For decades now, the issue of what age should be considered the proper age to drink alcohol has been intensely debated. Since the 1980s, the nationwide legal drinking age has been 21 and older for the United States. However, this age limit imposed on the consumption of alcohol was controversial then, and it continues to be so today.
In 2008, John McCardell, leader of Choose Responsibility and former president of Middlebury College, joined a campaign known as the Amethyst Initiative, which proposed lowering the drinking age to an unspecified number (Amethyst Initiative). In conjunction with this initiative, McCardell wrote an article entitled “Rethinking the drinking age of 21”. On the other hand, an article in the Chicago Tribune called “Keep the drinking age at 21” argues why the drinking age should remain the same. Both of these conflicting essays take a personal stance on a long-debated issue. While McCardell explains his desire for a lower drinking age, the Chicago Tribune attempts to refute any possible reason the legal drinking age should be lower than 21.
One particular matter that McCardell and the Chicago Tribune disagree on is the issue of statistics. In his essay, McCardell disputes the idea that statistics should be used to maintain the legal drinking age of 21. He argues that “even when the findings [of studies that determine the connection between alcohol problems and the drinking age] are inconsistent…we have tried to frame policies whose effects can be best measured by more data, statistics, charts, correlations, and formulae.” McCardell is frustrated that what he sees as unreliable statistics and data are being used as reasons to keep the legal drinking age at 21. He goes on to clarify why he views the statisti...
... middle of paper ...
...ons that the drinking age has had on the safety of college students. Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune uses statistics to express its belief that the drinking age of 21 is safer than that of a lower drinking age, and that lowering the drinking age will only cause more harm to individuals, not result in their safety. Both essays are primarily concerned with which drinking age will lead to the optimal safety of the individual. Perhaps this common ground can lead to a compromise within the debate concerning the legal drinking age.
Works Cited
"Amethyst Initiative." Amethyst Initiative » Welcome to the Amethyst Initiative. Web. 23 Sept. 2011. .
"Keep the Drinking Age at 21." Chicago Tribune. 26 Aug. 2008. Web. 23 Sept. 2011.
McCardell, John. "Rethinking the Drinking Age of 21." The Guardian. 22 Aug. 2008. Web. 23 Sept. 2011.
In the New York times article “Lower the Drinking age to 19” Mr.Steinberg points out the importance of why it might be more beneficial to the United States to lower the current drinking age. He debunked the common belief of underage drinking being linked to highway accidents, he explains instead of raising the drink age maybe we just raise the driving age to 18. He states that “Moreover countries that use 18 for both the drinking and driving age generally have safer highways that the United States.” Laurence Steinberg lower the drinking age New York times. Laurence then talk about the only reason why a higher drinking age would make sense is in the case
According to Center for Disease Control and Protection, about 4,700 people under age twenty one die from injuries involving underage drinking every year. Illegal alcohol consumption has been a major problem with high school students around the nation. Lowering the drinking age from twenty one would result in major consequences for America’s adolescents. By lowering the drinking age, alcohol would be more accessible to those who choose to participate in underage drinking. The desire to drink for teens and young adults between the ages of fourteen and twenty can be caused by peer pressure or an act of rebellion. One beer might not seem like a big deal at the time, but it could lead to a life of addiction and alcoholism.
In the contents of this paper, four points of view will be discussed on an extremely controversial issue that has an effect on a large percentage of citizens in the United States. The issue at hand is whether the legal age to consume alcohol should be lowered from 21 to 18, and will state a pro and con side, as well as 2 stakeholders for each side of the argument. The stakeholders on the pro side are as follows: Underage consumers of alcohol, businesses that sell and the companies that produce alcohol. The people on the con side of the argument that would want the legal age to remain at 21 include State and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, as well as the demographic of Parents that would prefer to keep their children from being exposed to alcohol at a potentially young age. As you continue to read the stakeholders opinions and arguments will be explained, after which the author’s personal opinion will be advanced. After doing my own in depth research on the topic, the legal age to consume alcohol should remain at 21 as set by the United States Congress when they passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act (NMDAA) in July of 1984. This act punished every state that allowed persons below 21 years of age to purchase and publicly possess alcoholic beverages by reducing its annual federal highway apportionment by ten percent. (National Minimum Drinking Age Act) This caused all fifty continental U.S. states to set their legal drinking age to 21, and it has remained there for thirty years.
