There has been some discussion with some younger friends who are in the "in between" ages of 18 and 21 of lowering the drinking age. They do get their alcohol and have their fun underground, much like the speak-easy age during Prohibition. It amazes me to no end just how easily they obtain alcohol for their parties.

Nevertheless, I do see a trend. Why can't we be responsible enough as a society to accept drinking at 18. If someone is old enough to die for their county in the military or to cast a vote for the next president, how are they not old enough to drink? Maybe I'm just more progressive than most, but it does make me wonder.

I throw this out here for you, my fellow poster, to read and to consider. Hopefully, you add in to the discussion as well.

MSNBC Story

Yes,because we don't have nearly enough drunk drivers out on the roads endangering other peoples lives.
In other words HELL NO!

I wonder if there is any other developed nation in the world that sets the drinking age at 21?

Then why not raise the drinking age to 25? 30? 40? Or how about mandatory blood-alcohol meters in every new car sold? That would cut down on the number of drunk-driving deaths.


All the 21-year limit does is drive partying underground, where 19-year-olds get piss drunk without supervision and people are scared to take sick friends to the hospital for fear of punishment. It also facilitates a binge-drinking culture -- hey, we're breaking the law anyway, might as well get really messed up! The law is a joke and everyone who has been in high school or college recently knows it.

I could never accept the intellectual leap required to say one was old enough to kill someone with an AK-47 but too young to have a can of beer.

Agreed, they raised the age to 21 here in NY in the early 80's and by the time I got to high school a few years later the culture hadn't changed amongst teens. Alcohol will always be readily available for those who wish to drink it prior to the legal age, and no new laws to stop such things will change that.

Yeah, to agree with everyone else here, getting alcohol at 18 (hell, 15) is a pretty simple thing to do. This is especially true if you go to college, where the bars just want to make business no matter your age and there are many friends to be made that have an I.D. (legal or not) that says they are legal to purchase alcohol.

So, change the age? I say why not, it's ludicrous to be able to serve in the military but not able to drink with your buddies when you get back.

Because car accidents are the leading cause of death among young drivers (16-21), according to news reports I've seen--in the Chicago area over the last couple years MANY teens have been killed in car accidents, and almost all of them were NOT due to alcohol. Adding the legal ability to drink at that age is just adding fuel to the fire; it's not necessary.

Sorry, but I don't believe the drinking age should be lowered.

When I was in college, the drinking age in Mass was 21, in VT it was 18 (they had just begun their transition to a 21-year old age, so we were all grandfathered in). Because we were only three miles from VT, the college did not crack down on underage drinking because they did not want to create a "blood border" of people driving up to VT to drink and then coming back. By senior year, as the VT age increased to 21, the college cracked down much harder on underage drinking. The result? Many more trips to the hospital for alcohol poisoning as drinking by freshmen and sophmores was driven underground. I'll never forget the sophmores in my dorm senior year who thought nothing of downing a big bottle of vodka among three people in about 30 minutes.

It is also ridiculous that we can get married, joint the military, vote, etc., but are not considered mature enough at 18 to handle drinking. Of course the age of maturity should be the same for all such regulations. As far as the issue of drunk driving is concerned, I'd rather see us either raise the driving age to 21 or impose European-style requirements before licenses are granted (my understanding is that it is very difficult for anyone to qualify for a license in Europe, and thus their drivers tend to be better).

I can go with that last route, CPT. I'm actually for raising the driving age here in Illinois to 18 at least. There have been WAY too many deaths attributed to young drivers lately, and as I said above, hardly any were alcohol related.

I am in favor of keeping the legal age limit to 21 to purchase alcohol.

FYI: In Russia, if you get caught drinking and driving, you are suspended from driving forever[i][u].

TRL

we need to get rid of the drinking age all togethe

just like sex, we need to demystify alcohol

if kids didn't think it was such a big no-no, they wouldn't drink nearly as much and they'd drink much more responsibily

Having done some of my growing up in Germany (a lloonngg time ago), I may have a different perspective. I don't know what the age was, but we all went to the local pub after school, and on Saturdays some of the teachers would join us. I don't remember anyone being very drunk, except at our graduation ball (where it's required!). Much was the same when I visited Norway; if we got drunk, NO ONE drove (and drunk driving laws were draconic).

