irresponsible people drinking and most likley driving not thanks, let them be young and experience the bar scene @ 21
2006-09-23 05:23:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Lindsey 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with the current drinking age but I do have a problem with it as well... It's a military thing. How can we make the age to enlist 18 (sometimes 17 with parental permission) with the possibility of getting killed, but those same men and women can't have a beer? Don't you think that those who choose to enlist have the maturity to have a beer or twenty now and then? I know when I was 18 and just joined the USAF I was pissed that I couldn't have a beer but I could go and die in a war.
Just my opinion...
I do agree with the above poster that the driving age should be raised.
ASTROFAN: Why can't a person who is a legal adult and have all the rights afforded to them as such not be able to drink alcohol? I also am a parent and I don't wish my children to drink at all if possible but if they are legal to do everything as an adult at the age of 18 then why can't they do EVERYTHING as an adult?
And your point about no corelation between drinking age and war fighting age... Do you actually believe that an 18 year old who holds down his DFP should not be able to enjoy a beer with the fellas? That makes no sense. It's ok to die at 18 fighting for you country but you can't have a beer with your dad during the football game? Your point is invalid. Will I obide by the law, yes. Will I discourage my troops from drinking before the age of 21, yes. Will I come down hard on them if they are caught drinking under age, yes. I will, however, never understand why military members under 21 can't have a drink.
2006-09-19 05:39:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by Fatboy 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
As well stated by many others here, I feel that the primary reason is to reduce drunk driving, since that age group is already among the least responsible and the poorest drivers on the road. Adding alcohol to the mix would only make it worse. Whatever the legal drinking age is, you can assume that at least 2-3 years younger than that age will then have easy access to alcohol through friends. Sorry kids, we love you too much to make it any easier for you to drink and drive.
And as far as the argument that if you're old enough to fight for your country then you're old enough to drink a beer, there is no logical correlation to these two situations. At the moment, there is no draft, so if you feel that you can't serve in the military without also consuming alcohol, then wait until you're 21 to sign up. That is certainly your right. Or we could raise the enlistment age to match the drinking age and thus prevent you from having the opportunity to earn a living in the military. (sarcasm)
2006-09-19 06:58:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by astrosfan57 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, currently, states have exclusive control over the drinking age, except on federal bases or installations.
However, if the states do lower the drinking age, Congress withholds millions of dollars in federal highway funds. So, to get those funds, the states must agree with the preferences of Congress.
As far as policy reasons, the numbers were set based on statistical studies that showed people between 17-20 were more likely to get into fatal or near-fatal accidents because of drinking. And by raising the drinking age, many of those accidents were averted. That provided the link Congress needed to make the highway funds conditional upon state's setting the age to 21.
Assuming those studies are accurate, then reducing the drinking age will result in an increased number of fatal or near-fatal vehicle accidents.
2006-09-19 05:36:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The only reason it was lowered, in most states, was to appease the anti-war baby boomers who saw the hypocrisy of being able to draft an individual to kill commies and die for their country but declare them too young and irresponsible to drink a beer.
In Ohio, and other several other states I'm sure, the breweries were required to water down the kiddie beer, and you still had to be 21 to get the 6% beer, but @18 you could buy 3.2%.
That's where "lite" beer originated, and the calories in beer represents their alcoholic content. In other words, the only difference between a Bud and a Bud Light is the Bud Light is watered down Bud.
Insurance (car) is why it will not be lowered, too many wrecks without adding the beer.
2006-09-19 10:50:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Chronic Observer 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
It used to be 18 when I was a teen... The only reason it went up to 21 was because of drunk driving... Raising the legal age resulted in fewer deaths on the road...
So lowering the age back to 18 would probably result in more drunk driving deaths...
2006-09-19 05:44:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Andy FF1,2,CrTr,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
One of the ONLY reasons the drinking age has not been lowered is because Tobacco companies (therefore law makers) make a killing off the addicts that they acquire between the ages of 16 and 25. Their theory is if they can make street drugs and cigarettes (focus on cigarettes) available to that age group that has a harder time accessing alcohol, they will create a habit that is both rebellious and accessible.
2006-09-19 05:40:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
hi
in france legal drinking age is 18 and i think (although i've only been in virginia) that americans drink less. there still is some underage drinking but probably not as much out in the open. in germany from 16 you can buy beer and it seems they drink way more. However, germany is the land of the beer! i don't really know, i'm just giving you a few things to think about.
2006-09-19 05:36:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by kpucine 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was at one point, but the the federal government said that the states would not get road money unless the drinking age was raised to 21. My, how fast things can change! It is important to note, however, that the legal drinking age in Puerto Rico is 18.
2016-03-27 09:02:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
From what I have read and from, and from who I have talked with about this topic the best answer I can give is that, the "normal" adult brain is not completely and full developed until the person is at about the average age of 20.7 years old. Therefore before the age of about 21 the average teenager is potentally risking full brain development by being exposed to alcohol too early. So most states made the law.
2006-09-19 05:40:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Brooke D 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Having the drinking age set at 21 allows young adults to assume responsibility slowly - voting at age 18, smoking at age 18 or 19, and finally, drinking at age 21. It also allows them some time to mature; I really can't think of many 18 year olds that are responsible enough to drink (I wasn't, that's for sure!).
2006-09-19 05:34:38
·
answer #11
·
answered by rita_alabama 6
·
2⤊
0⤋