Pros And Cons Of Lowering The Drinking Age

In 1984 Ronald Reagan proposed a new law that declared that the legal drinking age must raised up to 21 instead of the age of 18. The law was forced upon the states by threatening them by stating that the government will reduce their highway funding until the states passed the law. Of course all the states eventually change their legal drinking age to 21. Some critics believe that this law’s results have been very successful, however the law possesses many insecurities, but certain programs can be arranged to help educate teenagers on alcohol.

There are several controversies in the world today, but one that really catches my attention is on the topic of whether or not the drinking age in the United States should be lowered from 21 to 18. Many people have debated about this topic for several years, and there are several different opinions on this topic. Some people think it is dangerous to lower the drinking age; some people support it. Some children think it is stupid to lower the drinking age; some children support it. However, I strongly believe that the legal drinking age should be lowered from 21 to 18 for several reasons, such as 18 year olds are allowed to do several other adult activities, other countries have the legal age at 21, and people who are under the age of 18 are still going to drink alcohol whether it is illegal or not.

In the United States a large topic of discussion is the drinking age, should it stay at 21 or should the age be dropped. Somewhat recently the age has been changed from 18 to 21 and a lot of people want to be changed back. By 1988, all 50 U.S. states and the federal government had set the drinking age at 21 years of age, but is it time to lower the MLDA (minimum legal drinking age) to 18 years of age? Those who argue against lowering the MLDA claim that teens have yet to reach an age of maturity in which they can responsibly drink alcohol, and thus are more likely to develop binge drinking habits and endangerment of themselves and others by drinking prior to the age of 21. Those in favor of lowering the MLDA argue that the current MLDA doesn’t stop underage drinking and promotes binge drinking into private less controlled environments. Not only this, but lowering the MLDA strengthens the economy and can gradually expose people to drinking without overdoing it.

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.

There have been arguments, more so now than before, about lowering the legal drinking age from 21 to 18 years of age. Realistically, to do so would be unideal. From 1609 when the first colonist arrived in Jamestown in 1919, in the United States of America there were no age restrictions on alcohol consumption or purchase. Prior to Prohibition drinking laws varied by state, and there was no national law in concerns to a drinking age. Most states had no laws establishing a legal drinking age. In 1920, the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, making the sale and consumption of alcohol in the United States illegal. When Prohibition ended in 1930 the legal drinking age was 18 until 1984, when Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, it forced states to alter their age requirements to legally buy and possess alcohol. The National Minimum Drinking Age Act raised the age limit from 18 to 21 by October of 1986. If states failed to do so, they would lose 10% of their federal highway funding. The goal of the act was achieved by October 1986, which still stand until today. Yet, there are arguments over lowering the drinking age back to 18. To lower the drinking age to 18 would be a defective idea for numerous reasons. The age limit should remain at 21 because all things that can kill you must have restrictions, 18, 19, and 20 year old’s brains are not fully developed, and because it would be in the best for the public interest.

In over 100 countries across the world, the act of legally possessing and consuming alcohol is permissible below the age of 21, most often within the age range of 18-20. Nevertheless, there are many additional countries such as Spain and Haiti, which enforce a minimum age of 16 years among citizens. With the ratification of the controversial 1984 National Minimum Drinking Age Act, the United States federal government now requires each state to conform to the drinking age restriction of 21, or otherwise endure a penalty, encompassing a 10% reduction of federal highway transportation funds, attributed to the state in violation. Unfortunately, despite the conviction that a higher minimum drinking age prevents destructive, irrational actions conducted as a product of holding an underdeveloped brain, this federal ruling not only increases the seductive temptation of underage drinking, but additionally and equally promotes organized crime within the United States-a toxic societal conflict which would effectively be negated by a reduction of the minimum federal drinking age.

Studies show that keeping the drinking age at twenty-one improves lives. When the United States raised the age limit to twenty-one in 1985, a shortage of drinking occurred at a whopping 40% by 1991. As a result, fewer students drop out of high school, less motor accidents occur, and suicides rates dropped significantly. However, lowering the drinking age to eighteen will bring serious consequences on young adults by reversing these statistics. Lowering the drinking age will cause significant health problems, draw youth to poor judgment situations, before they are even old enough to handle the responsibility of drinking.