I think the difference was that we learned how to drink, and it wasn't something hidden and exciting. Behavior back at my high-school in the US was completely different - and I had trouble dealing with it.

I suspect drunk teens driving around, teen deaths in cars - would change if as a society we grew up and taught kids how to drink responsibly.

Nat

The boomer generation has apparently decided that it's much easier to pass unenforceable laws and to create organizations like MADD that demonize drinking. Less work, more moralizing -- good times.

I see both sides of this debate...lower the age and there might be more drunken driving by inexperienced drivers, but I also see the silliness in a drinking age, especially in a culture where it is romanticized to the point of insanity. I am for the elimination of all age restrictions, and true enforcement of drunken driving laws. I am tired of hearing about people with multiple DUI's, still behind the wheel, drunk, no less, killing and injuring innocent people.

Lower the drinking age, no way. Keep it at 21.

I totally agree with Nat, and for almost the same exact reasons.

Yes, I think both the 'Silent Generation' and the 'Baby Boomer Generation' did tend to try to resolve problems by creating criminalizing legislation. If they didn't like - or were even temporarily uncomfortable with - a behavior they tried to make it illegal. IMO they had a very ethnocentric view of the world, and were incredibly self centered compared to earlier or later generations.

I think they looked for simple solutions to even the most complex problems, and were unwilling to devote the time/effort toward more complex issues.

R

Why 21? Are there any other rights/privileges granted by the government that kick in at 21 and not 18?

It would be a brave politician in the UK and the US who would go on tv and say "I'm not going to do anything about teenagfe drinking. Its up to you parents to teach your teenage sons to behave".

Yes, gambling.

What no one in this thread has mentioned yet, is the fact that because the 18 to 21 age group largely doesn't vote and is not actively involved with politics (I realize this is a sweeping generalization), THEY are abdicating their opportunity to lower the drinking age. It's like everything else in life: if you don't speak up for yourself or what you believe in, how can you expect someone else to do so? Clearly the sentiment on this board, most likely voiced by members not in the affected age group, is to let the current drinking age stand.

My conclusion is this: because access to alcohol is quite easy and because enforcing the age related drinking laws is not a priority in this country, 18 to 21 year olds don't have to work to change the laws -- they simply ignore them. I know I did when I started college at 17 in the midwest and continued drinking and going to bars well before I was 21.

Casino gambling anyhow....you can get a scratchoff card or powerball ticket at a convenience store at age 18.

Casino age has to be linked to drinking age thanks to the alcohol served on the premises.

Also, most (if not all) Indian owned casinos are 18 for gambling.

Not so here in California, where most are at 21, even those that don't serve liquor.

Maybe we're going at this all wrong. Instead of lowering the drinking age, why don't we make the standard for adulthood at 21?

Very well said, UCLAfan.

Sounds good, less 18 year olds dying in the military is fine with me.

What is it about this country that we have so much trouble accepting that people drink? We were the only European culture stupid enough to enact a national law to prohibit alcohol consumption, and what a disaster that was. Every country in Europe allows drinking at 18, and they don't have any more of a problem with DUIs than we do.

This is true, they don't have a major problem with DUI. What they do have is extremely punitive laws regarding DUI, and very low thresholds of tolerance. France, I believe, sets a limit of about .05% BAC, as opposed to most US states, which are at .08%. The fines and penalties are much more severe than they are in the US, and can include jail time in some countries.

If you want to stop drunk driving, make it hurt for the drivers. Encourage people to carpool or walk (ah, the joy of DC, where I can walk to my favorite watering hole and then stumble home). Better yet, stop focusing on the bad thiings about alcohol. A healthy respect for alcohol is important, but it's been a part of human life for millenia. It's time to take away the mystery and show alcohol for what it is - a food product that, when used RESPONSIBLY can be an enjoyable part of everyday existence.

Besides, economics makes much more sense when you're hammered.