It 100% should not be raised. As you said it will be an unfair law for those aged 18-20 and will not stop 'any kind of drink-related crime'. There will always be a shop willing to serve an under-21 or an over-21 willing to buy alcohol for 'youths'.
The 'Cheshire cop' who has made this comment today is looking for something to blame pety crime on. Blame pety crime on those who commit pety crime.
And on top of that, I'm sure a large chunk of those drink-related crimes are commtted by peope/yobs/whatever
2007-08-15 04:31:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Drinking does not necessarily have anything to do with petty crime. Broadly speaking most parents do care if their children are drinking. It is not a punishment to not be allowed to drink. If it saves one life that is enough reason to have the age at 21. 18 is legally an adult and cannot blame their parents for irresponsible behavior Illinois lowered their dtinking age to 19 a few years ago. The problems of drunk driving and other related crimes increased. They have since put it up to 21 and the numbers have decreased. I live in a college town and underage drinking is rampant on campus. There is always going to be some person who thinks they dont have to obey a law.
2007-08-15 04:38:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by mnwomen 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think you're trying to rationalize your own opinion. The facts show that when the drinking age is set at 21, teen drinking rates drop, teen deaths due to drinking fall, and teens in general drink less alcohol.
Maybe the ones that raised you or your friends are different, but most parents ARE concerned about whether their kids drink while underage. People between 18 and 21 are not being punished because of irresponsible parents. They are being prevented from using a drug that most of them don't have the wisdom, experience, or judgment to use safely. Yeah, maybe some people of that age do have the judgment to do so, but most don't. Many over the age of 21 don't, either, but that's another story.
And what happens when one of those few lives lost is someone you know and love. Maybe a girlfriend who tried to drive drunk, or she was hit by a drunk driver, or even in a car driven by a drunk? What if it was YOU driving drunk, and she died because of your actions?
The loss of income to liquor sellers and bars and such is not great, and is a minor consideration any way. That argument is just a red herring you're throwing across the trail.
2007-08-15 04:31:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by Ralfcoder 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No The anti-social behaviour that becomes manifest under the influence of alcohol is indicative of a general malaise in contemporary society. It has nothing to do with age. It is a sad fact of life that the majority of murders committed whilst intoxicated are committed by adults.
This is just a government spin to pretend to empower us. Only two days ago we were told how responsible youth can be and we should have them as community police officers (a good idea i think) Today they are once again the font of all evil Give them the same respect we want for ourselves
2007-08-15 04:39:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by derek m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Surely the way to change behaviour and attitudes is through education. In France children are introduced to alcohol within the family, where it is part of meals. This takes out the mystique of drinking and helps young people deal with alcohol sensibly.
I guess that the ultimate aim must be to ban drinking alcohol altogether. After all, it's just another drug, and it kills as many people as smoking does.
2007-08-15 06:41:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes it should be raised and perhaps as important, retailers should be forced to get ID from anyone they believe to be 30 or under. I can't believe the attitude of some of the answerers. Innocent people are regularly being kicked to death by drunken yobs and all you care about is the loss of revenue to pubs and supermarkets and how unfair it would be to 18 year olds. Wait until your dad is murdered in his front yard protecting his home and then see what you think.
2007-08-15 12:19:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by andrew w 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with raising the age in principle, but in reality, currently people as young as 12 drink, so i think it would make very little difference!
Also, this is UK.answers.yahoo.com, if americans are going to post here, at least appreciate that we'll be talking about ENGLISH laws and don't tell us we are quoting the wrong law!!
2007-08-15 04:49:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
yobish? you must be in the UK. in the states, teenagers cause more accidents without being drunk than any other group. add alcohol and the probability of an accident goes way up. the age of legal drinking isn't the issue. it's educating everyone of every age that drinking to excess is bad for everyone, not just the drinker. anything too much is bad for you.
2007-08-15 04:26:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by wendy_da_goodlil_witch 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
it hasn't hurt us Americans any, to have to wait until we were 21.
Though I don't see why it's such a big deal to wait that long. Aren't you legally an adult when you turn 18?
I've always wondered why we didn't make our drinking age younger. The majority of Canada, for instance, has a drinking age of 19.
Bildy- I believe Ryan is in the UK.
2007-08-15 04:24:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Lily Iris 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
You become an adult at the age of 18 years of age which means that you can vote so therefore the answer is no in the UK
2007-08-15 04:48:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