consume alcohol at twenty-one years (Sanghavi). Once all states raised their MLDA to twenty-one years, drunk-driving accidents and deaths decreased. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the reduction in traffic fatalities due to the legal drinking age of twenty-one prevented 846 deaths in 1997 and prevented a total of 17,359 deaths since 1975 (Balkin 168). This single statistic shows that automobile accidents have substantially decreased in response to the authorization of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act. In addition, the average teenager earns their drivers license at the age of seventeen. This being said, allowing a young driver with only one years experience (excluding a learners permit) to legally consume alcohol would surely be an irresponsible decision. Most people know
Reviewing these statists one may be able to analaze and see that even drivers between 21 to 24 were high at risk. What would make a person want to lower the drinking age to 18. Young adults at eighteen are new drivers and less expierenced then the 21 + drivers and logically would produce more fatal crashes.
While people want to lower the drinking age, they are right not doing so because this could cause more car accidents. In an article titled Study: Lowering The Drinking Age Increases Car Crashes Among Youth by Join Together Staff, the author states “Several studies in the United States have shown significant reductions in alcohol-related traffic crashes since the Uniform Drinking
Evidence shows, when all states in the USA adopted the legal drinking age to 21, drinking among people aged 18 to 20 years declined from 59% to 32%, which decreased the number of driving accidents. Drinking by those below the age of 21 is strongly associated with alcohol-impaired driving.