Essay About Lower Drinking Age And United States

Drinking AgeEssay Preview: Drinking AgeReport this essayLower Drinking Age“Although the legal purchase age is 21 years of age, a majority of college students under this age consume alcohol but in an irresponsible manner. This is because drinking by these youth is seen as an enticing forbidden fruit” (Engs 1).The minimum drinking age in the United States should be set at 18 instead of 21.

“The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required all states to raise their purchase and public possession of alcohol age to 21, or risk losing federal highway funds under the Federal Highway Aid Act” (Grant 2). The states are not necessarily obligated to raise the drinking age, but this very effective force pushes the states into raising the minimum drinking age. The government finds a way of soliciting the idea of a higher drinking age in order to reduce the drunk driving fatalities of teens. The states buy into this concept; even if they do not, they raise the minimum drinking age. The people need to apply pressure on the legislature to change the minimum drinking age.

Other countries have a lower minimum drinking age, some below the age of eighteen. “In Europe, the drinking age in some countries is 12, and is designed to acclimate youth at a younger age and develop better judgment skills” (Gravatte 1). This allows students to become aware of the true powers of alcohol and gives them an opportunity to experience how alcohol can affect a persons senses. This is a good concept for most countries to adopt. The United States is one of the few countries with the drinking age set at 21, but in comparison the United States has an equal number of drinking and driving fatalities to those of other countries if not more. Why should the

youth be restrained from experiencing a commonly used substance called alcohol?Different groups such as Italians, Greeks, and Chinese allow drinking at a younger age. The result of allowing younger-aged students to consume alcohol is a lower desire to drink. “Alcohol is neither seen as a poison or a magic potent, there is little or no social pressure to drink” (Engs 2). The people are told not to do something and in return the urge to commit the action strengthens. Other countries have allowed drinking to become a norm of their society. Their students do not feel the urge to binge drink and become intoxicated beyond recognition. They are acquainted with the powers alcohol can have on a person. It is normal to see students drinking a glass of wine or a beer at meals.

While the minimum drinking age is rising in the United States, the minimum drinking age in New Zealand is being lowered. “[In 1999] After considering almost 233 submissions to the committee on whether changes should be made to the minimum drinking age law, the New Zealand Advisory Committee Report recommended lowering the drinking age to eighteen” (Grant 4). New Zealanders do not feel a lower drinking age will increase abusive drinking. A few countries do not even have a minimum drinking age. In the Netherlands the Minister of Health suggests to the legislature to raise the drinking age to eighteen. Before the bill is enacted, it is disapproved due to the opinions of government and corporate officials.

The majority of countries have a set minimum drinking of eighteen. The United Kingdom deems it impractical to have a drinking age higher than the majority. “Only four countries in the entire world have a legal drinking age of 21–Ukraine, South Korea, Malaysia, and the United States” (Gravatte 1). While most of the worlds youth are drinking from as young as eighteen-years-old, the young adults of the United States have to wait until they reach the legal age of 21. It is unnecessary for the legislature to set such a high drinking age because the opinion of the people is what matters.

Parents have been attempting to reduce the drinking age to eighteen. “The minimum drinking age is discriminatory based on age, and that it goes against the Constitution by forcing the states to comply with the federal government” (Koroknay-Palicz 4). Since legal to vote, the citizens should have the right to decide whether the drinking age should be set at 21. Parents are the ones that deal with their childrens drinking. By allowing them to decide, they will have more control over their children. Their children can become more open about their lives, and their parents can control what their children do.

Politicians approve the drinking age law in order to gain good publicity. They use lies in order to make the public believe that drinking has become an out-of-control behavior. “Statistics taken from Thomas Senate Vote Analysis, said that 5,000 killed on our highways are teenagers. It says that 43 percent of those 5,000 teenagers, or 2150, were legally intoxicated. So 2150 drunk teens out of 2,500 total accidents- that is eight percent not 20 percent as they imply” (Koroknay-Palicz 4). Politicians have just created a concept they want the citizens to adopt. Then they adjust rules and regulations to gain the public in their favor. It is difficult to completely trust politicians for their deceiving strategies for winning future terms. By raising the drinking age, the government has risen the amount of students who drink.

Young-adults have been drinking larger amounts more often since the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. They have found different ways to purchase alcohol. They can request adults of legal age to purchase the drinks. Studies have been made throughout colleges throughout the nation. At East Carolina University, “Students intentions regarding their behavior following passage of the 21-year-age drinking law revealed that only six percent intended to stop drinking, 70 percent planned to change their drinking location, 21 percent expected to use a false or borrowed identification to obtain alcohol and 22 percent intended to use other drugs” (Hanson 2). If students are allowed to drink, this irrational behavior will gradually end.

Once eighteen, teenagers are considered adults. “At eighteen, we can also vote, enter into legal contracts, get married, smoke, and buy pornography, in addition to enlisting in the military Making an exception for the most dangerous of that list does not change the fact of that eighteen-years-old are adults and should be allowed to make their own decisions about whether or not to drink” (“Soldiers” 1). Why can they not drink alcohol? The last age-restricted act for these young-adults is drinking. It is obscene to not allow these adults to make their own choices which can and will affect them for the rest of their lives. Some people learn from experience; and without

I have read several years of college students who said they had the right to take out an ad in a paper magazine, but were stopped repeatedly by the administration (and possibly the cops) to tell them “The ads were for minors. We’re gonna take your money and tell it to your family.”

After a period of silence on the subject, it was finally brought up this December in front of the senate. Senator Schumer, a Democrat, stated that: “We should not have an age-restricted ban on a group that may be sexually involved with their parents. If we think they should be able to legally purchase a computer and a television and a television that is not a child pornography, or they can be charged with something, then for me that’s just totally unacceptable. What we need to do is make it illegal for the government to target us.” The act will still pass in the Senate but in a few weeks, we will likely be getting the law to the president for his signature.

We are concerned that this law, after being so widely considered in our state legislatures over a decade, may become the law of the land for one of our many young adults. But as of this writing, the Senate hasn’t been able to pass this bipartisan, pro-family legislation.

This bill will also require that college students obtain a health insurance plan while in college, but will require that they purchase insurance on their own or buy health insurance through their own employers. This legislation is also designed to stop parents buying their kids in high school for $75 more than college students. As Senator Schumer stated, the student program is currently limited to “18-year-olds with high school diplomas in public policy.”

I support the idea of having an exemption for 18-year-olds so that they are able to play by other rules as a result. And yet, while the bill’s current status is so vague, it appears to create an easy path to making sure that we make it harder on teens every time an adult makes sexual contact with our young people’s children in public.