Lowering The Minimum Drinking Age

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.”

Stating that drinking at a younger age causes more health hazards proves that having the drinking age higher would be safer for oneself and the community as a whole. In addition, younger adults could easily become exposed to alcoholism. It is stated by the National Highway Institute in a study done on alcohol abuse among teens that “the overall risk for alcoholism decreases 14 percent with each year of age that drinking is postponed” (Boulard 52). The drinking age should not be lowered because the higher the drinking age, the less risk there is for alcoholism. Not only does drinking cause health related problems, but it also produces risks of injury or death. It has been proven that “youth alcohol use contributes to higher incidences of drunk driving, traffic accidents, unwanted pregnancies, and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)…” (“Update: Alcohol Issues” 1-2). Not only is underage drinking illegal, but drinking and driving is as well. Therefore, maintaining the drinking age would prevent the number of accidents and deaths. However, some believe that drinking wine is good for the heart. This is only true for drinking in moderation. If one drinks more than a couple of glasses, this does not go into effect, and the number of bad health related consequences outnumbers the good. Studies have shown that “The lower death rate among moderate drinkers is due to the reduction in heart disease, specifically atherosclerosis or

In recent discussions of the drinking age limit, people have always said that the drinking age limit should be lowered. Some may argue that alcohol is not bad and that it can actually be beneficially. Many people would want the drinking age limit to be lowered so that it is legal for young adults to drink. If the drinking age limit were to be lowered there would be a drastic difference in society. In my perspective I will argue that the drinking age limit should not be lowered.

"Adults under 21 are able to vote, sign contracts, serve on juries, and enlist in the military, but are told that they are not mature enough to have a beer?," said Ruth C. Engs, a professor of Applied Health Sciences at Indiana University (Engs). No matter what is done, teenagers and young adults all over America are going to drink if they want to. The question is, why can 't they start legally drinking when they enter adulthood? An alternative to simply lowering the minimum legal drinking age could be thought of, such as, having a learner 's permit for responsible drinking for people between the ages of 18-21. In other cultures where the minimum legal drinking age is lower, there is not as large of a problem with drinking. Lowering the minimum legal drinking age would stop criminalizing a large amount of people for the minor crime of underage drinking, which on your record makes it hard for young people to apply for jobs or apply to colleges.

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.

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 Alexis Aguirre in The University Star, “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” (Aguirre). Sure enough, if the drinking age were lowered to 18 it would avoid the illegal, abused intake of alcohol by 18 year olds. According to the U.S Department of Health and Human Services, “Each year, approximately 5,000 young people under the age of 21 die as a result of underage drinking” (U.S Department of Health and Human Services). A way of avoiding such tragedies is lowering the drinking age to 18, teaching younger

In the 1980s, the United States raised the Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) to 21, from 18, in an attempt to protect the nation 's youth. This placed the USA among the few countries whose drinking age is above 18. These countries include most of Canada, the Republic of Korea, Nicaragua, Iceland, Japan, Norway, Sweden, Egypt, Indonesia, Micronesia, and Palau (Jernigan). Around the world, drinking ages vary; for example, in Slovenia, Italy, Portugal, Malta and Greece, you can drink before you turn 18, and in parts of India, you cannot legally obtain alcohol until age 25 (Jernigan; Mukherjee). This leads to an important question on whether our democracy should lower the MLDA. The facts on underage drinking, international data on lower drinking ages, current enforcement of underage drinking laws, as well as proposed implications of programs coupled with a lower drinking age provides provoking data pointing towards the ethical lowering of the drinking age. The democracy of the United States of America should lower the MLDA, but also adopt a mandatory alcohol education class, and a graduated licensing system.

According to Andrew Herman, “Each year, 14,000 die from drinking too much. 600,000 are victims of alcohol related physical assault and 17,000 are a result of drunken driving deaths, many being innocent bystanders” (470). These massive numbers bring about an important realization: alcohol is a huge issue in America today. Although the problem is evident in Americans of all ages, the biggest issue is present in young adults and teens. In fact, teens begin to feel the effects of alcohol twice as fast as adults and are more likely to participate in “binge-drinking” (Sullivan 473). The problem is evident, but the solution may be simple. Although opponents argue lowering the drinking age could make alcohol available to some teens not

The case to lower the minimum drinking age in Wisconsin, the self-proclaimed beer capital of the world, is emerging despite the majority of people who oppose it. Both the Republican and Democratic parties contain majority’s who oppose lowering the drinking age, yet conservatives are the least supportive when compared to liberals. The biggest opponent is the group that initiated the age increase years ago, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD). On the other hand, people who tend to support lowering the drinking age, are regular drinkers and people who have a higher education, more specially obtain a postgraduate degree. Also, contrary to popular conception, younger adults are no more likely to support lowering the drinking age than older adults. The argument is critical because of what is at stake, lives and more uniquely, young lives. Therefore, the conversation of the minimum drinking age will not cease any time soon as the safety of the nation is paramount and directly influenced by the passage of drinking

I. Introduction: Starting in 1970 21 states reduced the minimum drinking age to 18. Another 8 reduced it to 19 or 20. However, these states noticed increases in alcohol-related fatalities among teenagers and young adults. As a result, of the 29 states that had lowered their drinking age, 24 raised the age again between 1976 and 1984. By 1984, only three states allowed 18-year-olds to drink all types of alcoholic liquor. The enactment of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 prompted states to raise their legal age for purchase or public possession of alcohol to 21 or risk losing millions in federal highway funds. The states who raised it were given highway funding by the

Around the world new adults are flaunting their new found responsibilities consuming alcohol at the average age of 18. However, unlike most countries in the world the United States has determined to establish their drinking age to be set at 21 years of age. This antiquated position is unjust to many young American adults. The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 should be revised and reconstituted to the legal age of 18. To provide a more suitable America that is secure and reasonable for all young adults. The drinking age needs to be lowered so that it can reduce traffic fatalities, reduce binge drinking, and allow young adults to understand an old ongoing tradition. It’s time to reconsider the drinking age to allow a safer environment for everyone.

Over the past twenty years the minimum legal drinking age has been twenty-one in all US states, but that has not stopped citizens of the United Sates from attempting to lower the age. Following the end of prohibition in the United Sates during the Great Depression, all states agreed on a set of twenty-one to be the legal drinking age. For almost forty years there was no change in the drinking age until a decrease in the age for voting occurred. This led to the gradual decrease of the minimum legal drinking age to somewhere between the ages of eighteen and twenty among twenty-one states. Recent data collected by Henry Wechsler and Toben F. Nelson, both of which obtain either a

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).

Many under the age of 21 are getting in trouble with the law in alcohol related incidents, which wouldn?t take place if the drinking age was lowered. Many underage drinkers drink in more dangerous places in order to avoid law enforcement. "... when these young adults ?drink on the sly in unsupervised settings, they are