TheJHub.com

All > News
Should the drinking age be lowered?
Topics:
Posted by Jen1180 Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:10:16 MDT
Viewed 348 times
0 responses 10 comments

Reply or Comment

Send to a Friend

Report a Violation

Comment From: Anonymous

I feel that it should. You are considered an adult when you turn 18. You can fight for your country, own your own home, own your own car, & have kids but, you can't drink! If people want to drink at 18, they are going to whether it is legal or not. So, why should adults get in trouble for drinking? Comment From: mbogo

I absolutely agree with Vailas on this one. The legal age is and should be twenty one. Comment From: paulf

I agree that the drinking age should remain at 21. The school should not make itself above the law. If people want the drinking age at 18, then process it thru the right channels to change the state law. Comment From: idahomeyers

Since it is 21 to drink...perhaps it should be 21 to enter into legally binding contracts...21 to be able to get married...21 to be forced to fight in a war...etc...etc...etc. Comment From: Ike

How does lowering the drinking age on campus contribute to the academia of the university? I can't answer that.  As to the statement saying, "I'm old enough to vote, I'm old enough to die for my country," is debating this issue on a larger scale.  That isn't an argument to lower the drinking age on campus, it's a debate to lower the drinking age everywhere.  Why should the university be a piece of holy ground where the rules suddenly change? Comment From: alfokris

I think it should be changed everywhere. I don't know the exact statistics, but I do know that in places where the drinking age is 15 or 16, there is a MUCH lower rate of binge drinking in general. I visited Peru recently. Where alcohol was available, natives maybe drank one or two, if that, while the underage Americans who aren't able to drink in the U.S. guzzled down as much as possible. I was really disappointed (in my friends) but interested to observe the Peruvians' lowering of respect for the American bingers (if that's even a word). If alcohol wasn't so prohibited and taboo, it wouldn't be such a problem. It has been proven by many other cultures and countries in the world. Kids are going to drink. Period. Not all of them, but if we give them the choice at an earlier age, they will be more likely to choose wisely. Also, if our culture promoted a better and healthier idea of what consuming alcohol IS, those who choose to drink will be having one glass with dinner, or a few with friends, instead of guzzling as many beers as possible just to get drunk and impress their friends. I suspect that grades would have a better chance, that the rate of alcoholism, deaths by drunk driving and alcohol poisoning, date rape, and other crimes that use the tool of intoxication would go down. I have never known someone who waited until they were 21 to drink. I know people who don't drink at all, or who do and have since junior high or high school. People want what they don't have. If someone told you not to look, wouldn't it be a natural reaction to immediately turn your head, or at least be curious as to what you're not supposed to be looking at? Comment From: allonoak

Traditionally we've been able to notice that the younger a person is, the MORE foolish decisions they make. As with tobacco, it's been statistically shown that most people start using and become addicted somewhere in their teen and college years, and this largely due to peer pressure. Lowering the drinking age does nothing to change whether teens or college students drink to become intoxicated, and thus has no effect on whether they commit crimes while intoxicated. That said, it may very well lower the number of binge drinkers, since it's possible some drink in binges rather than regularly because they're afraid of getting caught. However, the argument that because people are participating in an illegal activity justifies making it legal is a logical fallacy. This can be compared to speeding: Many people drive over the speed limit, especially by the 5-mph-over rule, knowing that their chances of being pulled over are slim-to-none. However, if the government raises the speed limit because so many people break the law, it won't curb the number of people who speed. Rather, the end result is a higher speed and more dangerous conditions, with the same number of people going 5-mph-over. Similarly, lowering the drinking age won't reduce the number of users or the number who get intoxicated for kicks, but rather, just lower the margin, so that those on the new age border are tempted to cross over that much more, and those who can now legally drink are still making the same unsafe decisions as before. Comment From: Anonymous

As a graduate of ISU and currently an Associate Professor at a small midwestern university, I think an important clarification is needed. The Amethyst Initiative calls for schools of higher education to have a national discussion about the legal age of drinking. To jump to the conclusion that administrators in higher ed agree that the drinking age should be raised is inaccurate. Comment From: sgettman

We already have enough problems with drinking why make it any worse by lower the age to 19. Keep it at 21. Comment From: mcelcarl

No!!!