Speaking Out: 18 vs. 21

Youtube: Fox News Debate About Drinking Age

crawfoj5 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:03:36 +0000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=godS6-ni8Pg&feature=related

The heated debate about the proper age for drinking alcohol has overtaken the public media as well as research, political speeches, and esteemed essays. This on-air debate involves John McCardell, president of Choose Responsibility–a non-profit organization whose goal is to represent the rights of 18-20 year olds, including the right they should have to drink alcohol. In the video above, John argues that a lot of the deaths that result from drinking alcohol are deaths of young adults who are taking place in “binge drinking” that takes place behind closed doors. He states that if the drinking age is lowered, these young adults would find themselves more likely to participate in the much safer, public or “social” drinking. The main characteristic of binge drinking is that it is used by young adults to become intoxicated under the use of a large amount of alcohol in a short amount of time. It is most commonly found in high school and college settings in the form of drinking games, chugging alcohol, and taking shots. It is no doubt a social standard among high school and college students to drink alcohol in these underground party scenes, and the pressure that results from these standards are enough for them to surpass their alcoholic limits in dangerous ways. This social pressure to drink elevates the chance that young adults will choose to drink and drive as well. It is time to bring this binge drinking out into the open where it can be measured and monitored in the attempt to deal with the issue rather than send it underground to “mask” the problem.

The opposing view of the video debate comes from Chuck Hurley, the chief executive officer of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. His opening statement is this: “The real question for the parents of America is do they want their teenagers to have more access to alcohol or less?” In response I ask, what debate do you think you are in, Mr. Hurley? This debate is about young ADULTS choosing and having the right to drink alcohol. The opinions and authority of parents do not matter because after a person is of 18 years of age, they are allowed to make their own decisions. He also brings up the research and facts that show the negative impact that alcohol has on the lives of young adults. He says, “There really is no controversy in the science whatsoever. John is entitled to his own views but not his own facts. ”No matter what the “facts” show about the presence of alcohol in the life of a young adult, the true fact and reality still remains that the law is NOT working. Underage drinking in the United States is becoming dangerously similar to the effects of prohibition on society in the 1920′s in the fact that it is still taking place in large amounts underground despite the law. With a much better argument, John states “A law that says it is illegal to drink before you turn 21 can be evaluated in only one way: is it working? The data are unmistakable on this point. The vast majority of young adults have already consumed alcohol by the time they are 21.”

As a young adult, former high school student, and current college student, I agree with John in the fact that there is a problem and the law just isn’t working. It’s time to re-evaluate, which seems to be a concept that people like Chuck Hurley don’t want to mess with. It’s time to swallow our pride and look to other policies and strategies that are working in other countries regarding the consumption of alcohol. It is a good sign that something needs to be done when we (the United States) are standing alone with the law at age 21 among the majority of the world who have their policies at lower ages.

jenberg38 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:17:10 +0000

Works Cited

Cloud, John. “Should the Drinking Age Be Lowered?” Time. 6 June 2008. Web. 27 Oct. 2008.

time/nation/article/0,8599,1812397,00.html>.

Engs, Ruth C. “Why the drinking age should be lowered: An opinion based upon research.” Indiana University, 1998.

Web. 27 Oct. 2009. .

Politzer. “University Administrators Consider Lowering the Drinking Age to 18.” The Collegianur. 29 Apr. 2009. Web.

27 Oct. 2009.

loweringdrinking-age-to-18/>.

Schackner, Bill. “Pros and cons of reducing the drinking age.” ScrippsNews. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 12 July 2007.

Web. 27 Oct. 2009. .

Wagenaar, Alexander C. “Effects of an Increase in the Legal Minimum Drinking Age.” Journal of Public Health Policy

2.3 (1981): 206-25. JSTOR. Web. 27 Oct. 2009. .

YouTube.com. “Fox News Debate on Drinking Age.”
.

An Opinion Based On Research

seitztr2 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:02:00 +0000

In an argument posted by Professor Ruth C. Engs, the lowering of the drinking age is argued as a safe choice as long as it remains controlled. If an 18 year old wishes to drink, he or she should be able as long as they are mature enough to remain sensible. Through the guidance of role models and educational programs, young adults would be able to attain the appropriate guidance concerning what is now known as “underage drinking.”

Less than twenty-five percent of undergraduate college students are old enough to legally purchase or consume alcohol. Consequently, when students drink, for it is almost inevitable, it is done in an irresponsible manner, states Engs. In her educated opinion, this is due to the enticement caused by “rebelling.” Although the United States has tried in the past to manage reckless drinking and the problematic outcomes it causes, the laws were unenforceable. Now, as we continue to repeat our mistakes made previously as a country, it is evident that what did not have any affect then, will not work now with this age group.

There is a desperate need for an alternative approach to this issue. Even among other cultures we can relate the problems we experience with drinking. However, in said cultures alcohol is not viewed as anything negative like it can be in the United States. Children and young adults are taught at a young age how to handle the pressures and consequences from drinking, and negligent behavior is looked down upon. As it stands, the 21 year old drinking age is counterproductive, believes Engs, and without altering the current law we as a nation will never progress.