Each year, about 5,000 teens are killed or injured in traffic crashes as a result of underage drinking and about 1,900 are due to car accidents. (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and U.S. Department of Transportation) In the newsletter, safety in numbers by National highway traffic administration and U.S department of transportation “Of all the people who died in motor vehicle crashes during 2012, 31 percent died in crashes involving a drunk driver, and this percentage remains unchanged for the past 10 years” (Vol 1, 2013). Crashes involving alcohol include fatal crashes in which a driver had a BAC of .01 g/ ld. or higher (Underage Drinking Statistics)). Deadly crashes involving alcohol are twice as common in teens compared to people 21 and older. This is because teens’ judgment skills are harmed more by alcohol. Teens who drink not only risk hurting themselves, they risk hurting their friends, family, and even strangers when driving intoxicated. Teens and parents both need a strong reminder that underage drinking is illegal and can have disastrous consequences. According to Health Day News, “one study found that in 2011, 36 percent of U.S. college students said they'd gone binge drinking (five or more drinks in one sitting) within the past two weeks, as compared to 43 percent of college students in 1988. Since 2006, the current law has reduced the rate of drunk driving crashes among young Americans” (Preidt, 2014 and DeJong, 2014). This proves that lives have been saved after the legal drinking age increased. According to an article in Time Magazine called “Should the Drinking Age Be Lowered?”, “lowering the drinking age to 18 would stop infantilizing college students, but it would probably kill mor...
There has been debate on what age should people drink. Many think we should be able to drink at 18 or many people think we should be able to drink at the age 21 or older. Both cases makes some good points of why. There shouldn’t be any debate at all because bottom line the age limit on drinking is fine where it is for many reasons.
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 mature enough to handle it, lowering the drinking age actually teaches responsibility and safety in young adults, maintains consistency in age laws, and diminishes temptation.
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).
Bob Marley once said, “Herb is the healing of a nation, alcohol is the destruction.” This is the case when it comes to teens and alcohol. In America, the National Minimum Legal Drinking Age is a topic of great debate and controversy. Many people argue that the age restriction provides a safe environment for all citizens; whereas others disagree that the law creates an untrustworthy aura among teens. If the minimum legal drinking age were to be lowered, most people would be affected by it, whether it be by an increase in drunk-driving or a rise in crimes. Although teens are legally considered adults by the age of eighteen and the minimum legal drinking age prompts underage teens to exhibit risky behavior, the age restriction should not be lowered from twenty-one to eighteen because young teens would have easier access to alcohol, the minimum legal drinking age has decreased alcohol-related problems, and alcohol can cause damage to underage drinkers.
Now it is simply an opinion that tightening restrictions and increasing visibility enforcement will lower the number of drunk driving accidents and deaths. The legal age to consume alcohol in our nation, the United States of America, is 21 years of age; although, it was previously allowed at the age of 18, when one is accepted into adulthood. The National Minimum Drinking Age is imposed in every state that allows persons under 21 years of age to purchase and publicly possess alcoholic beverages.
Muhlenfeld, Elisabeth. “Seeking a Drinking Age Debate.” University Business 11.10 (2008): 53-4. Academic Search Premier. Web. 3 Mar. 2010.
Briar Clay Mrs. Bauch 05-16-16 Persuasive Speech Lowering the Drinking Age to 18 How many of you would like the chance to purchase an alcoholic beverage by the time you turn 18? Today I am going to go over some pros and cons of lowering the drinking age to 18. This is something I believe should be done in Iowa, or even the whole nation. Upon researching this topic I learned that ever since the drinking age was increased to 21 years of age more people have died from drug overdose. Another fact about drug overdose is that it has increased 102% since the increase in the drinking age.
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 has shown significant results in the prevention of accidents and death studies across the board. Accordingly, the MLDA should remain at the current age of twenty-one.
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 lowered due to the fact drunk driving, juvenile delinquency, and alcohol-related medical issues related to teens will increase.
The debate of whether the minimum legal drinking age should be lowered or not has been around for many years even since the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 raised the MLDA to age 21. Prior to that, the government has t...
As a result of underage drinking, 5,000 adolescents under the age of 21 die annually due to intoxication (taking motor vehicle crashes, homicides, suicides, and other injuries while intoxicated into consideration) (paragraph 2). Later in life, underage drinkers are more likely to develop alcoholism, poor performance in school, and risky sexual behavior (paragraph 43). Although this research is not opposed to my argument, there is an importance to acknowledging it as proof of dangerous, underage drinking occurring significantly regardless of whether it is illegal. More importantly, this research stems from adolescents drinking without the supervision of adults and in uncontrolled quantities. Since adolescents must wait a long period of time to drink legally, I believe they fear they must take advantage of drinking opportunities by excess drinking and risk of safety due to their restriction to alcohol. Based on this mindset, I believe exposure to alcohol at a younger age in controlled environments would not only decrease underage drinking in large quantities, but injury and death related to intoxication, as