Drinking Age Debate

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jWXhmLxHPcv8q_iFiN7nLt7RP8CgD92NJEV00

Despite being a young adult who likes to have a good time, I have always supported the drinking age being 21. I viewed alcohol as a privilege, available only to those who are responsible enough. The federal law that essentially requires states to set their drinking age at 21 is up for reauthorization in 2009, and there has been a recent surge to consider lowering the drinking age to age 18.

I don't want to get too much into the actual issue (you can read about it from the AP article linked above), as I want to get into my opinion now after hearing a more reasonable argument from the "lower the drinking age" side.

States should set their own drinking age without getting "punished" by the federal government for having a drinking age that is "too low." That currently doesn't happen, as any state which has a drinking age lower than 21 loses ten percent of federal highway funds.

The current drinking age of 21 encourages binge drinking. Will there still be binge drinking if the age is lowered? Of course. We want things we can't have; it is simply human nature. Those who are underage will drink more alcohol, because they can't have it. The restriction of drinking alcohol should be replaced by education which focuses teaching moderation. While the best way to learn things is usually by doing, finding out what happens when one's self drinks too much is unpleasant and unnecessary with proper education.

It allows those who are underage to show serious disrespect to the law. Using fake identification is a very serious infraction of the law. By using a fake ID, a person has essentially broken at least two laws: (1) using falsified documentation, (2) purchasing alcohol. Without a doubt, possession and consumption laws are also being broken. By using a fake, it shows others that it is okay to break the law, which is bad role modeling. Younger people will think it is okay to break the law, and if their older sibling is, they likely will also.

Social drinking is a lost art. Drinking is a forbidden pleasure and thus, those who are underage drink more because it is mysterious.

We are essentially segregating college students. When there is a campus event where alcohol is made available to those of age, there are essentially two groups: those who can (usually marked with a wristband) and those who can't. People don't like to be segregated from one another in the same venue. Students want to become one of what they view as the ideal (those who can drink) and get a fake ID, so they can, which leads to binge drinking and the lost art of social drinking.

Prohibition did not work and neither is this "mini-probation." Adults of all ages were breaking the law when there was prohibition in the 1920s. Now, just adults aged 18-21 are breaking the laws. History repeats itself. We are supposed to learn from history. We just haven't in this instance...yet.

Notice, I have not said the typical arguments of "well, you can drive, vote, and go to war, why can't you drink?" That argument, I think, is elementary. There are plenty of better ideas and reasons why the age should be lowered.

I'm not sure what the "correct" drinking age should be. I am sure it should be at least one year later than the driving age. This will reduce the amount of deaths by driving under the influence, which is (basically) why the currently law is 21. If that means different drinking ages in different states, that is fine. I hope Congress realizes the problems the current law has causes, and that the situation is fixed in 2009, when the law is re-voted upon.