Not a good Idea, they did that in the 1970's . and it lasted for about 15 years, and bumped it back to 21. Everybody got tired of spooning teens off the road.
Reading some of the answers below me, It might work better if they lowered the drinking age to 18 but bumped the driving age to 21. They could get 3 years to drink, before they made themselves road kills
2007-10-16 13:10:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by tom 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
As much as I would have loved to have had it when I was 18, it really isn't the best idea. The main reason why would have to be the level of responsibility. Your average 18-year old has just finished (or is even still finishing) high school, has only a year or two of driving experience and still tends to pack a "don't really care" attitude. There's a greater chance that he/she isn't going to know when to say when, and worst of all, when it's not okay to drive. Another thing to think about is that 18-year olds have much more interaction (and more friendships) with high schoolers than 21-year olds, meaning it could be very easy to supply several underage kids with booze. Just a quick walk to the nearby 7-eleven, and a 15-year old can get hooked up with a 12-pack.
2007-10-16 20:33:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by mcguirerocks 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think 21 is a dumb number. It has no other significance. 19 would make more sense as it would keep most high school seniors from legally being able to drink. Once you get to college, you should be able to drink. It's part of life and you need to learn about it sooner or later.
Actually, if it were 12, there'd probably be far less problems since people would have adult supervision around and drinking wouldn't be as popular because it wouldn't be taboo.
By the way, I don't think we'll ever go back to a younger drinking age.
As for the military, you should be able to drink at any age with a military ID. I think they have earned that right.
2007-10-16 20:19:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Steve B 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
well, i think that it may take some time for it to sink in, but i think it would be better if the drinking age was 18. i dont thinks its right to allow 18 year old boys to die in war, marry, go to jail for life, drive a car etc...but still not drink. in europe the drinking ages are much younger, and they dont drink as much, this makes me think that teenage overdrinking may be one of those "i cant do it so i want to" kinda things. and its really hypocritical for the government to send army recruiters into the high schools but not allow them a glass of wine at a restaurant.
2007-10-16 20:27:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by jessica39 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't rely on opinions. Look at the facts on traffic deaths involving alcohol involving that age group after some states changed it in the mid-1970s. They quickly reversed back.
2007-10-16 20:19:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by American Spirit 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
18 has always been the legal drinking age in Australia and most of Europe.
I think if your old enough to vote and drive you should be old enough to be able to choose to drink or not.
2007-10-16 20:13:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by L L 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since 18 year olds can legally get married, star in a porn movie and vote, they might as well be able to drink too.
2007-10-16 20:09:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tom Clark 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a really bad idea, but it is a tactical step for the Democrats that want to eventually disarm the U.S. One thing is directly related to the other. Watch.
2007-10-16 20:11:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Estrella E 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think they should to those who are serving this country in the military,if you are old enough to go to war you should be old enough to have a cold beer.I am a Viet Nam Vet.The average age of the combat soldier in Viet Nam was 19.
2007-10-16 20:10:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by wanna know 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
if they leave it like it is, do you realize how many auto wrecks after 2:00 am, that we'll be missing? not to mention all the extra people to feed. all that aside, i do believe, if your old enough to die for your country, you should be able to have a couple beers before you go.
2007-10-16 20:17:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by gen. patton 4
·
0⤊
0⤋