Thursday, December 5, 2013

Week #9 Legal Drinking Age


Underage drinking is a widespread problem in the U.S. Since the 1980s, the legal drinking age has been 21 – enforced at the state level, but heavily encouraged at the federal level. The initial idea was to stop highway fatalities for young drinkers, according to TIME on June 6, 2008.  For most of the rest of the world, the legal drinking age is just 18.  For a country that legally recognizes people as adults at the age of 18 (they can vote and enlist in the military), strict discipline is imposed if anyone under the age of 21 is caught drinking alcohol. Legal trouble from MIP’s can span months, and keep kids from pursuing certain degrees in college. 
            The aforementioned TIME article describes a new insight to the drinking age debate.  Former Middlebury College President John McCardell Jr. is promoting the cause to lower the drinking age to 18 – by providing the youngsters with a license to drink if they complete 42 hours of education on the history, chemistry, psychology, and sociology of alcohol.  He argues that by bringing underage drinking out in the open, there would be less abuse of the drug.  Whereas now, underage kids are forced to drink behind closed doors completely unsupervised.  If out in the open, there would be less binge drinking, fewer untreated alcohol poisonings, and better supervision of new drinkers.
            However, against the cause of course is M.A.D.D., or Mothers Against Drunk Driving.  On September 14, 2012, PolicyMic published an article criticizing efforts to lower the drinking age.  They cited three main reasons to keep the legal drinking age at 21.  First, drunk driving is highest amongst 18-25 years olds.  M.A.D.D argues that if the age were lowered, even more drunk driving accidents would occur in the 18-20 year old range.  Second, with binge-drinking and alcohol poisonings so prevalent on college campuses already, the article contends that by lowering the drinking age, it would subject more kids to the harsh effects of alcohol.  Last, alcohol would only increase the impulsive nature of youngsters.  The potential for violent behavior would increase if more people had legal access to alcohol. 
            Personally, I do agree with lowering the drinking age.  As a minor, I hardly had any trouble getting alcohol.  But what endangered my safety the most was trying to hide it from my parents and law enforcement.  Rather than call my parents to pick me up from a party, I would drive home under the influence and hope I didn’t see any cops.  Minors are going to drink.  It goes along with the age.  I agree with John McCardell Jr.’s idea of educating people before allowing them to drink.  If I had known a sliver of the dangers alcohol poses, I believe I wouldn’t have engaged in binge drinking like I did.  Now that I am old enough to legally drink, I find that I don’t drink near as often as I did when it was illegal for me.  The risk factor is gone, and so is the major enticing elements that drinking provides.  By lowering the drinking age, the risk factor would be gone for thousands of kids, and so would a large portion of the dangers surrounding underage drinking.  

No comments:

Post a Comment