Studies have found that keeping the MLDA at 21 reduces traffic accidents and fatalities by 13%. (Minimal Legal Drinking Age, 1) Lowering the MLDA to 18 would increase the rate of binge drinking under the age of 18, if MLDA was lowered. (Minimal Legal Drinking Age, 2) Lowering the MLDA to 18 would also give middle schoolers and high schoolers easier access to alcohol. Many believe that 18 year olds are not responsible enough to handle alcohol consumption and is more susceptible to the influence of alcohol. (Pros and Cons of Lowering the Drinking Age,
By July, 1, 1970 thirty states minimize their MLDA to 18. By 1980 most of the United States lowered the MLDA to 18 except 14 states. Referable to the legislation of the Minimum Legal Drinking age act of 1984, all the United States raised their minimum age again to 21. The minimum legal drinking age should be 21 because the car accidents will be less, and the possibility of intoxication will decrease, The proponents expressed that the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) did not prevent youths from drinking, but further it made them drunk in a really dangerous place away from their parents and the guild control. While the opponents debated that by age 21 you will be more responsible and you can experience precisely what harms you.
Years after the drinking age was lowered, studies started to claim that the states that enacted a lower drinking age had a rise in fatal car crashes for people in the age group 18-20. The two main studies, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study and the National Transportation Safety Board study were used in the Senate Congress debate (Miron 318). Michigan was the first state to raise their drinking age, but the time it took to raise it at the state level was a long time. As different states changed their drinking ages, and some kept their drinking ages, it allowed people to drive across state lines to purchase alcohol. Something the typical teenager would do to get a few brews for the weekend.
Now that more people are aware of the effects of alcohol, the question is should they lower the drinking age to 18 because at that age a person is considered an adult. With teens being more educated in high school and collage one would think they will not make the mistake of driving drunk, now that they are aware of the consequences. If young people in other countries can handle the responsibility of drinking, why can't it be the same for our country?
According to Center for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2015, 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (29%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States. The cause of drunk driving is alcohol; however, it would be difficult to get people to stop selling alcohol. Alcohol is a big money maker for stores and alcoholic beverage companies. According to MADD, 57% of fatally injured drivers had alcohol and/or other drugs in their system — 17% were caused by both. Some effects of drunk driving are; car crashes, severe injuries, fatal accidents, and more.
Drunk driving casualties is one of the factors that caused people to question the age of which someone is allowed to drink. Casualty caused by druk driving of the last 40 years. In the 70’s states lowered it to 18 due to the lowering of the reduced military enlistment and voting age. The community will say that raising the age of the drinking age to 21 reduced the amount of casualties caused by drunk driving but that is not true. In 1984 the drinking age was changed to 21 by the federal government any state that did not comply would lose 10 percent of their government funding.
In some ways it would benefit the economy by increasing the tax revenue that is collected by the government. People that are under the legal drinking age, especially college students, create unsafe environments for them to binge drink. This could possibly be eliminated by lowering the minimum age so that 18 to 20 year olds can also drink in bars and private restaurants. As an adult, people should be responsible enough to make decisions that will not put their own lives in jeopardy. Young adults should be required to take an alcohol-education program so that drinking can be a privilege, not a right.
During the 1960’s and 1970’s, many states lowered it to eighteen to match the drafting age (Alcohol Policy MD). President Reagan passed The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 which required all states to raise their minimum purchase and public possession of alcohol age to twenty one. States that did not comply faced a reduction in highway funds by ten percent under the Federal Highway Aid Act (US Senate 125). Society surely understands that people drink and drive, but why should the federal government threaten each state with reduction of highway funds if they don’t raise their MLDA to twenty one? Head of the Sociology department of State University of New York, Professor David Hanson writes that there are many countries in the world that have MLDA’s at eighteen, eighty two to be exact.
There are many eighteen year, with immaturity. However age doesn’t define maturity because a twenty one year old could make the same decisions as an eighteen year old. “The age limit for alcohol is based on research which shows that young people react differently to alcohol. Teens get drunk twice as fast as adults, 9 but have more trouble knowing when to stop. Teens naturally ov... ... middle of paper ... ... states reduced highway funds because of the damage of underage drinking, which made states revamp the age back to twenty one in order to get highway funds.
Lowering the age could allow these alcohol virgins to consume alcohol, and learn what their limits are. Not knowing your limit can go from a few drinks to a lot of drinks to the emergency room or an underage ticket. The odds of you having a good start to college if your going in a virgin to alcohol are not in your favor. The odds aren 't in your favor because 2/3 of the drinking in college is binge drinking, according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and