Unfortunately many states have taken the easy road and have become over-reliant on the federal government for support. In return they are forced to relinquish power and freedom. This is one of the “cons” to following the federal mandate of the universal MLDA of 21. The main argument against lowering the MLDA again, is the inevitable rise in drunken driving related deaths. In the 1960’s and 1970’s when many states had lowered the MLDA, besides the rise in drunk-driving deaths, studies showed that people raised from childhood in under-21 states were involved in higher rates of alcohol and drug use as adults, and had a higher rate of homicides and suicides.
We cannot legally purchase a handgun, gamble in a casino, or adopt a child until the age of twenty one. These are a high level of responsibility and our leaders and patrons feel they are at equal levels. Our Minimum Legal Drinking Age has reduced traffic accidents and fatalities. 100 of 102 analyses inquired in a 202 meta-study found that a higher legal drinking age associates with lower rates of automobile accidents. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimated a 13% decrease in car fatalities in 1975-2008 saving approximately 27,052 lives since then.
The controversy of whether or not the drinking age should be lowered to eighteen in the United States has been an ongoing issue. Turning eighteen means receiving rights and responsibilities of adulthood, therefore why not change the legal drinking age? Many argue that doing so will produce new problems among young adults that will put them as well as others in danger. However, lowering the drinking age to eighteen can actually benefit our society and create a safer environment for those who are underage. This controversy goes back to many decades ago.
Personal Statement: I liked the tables in the book that showed whether or not the herbs/ natural medicine were shown to have a good effect on what they were supposed to. It was interesting to see how many things were thought to help some illness but really did nothing
Unlike soma, the drugs produce numerous negative aftereffects. Furthermore, the use of drugs is not regulated. As a result many accidental overdoses do occur. Although drug use is not mandatory as it is in Brave New World, many people choose to take drugs. In both societies, people use drugs for the euphoric feeling to escape from their worries and problems, instead of dealing with their emotions.
However, it was very successful socially. The intentions of Prohibition were not to make alcohol consumption illegal. After all, the consumption of alcohol itself was still very much legal. Prohibition was a success socially because it was able to lower alcohol consumption which in return helped reduce many of the country’s social problems. This law, a government “experiment” with very little ways of enforcement, succeeded in cutting down the consumption of this very popular drug by one-third.
They would also begin to drink in moderation since there is no longer the appeal of a “forbidden” rebellion. This, in turn, would benefit their health. Nearly every other country in the world has a minimum age of eighteen and, evidently, alcoholism amidst the youth is not a global crisis. In fact, “in contrast to their American peers, Europeans are ‘very intolerant of their peers who become intoxicated… they think it’s stupid, unacceptable, and that’s true throughout most of Europe’” (Minimum Drinking Age).
Currently, college students mainly drink due to the convenience of accessibility to obtain substances from older acquaintances or friends who also enjoy having a good time. As a result, the Mother’s Against Drunk Driving and federal experts in health regulation have consistently fought to prevent the alcohol industry from altering the drinking age (Kirszner, Mandell 458). Furthermore, it is unethical and immoral practice for parents to be allowing minors to consume alcohol, as this is also illegal and detrimental to one’s overall growth and development. Although some countries in Europe may argue otherwise, intoxication levels are higher in Britain, Denmark and Ireland,
European countries have a lower legal drinking and appear to have lesser alcohol related problems. Trying to enforce the drinking age of 21 is ineffective and pricey. Even though the law says one has to be 21, teen drinking is a major problem and there will never be a way to stop it. It would be more effective to spend money on educating the youth about how to drink responsibly rather than attempt to enforce the drinking age of 21 and continuously waste money and effort.” For 21 years, the legal drinking age has been set at 21 years. This has been an issue topic for quite some time now, and more states are considering revising the law.
Alon Leichman ESL Professor Tharp Argumentative Essay Spring 2012 Lowering the Drinking Age in the U.S. Although the legal purchase age is 21 years of old, many people have strong opinions about the drinking age in the United States. A majority of college students under this age consume alcohol but in an irresponsible manner. I would like to propose an agenda that might bring a change to the legal drinking age in the United States. I think that the drinking age is too high and should be lowered to the age of 18.