-Source

At 18 You Get To Make Your Choices, Why Not This One?

jenberg38 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:45:04 +0000

The issue of the drinking age has always been in question and has been debated back and fourth for many consecutive years. In 2008 there was an entire organization of former college presidents that came together and thought that the drinking as should be lowered to the age of 18. This reveals they had seen this to be a prominent issue on college campuses. In particular the former head of Middlebury College, John McCardell Jr., founded the organization called Choose Responsibility in 2006 to lower the drinking age. He brought up many valid points on how lowering the drinking age would be beneficial to society. For example, when someone turns 18 they are responsible for themselves and they are opened up to many new freedoms. “Treating alcohol differently helps turn it to a holy grail of adulthood”(Cloud). Allowing freedoms but exempting the freedom to drink makes young adults want to consume alcohol and find ways to obtain it. Finding ways to get the alcohol can sometime also lead to dangerous situations. Also, just because alcohol is not legal to people under 21 does not mean that they do not consume it. Because it is not legal it gives young adults a certain rush of breaking the rules; therefore, if it was legal this would not have such a impact. McCardell also said that there are “forced alcohol consumption behind the closed doors of [dorms] and fraternity basements. Always unsupervised, done in secret and too often excessive, this style of drinking has no doubt been responsible for the alarming rise in rates of so-called ‘binge’ drinking seen at colleges” (Cloud). Overall, lowering the drinking age would exempt may of the problems found with the rush young adults have when obtaining and consuming something illegal and something they should not have.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1812397,00.html

Lowering The Drinking Age on College Campuses

jenberg38 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:38:50 +0000

There are many argument on why the drinking age should be changed from 21 to 18 years of age. There has been a lot of debate if the drinking age should be lower on college campuses to reduce problems of binge drinking. This is because there have been many problems with alcohol abuse on college campuses with under age consumers. Before the year of 1984, when the drinking age was 18, there were less problems with the issues arising today with alcohol abuse. Tracy Cassalia, the health education at Richmond’s Weinstein Center for Recreation and Wellness said, “since the drinking age has been raised, increases in binge drinking has actually created a higher risk on college campuses” (Politzer). Also, “according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 18-to 20-years-olds had the steepest increase in binge drinking rates- 56 percent- between 1993 and 2001,” (Politzer). This means that if the drinking age were to be lowered to 18 the binge drinking and pre gaming would definitely not be as prominent because when it becomes legal it starts to loose what is so special about it. This can also prevent alcohol abuse because when something is available to everyone it becomes less important and will lose its effectiveness.

http://www.thecollegianur.com/2009/04/23/university-administrators-consider-loweringdrinking-age-to-18/

Pros and Cons of Reducing The Drinking Age

seitztr2 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:34:12 +0000

While most adults will argue that the drinking age should be kept where it is nation wide, at age 21, there are evident pros and cons, as there are with every argument, to both sides. So what exactly could happen in a society where the legal drinking age is lower than 21? By looking just south of the border, we can pick up a few hints. In Canada, since 1979, the legal drinking age has been 19 years old, making it more likely that some high school kids could be drinking, and even more likely that college kids will be drinking. However, there is a positive side to this. Some teenagers say with the lowered drinking age, because alcohol is available to them so much sooner than normally, there appear to be fewer instances of teens slamming down drink after drink in Canada, rather than in the United States. Since it is legal, it becomes “no big deal.”

Of course with pros there are always cons to any situation. John McCardell, the president of a college in Vermont argues that the approach found in Canada does not work. He instead suggests the idea of a more organized approach where anyone wishing to drink need a license to do so, and like any other license, must go through a series of classes. Even though it is custom in all 50 states of America that the legal drinking age is 21, it has not stopped teens from drinking, still.

So will these example have any affect on how adults view the discourse at hand? Perhaps not, yet it still shows that they can no longer use the argument that changing the law now, when it has been the same for so many years, would lead them into an unknown place. With clear examples of what such a culture would be like, all that is left is a decision.

-Source

Effects of an Increase in the Legal Minimum Drinking Age

crawfoj5 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:03:57 +0000

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3342367

You may wonder why this article is posted on a website that is of the opinion that the drinking age should be lowered to 18, considering the nature of this article would normally argue to keep it the same (21). This article, ”Effects of an Increase in the Legal Minimum Drinking Age” by Alexander C. Wagenaar outlines some specific research proving that lowering the drinking age would increase chaotic behavior from teens, resulting in more drinking and driving and ultimately, more fatalities. The point of this article is to examine the effects of the drinking age on the behavior of young adults in order to ensure that the decisions made by the government are ones that will ensure their “safety”. But the question I ask about the ideas presented in this article is this: What about all of the 18-20 year olds that are being killed by the hundreds in Iraq? Who is arguing and making the attempt to increase their security? The problem with articles and views such as this one is that they are inconsistent and hypocritical.

It is a recurring theme within our judicial system to ask the question, “Where do we draw the line?” and most of the time, it is a good start to the debate that finally answers the question. However, there seems to be a dip in the line they drew as to what decides a person as an adult and what does not. In every other aspect of our society except the legal consumption of alcohol, a person of the age of 18 is considered an adult that can make his or her own decisions. At that point, they are allowed to decide who leads our country, legally smoke and buy addicting cigarettes, spend their money on the lottery, legally move out of their parent’s house for their own, and give away their lives in war before they are allowed to ingest even one alcoholic beverage. All of these things mentioned are reckless acts that could lead to physical injury, emotional damage, or even death. So to the authors of articles such as this one who seem to be so concerned, I ask one final question: If you are willing to let the “fake” adults of our society have all the right in the world to do the listed above, why hold back the alcohol?

The Drinking Age Should Be Lowered

seitztr2 — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:29:06 +0000

A lot of teenagers view different ages as upcoming opportune times in their lives to experience new things that they couldn’t before. At fifteen, most teens can finally get their permit, and a year later at sixteen, their actual license to drive. Seventeen means a teenager can go to an “R” rated movie without adult supervision. When a teen turns eighteen, however, even more doors open. They can legally enter most any workforce, including the United States military, vote in important elections, purchase cigarettes, and even play the lottery. So why, when a teenager is expected to be responsible enough to defend our country and have a say in who runs our government are they still not allowed to buy, drink, or sell alcohol for three more years? This is a controversial issue that has been argued on many times.