Rhetorical Analysis

There has always been a big controversy on the legal drinking age and what it should be. The consumption of alcohol can be seen has dangerous or has a medicine. The legal drinking age should be raised due to violent crime, domestic abuse, and DUI all related to abusing alcohol. Raising the legal drinking age will decrease the amount of violent crime, domestic abuse, and DUI related deaths.

What do you think the legal drinking age should be? For years the question, “What should be the legal drinking age,” has been in the air. Many people have been arguing whether or not the legal age to drink should be raised, stay the same, or lowered. Save Us from Youth talks about how there is not a consistency of laws for an eighteen-year-old. As a young adult you are given many rights to be certified as an adult, yet are held back as youth because drinking is prohibited. Different appeals to logic and red herring are used in Save Us from Youth, to give the authors view on consistency of laws and being an adult.

Upon turning eighteen you are considered to be legal adult and receive all of the responsibilities that accompany the title. At the age of eighteen year olds you receive and are expected to use the rights and responsibilities to vote, serve on juries, get married, sign contracts, join the military--which includes taking on the responsibilities of life and death--and be prosecuted as an adults in the court of law along with many other things. In 1984, the national government raised the drinking age from 18 to 21. Mothers Against Drunk Driving was a key contributing organization that influenced the change in the minimum drinking age. While there are arguments for both sides, it is said that if the national minimum legal drinking age is

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.

Lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18 will delay underage drinking, as well as terrible injuries or deaths that result from such conduct. Keeping the drinking age at 21 is driving to more cases of binge drinking in a short time because it has become a ritual among this age group. However by lowering the drinking age to 18, the binge drinking practice will decline, because it will demystify the drunken experience therefore viewed the moderate consumption of alcoholic beverages becomes a disciplined behavior.

According to “Underage drinking and the drinking age” at the age of 18 you are considered an adult, however the article suggests most 18 year olds are not mature enough to drink responsibly. Underage drinking is an immense problem that college students and young men and women face. Main states, that although students argue that when they turn 18 and are considered adults, they should be able to legally vote, risk their lives in the military, get married, and legally drink. Depending on where the soldier is stationed depends on whether they can drink or not. Soldiers stationed in the United States drink less because they are under less stress. Many soldiers and young adults use alcohol as a way to cope. Years ago alcohol Prohibition was used to stop the use of alcohol altogether. The availability that underage drinkers have to get their hands on alcohol is high (Main).

Alcohol has been a large part of society for many years. Currently out of the 190 countries in the world, 61% of them have drinking ages of 18 or 19. While 12 other countries have their drinking ages set at 21. In those 12 countries is the United States, who after 1984 raised their national minimum drinking age when Congress passed the Minimum Drinking Age Act. The drinking age in recent years has became a topic of controversy with people arguing that it showed be lowered back to 18 or 19. Their reasoning for this is that when a citizen in the United States turns 18 they are allowed to vote, enlist for the draft, serve in the armed forces, and get married, and serve on a jury. They are now considered adults in the eyes of the government. However while being considered a legal adult, individuals cannot drink. The argument for lowering the drinking age is that if an individual is treated as an adult and can die for their country, individuals should be able to drink alcohol legally. While there is support for lowering the drinking age, there is also support for keeping the drinking age where it is currently set. The common argument for keeping the drinking age at twenty-one is that the brain is not fully developed and alcohol usage before a developed brain can cause side effects. There are studies supporting both sides’ arguments for lowering the drinking age and keeping the drinking age.

In the United States, a citizen is considered an “adult” at the age of 18, and with that new title comes many responsibilities, such as the right to vote and to join the army. However, the legal drinking age in America is twenty-one. This issue has been a major controversy for some time now that faces both national and state governments. Should the drinking age be lowered to the age when legally a person becomes an adult and assumes all other adult responsibilities, or should it remain at a higher age to allow people to grow more mature and, hopefully, make more responsible decisions?

The Drinking age debate for young adults have been very controversial since the 1970s to the present days.The Drinking age have been very controversial between the age of 18 and the age of 21. For many years, Most people wanted the drinking age to be 18 because they believe since u are an adult u are mature. On the other hand the other side believes that keeping the legal drinking age at 21 causes less accidents and deaths. They have been many studies on why the drinking age shouldnt be 18. There are many benefits and risks of having the drinking age lowered from 21 to 18.

“A drinking age of 21 doesn’t work” by John McCardell it is focus on the fact that because people at age 21 are still not responsible to drink, that they should race to the drinking age. The argument is based on some facts, like for example, he states that there has been more deaths at age 21 than at any other age. McCardell, makes use of pathos, he uses the emotional side by bringing up the campaign by “ Mothers against drunk driving” making the audience see that there is even a campaign run by mothers who opposes the drinking age because of the consequences that it brings, like drinking and driving. The author McCardell, uses the “Good reasoning” by using facts, for example he used the opinion of psychiatrists, whom support the rise of the

“Everyday in the United States more than 4,750 kids under age 16 have their first drink,” according to study done at John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. That’s a lot of teenagers trying alcohol but wait; I thought the legal drinking age was 21 years old? If there are around 5,000 kids under 16 trying alcohol each day than why do we have a legal drinking age in place if people already are breaking it? I think if the drinking age was younger, less under aged kids wouldn’t be so tempted to start experimenting with drinking in the first place knowing that they didn’t have to wait until they turned 21 years old. Minnesota should lower the drinking age to 18 years old in bars and resturants because it will result in less binge drinking,

       Do the current laws involving the age at which adults can start drinking really make sense? There are many reasons why the government changed the legal drinking age to 21, but has this actually caused a decrease in the amount of alcohol consumed by persons between 18 and 21? Alcohol related crime and traffic accidents have gone down in recent years, but the source of this drop may not simply have to do with raising the drinking age, as the government would like you to believe. There is a theory in psychology called the Reactance Theory, which disagrees with the idea that by making more restrictive laws, drinking will slow down.

One approach that many people who are concerned with the issue take is to lowering the drinking age because current policies don?t work. Most people taking this approach believe that the laws in place today do little or nothing to help or stop underage drinking, and in some ways even make it worse. "At the very least, American youth alcohol policy is ineffective. More disturbing, the drinking age may be counterproductive. It is applied so rigidly in most of the country that it precludes any attempt to teach young people how to handle alcohol responsibly." (Hanson).

The controversy on the proper drinking age is one that has been repeatedly discussed and researched over the years. Its common to hear the argument “If someone is old enough to take a bullet for their country, they should be allowed to drink alcohol.” But is that enough justification? Some would say no. “According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) it is estimated that in 2004 there were more than 1,700 student deaths, 599,000 injuries, and 696,000 assaults annually associated with excessive drinking” (Fennell 247). Given these numbers, would lowering the drinking age really be the best thing for America’s youth?

Seaman then uses Logos to persuade his readers to believe that “ the minimum drinking age of 21 is not the solution. It’s part of the problem”(Seaman 2). He goes about convincing his audience by offering facts and statistics about different laws and when they where passed by congress. Although Seaman makes a compelling argument, he has many flaws within his argument. Seaman strives to show his audience that there is a counterargument to his claim. However, Seaman clearly states that when the minimum drinking age was raised; it “saved lives” (Seaman 2). Even though Seaman might have tried to dispute that idea, regardless, more lives are being saved with the drinking age set at twenty-one rather