The debate of lowering the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) has been going on for decades in the United States. Those opposed, argue that the current MLDA is not efficient and counterproductive (Engs 1). One study indicated that thousands of lives under the age of twenty-one are lost each year to alcohol (McCardell 1). Underage drinking is an issue that persists, despite evidence suggesting that the minimum legal drinking age of twenty-one has lowered alcohol usage among individual who are underage (Toomey 1961-1962). Teens tend to over drink, which can lead to severe consequences. They do not know better because they are inexperienced and not aware of the effects. Better drinking habits could be enforced by lowering the minimum legal drinking age. This could give eighteen year olds, when first considered as adults by most states, the right to decide about their alcohol usage ("Should" 1), and the ability to make safer choices which keep themselves and others safe.

There has been an ongoing controversy in the United States on whether the drinking age should be lowered to eighteen like most of the world or if it should stay at twenty-one. Underage drinking has been a major controversial issue for years, yet why is it not under control? Teenagers are continuing to buy alcohol with fake identification cards, drink, get into bars, and drink illegally. As a teen I have proof that these things are going on not only in college but in high school as well. There are a lot of factors that come together to why the drinking age should be lowered to eighteen; the most obvious reason is too many people are drinking before they are twenty-one. Liquor stores, bars, and clubs all want to make money and if they can get away with selling to underage teens then they will. A study done by the Academic Search Premier agrees that, ?By now it is obvious that the law has not succeeded in preventing the under-21 group from drinking? (Michael Smith 1).

Despite the problems that would arise, many people are beginning to feel that the drinking age should be lowered from twenty-one to eighteen. Studies have been made; however, no hard evidence suggesting lowering the minimum drinking age would help have surfaced. Although there are countless studies of how alcohol has many harmful effects on teenagers, there is a great deal of negative criticism about what if the drinking age is lowered. Some would say the morally right decision is to not allow teens the chance to hurt themselves. Everyone is entitled to having his or her own opinions and beliefs. However, the overall health of the youth of our country seems a little more important than some personal belief. The drinking age should not be

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

The question on weather the Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) should be lowered has elicited much debate in the recent years. The proponents to the proposal of lowering the MLDA argue that setting it at 21 years has not resulted in the control of underage drinking, but has instead led to cases of binge drinking which leads to health and life threatening behavior among the teens. The opponents, on the other hand, argue that at 18 years, the teens have not attained an age where they can responsibly handle drinking. As a result they have higher tendency to harm or kill themselves or others by drinking. The opponents also cite the fact that traffic fatalities and accidents have drastically reduced with a higher MLDA. The MLDA should not be lowered since it would lead to more problems for the teens and society in general.

The article from Jay Evensen oppose the idea of lowering the age-limit for drinking to 18. He oppose the idea because he believe that by lowering the drinking age, there will be an increase in mortality for the youth (which in this case below 21). He believes that it is true that the 21-years-old drinking age creates lots of binge drinking activities, but it is not the solution to lower the drinking age because the cost that might happened will be even worse. He stated that “there really is no logical connection between being old enough to qualify as a fit and effective soldier and making mature drinking decisions. Rental car companies understand this, which is why they generally don’t trust their cars to anyone under 25”.

The debate for the legal drinking age of eighteen or twenty-one has been a topic of discussion for a long time. Personally, most people support the side that they should just leave the legal age at twenty-one. There are many reasons as to why people would support this side of the argument. If the drinking age gets lowered to eighteen, it would lead to cause more car related accidents, there will be an easier access to alcohol, and that it would be medically irresponsible to drink at a younger age.

It has been a reason for debating whether the Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) in some states of the United States should be lowered from 21 to 18 as it is in most countries in Europe. Although an 18-year-old is regarded as an adult in the United States and having the right to vote, buy a lottery ticket, a pack of cigarettes, get a tattoo, and join the army, they do not have the legal right to buy and consume alcohol. So, in this essay, I am going to explain why Minimum Legal Drinking Age should not be reduced to 18 because it would affect negatively the development of the adolescent’s brain, elevate the rate of car crashes, and eventually, death among young youth.