What Are The 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.

Prohibition was a time in American history where any type of alcohol consumption, production, and distribution was banned. The thirteen-year, dry period finally came to an end because of the temptation and social urges alcohol presents. Throughout these thirteen years, people corruptly consumed, produced, and distributed alcohol as if the regulations instituted by the government were suggestions. Speakeasies would be held underground where drinkers would distribute gin they produced in their own bathtubs and have parties without law enforcement knowing (“Prohibition”). After the Prohibition laws were lifted in 1933 to create more revenue to aid the failing economy during the Great Depression, the drinking age was set at 21 but was later lowered

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.

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.

I don't believe that youngsters have the obligation or capacity to handle drinking while attempting to grow up and adapting new things all in the meantime. Would you have the capacity to handle everything? I feel that bringing down the base drinking age will impact more strategic alcoholism and more youngsters to misuse liquor. Bringing down the drinking age might likewise prompt more motor vehicle accidents among teenagers. If the drinking age is left where its at, then there may be less deadly mishaps than if United States brought down the Minimum Legal Drinking Age to 18. The writer of the essay, " Redefining the Problem Won't Make it Go Away", Linda Chavez, believes that, the drinking age should be left as it is, because he thinks that lowering drinking age is not a solution. Chavez say's, " Lowering the drinking age to eighteen won't solve these problems and would likely make them worse."(334). Moreover, the fact suggest that, in the 1970's 30 states brought down the drinking age, on the other hand it didn't keep going long. On the

Ten thousand four hundred ninety-seven. This is the number of people who died in 2016 from drunk-driving related accidents (“Motor Vehicle Safety”). People have brought up the debate about lowering the drinking age once again. The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 originally raised it from eighteen to twenty-one years old. The government convinced everyone to raise each of theirs by threatening to lower their state’s federal transportation funds. Some states have exceptions to this law in appropriate situations ("Background Of The Issue - Minimum Legal Drinking Age - Procon.Org."). Lawmakers should not approve of lowering the minimum legal drinking age because it would otherwise result in more deaths, higher risk for younger kids,

The national drinking age in the United States has been 21 years old since 1984. Most people support the law, but what are the real consequences if the minimum drinking age is lowered? In Henry Wechsler’s article called “Will Increasing Alcohol Availability by Lowering the Minimum Legal Drinking Age Decrease Drinking and Related Consequences Among Youths?”, shows both sides of the argument about whether the legal drinking age should be lowered.

The minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) in all 50 states is set at 21, but the question is if it should remain the same or should it be lowered. As said on the background information on ProCon.org many people who are for lowing the MLDA says setting it to 21 “pushes underage binge drinking into private and less controlled environments which leads to more life thearenting behaviors. People who oppose lowering the MLDA says that teens are not responsible enough to handle alcohol and can bring harm to themselves. In the beginning states we allowed to set there own alcohol consumption laws but in 1976 the US Supreme Court said the difference of age violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

It’s the big 18; as an official adult one can go out and vote for the country’s next president, one can become a real patriot and fight for the country they love, one can even purchase tobacco that they have been dying to try. These are just some of the benefits as a legal adult so why is it that in the United States it is still illegal to drink under the age of 21? Consuming alcohol is a right and just like any other right there are consequences that one must endure for abusing them. Lowering the drinking age has always been a controversial debate, on one hand with a stricter drinking requirement than majority of the world America is taking the precaution to keep their citizens out of harm’s way. But on other hand, even though America has

Although, people who opposing keeping the drink age at twenty-one have some good points; they fail to accept the good points of keeping it a twenty-one. When teens already have an issue with decision making and maturity, it creates an even harder problem to solve. Though some teens may be very responsible with life and could handle alcohol, most teens will struggle with being accountable for many actions. For example, many students today are consuming information that their brain is unable to handle yet. They constantly want to experience all of the things they have seen through the media, but they fail to realize that are unprepared to experience that emotionally (Elmore, 2012). Teens are unable to grow in maturity normally due to society

Would raising the legal drinking age to twenty-five years benefit our country from hurting the youth? If a twenty-one-year-old can join the military and can help defend the country, then why not keep the legal drinking age there? The drinking age should not be raised to age twenty-five. There are many important reasons that should be considered first. There are some reasons why; you are a legal adult at twenty-one, most people at the age are already out from under their parents, and maybe even in their third year of college living on their own.

Have you ever wondered why when you're 18 years old you're old enough to join the army and move out, but not drink or buy alcohol? People are trying to lower the drinking age to 18 because they think they're mature enough. They think if you can be in the military you should be able to drink. If you're old enough to fight in a war and live by yourself you're old enough to buy alcohol.

Should the Drinking age be lowered from 21 to a Younger Age, an issue that has been discussed for at least two years ago, this is an issue that affects to all people, there are lots of different opinions about this topic, people are asking questions about their security, about all the consequences that lowering the drinking age will lead.