18 year olds ready to drink?
The topic of lowering or even raising the drinking age has been greatly debated over the years. A majority of people seem to think that the drinking age should stay at 21 or raise to an older age because of "irresponsible drinking" problems.
My question is though, is it really related to age? Or is it just the idea "I can drink now! Let's binge!"
If 18 year olds are "responsible" enough to vote, smoke, live on their own, gamble in some casinos, engage in "adult" material- why aren't they responsible enough to drink?
The idea that 18 year olds can't handle it is a poor case. Look at the list of things they are entitled to as "adults". If they can't handle alcohol, then surely they probably shouldn't be gambling or drinking.
The reality is people are afraid of change. They are afraid that lowering the drinking age would cause a surge of parties, DUIs, and deaths. In reality, this isn't so. If the drinking age were to be lowered to age 18, there would be a short surge of more drinking. But only because of the same train of thought as when people turn 21 now. After a short period of time, the amount of drinking would in reality drop. Because it would make drinking less of a big deal. You can see evidence of this in the prohibition. When they banned alcohol, a lot of people drank illegally. Yet, when they amended the amendment, only a short surge of drinking occured for a short time.
Before, legal drinking ages were left up to the states. But Candy Lightner, creator of MADD, took her ideas to courts, upset about the death of her child. Her emotional pull affected the courts and the national government basically told the states "change your drinking age to 21 or we won't fund you for highways, etc."
Adults are entitled to be treated as that- adults. Raising the drinking age won't result in less DUIs. It will result in more "acting out." To deal with DUIs we should do just that- deal with the criminals, not those who are responsible and obey the laws.
Give more credit to young adults.
Delicious
Digg it
Stumble it
Reddit
Share on Facebook
Subscribe to comments- kat's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
Comments
There are three kinds of lies:
-Lies
-Damn Lies
-Statistics
-Mark Twain
Emotional development can outweigh the cognitive, just because the drinking age is 21 doesn't mean that people don't drink before that age (probably some of you)- take out the risk (of getting caught, the excitement of getting to consume booze illegally etc.) and the binge becomes so much less exciting.
very valid kat, many hallucinogens- namely LSD and other strains of Acid literally eat brain cells, so naturally, alcohol is less dangerous in small doses, and it does take a long time for the effects to become apparent- however, I know many more alcoholics than shroom-a-holics... so it's a tricky debate to have.
thats very true. although i think a more suitable term than "shroom-a-holic" would be druggie, or drug abuser. :)
maybe someday I'll learn how to post a comment that's not longer than the initial blog... baby steps
haha, no biggie. I like intelligent responses.
And i basically agree with a majority of your response. Although I still feel that alcohol isn't as damaging to one's body as hallucinogens, etc. (not marajuana though) It takes a very prolonged time period of alcohol abuse to develop liver cancer.
Besides that, all very valid reasoning!
Alright guys, sorry I'm late in the running on this one, but here are my thoughts:
1. The drinking age should be brought down to 18. If you can (and many this age are currently) die for your nation, you should be able to drink a beer to celebrate it. Bottom line. The reason that this doesn't exist is because the US government withholds transportation funds for states with lower drinking ages. As I'm sure you're all aware, the states have slowly come to comply with a higher drinking age. We have the highest drinking age in the world (and not one other nation has an age of 21- super arbitrary).
2. There are risks with this, irresponsibility being very high on that list, but I can tell you there are just as many 21 year olds binge drinking like crazy and being irresponsible as 18 year olds. It's not a matter of age, it's a matter of maturity and knowing your limits. The reason that drinking gets crazy in college is because it's easily accessible, and it's new to many students. I think that when moderation has not been learned before collegiate entrance the potential for disaster (or at least some very serious hangovers) is much higher.
3. I agree that other drugs should be legalized. First and foremost, the use of marijuana. As it stands now, enough people "smoke it like it's legal" to where if it was, the government could be making an incredible profit and as you've discussed boosting the economy. I am also in favor of the legalization of opium, as it already is in the form of prescription medication. Vicodin, Percoset, Morphine- all opiates. If I'm not mistaken Morphine and Heroine are but wee compound adjustments from being twins. Drug companies make bank off these opiates, so why can't the US public benefit from them too? There are dangers to the mass release of hallucinogens, but there are far greater risks in everyday life. Obesity (and subsequent heart disease) is the number one killer of Americans now, followed closely by deaths related to cigarettes. So in terms of risk, I'd be more weary of the oreos in the cabinet and the cigs at the mini mart than the legalization of some drugs.
4. Alcohol is a poison. I've always found it so ironic that it's all but advocated in American Culture, and yet it can be extremely detrimental to ones body. One of the first deaths that I can remember experiencing first hand was that of a family friend, fallen victim to Liver Cancer. It was insanely painful to watch, and it made me realize how damaging liquor can be. This fried of mine literally molded (as many immobile cancer patients do) in the last days of his life, and it was tragic.
5. That's not to say that I opposed to drinking- at all. Friends of mine and members of the PSO staff could validate that... haha. I'm just in favor of introducing other products into the taxable drug market (to join alcohol, caffeine, nicotine etc.).
6.There will always be a black market. No matter the nation, no matter the product, there's always someone selling it illegally.
7. That column got way too thin, I'll contact the site designer to see if there's anyway we can work on that...
I agree with every single one of your points. If people have to go to die for their country at 18 they should be able to celebrate with a drink.
Also, some drugs should be legal. like in Amsterdam, marijuana is legal and people are always somking it in alleys, but it doesn't seem like a huge deal. For some kids, doing something illegal, is the thrill. MAke it legal and the thrill disapears.
what you said was so true. they do it not because they don't know the law but they do it because they know the law and for them it is so cool and thrilling to violate the laws.
exactly
The abundance of non-responsible 18-year-olds outweighs the small minority of those capable of being responsible while under the influence. In order to make a working system, you must generalize the variables.
Consider the fact that many teenagers whom are 18 years of age are still currently enrolled in high school. It's easier for underage teens to befriend an 18-year-old and posess alcohol than it is to befriend a 21-year-old. Alcohol will be more widely distributed through high schools if the age is significantly lower. Same goes for cigarettes. I'm a firm believer that if we were to raise the age of cigarette sales to a significant age after high school, than there would be less teen smokers. Canada has the right idea in making sure individuals are out of school in order to purchase substances (the legal drinking and smoking age is 19).
Would lowering the drinking age cause more DUI's? Possibly, considering the fact that teenage drivers account for 40% of all automobile related accidents. It makes theoretical sense that in the possession of alcohol, the DUI rate would increase.
I've personally never met anyone under the age of 20 that was responsible with alcohol. Most individuals do not mature until they are in their late teen years. An 18 year old is not responsible enough to deal with any substance, let alone die for their country, vote responsibly, or own property. The age regulations in America are completely illogical.
I think that basing one's responsibility off of their age is completely illogical.
Age is completely relevant.
A study was developed by Dr. Judith Rapoport in determining the development of grey matter in the brain during childhood. This is the substance in the brain that is responsible for "thinking" and building pathways through the brain. This study showed that the development and maturation of the grey matter located in the frontal lobe (the area responsible for impulse control) was not showed until late adolescence.
From this study they are able to analyze the rough estimate in age when gray matter starts to mature and grow.
Another study that was conducted by Dr. Arthur Toga of ULCA tested the brains of adult 23-30 year olds for myelin (the protective sheath around axons) and compared it to those that were between 13-17 of age. They looked for amounts of myelin in each variables age to conclude that myelin would imply maturation and more efficient conductivity for signals traveling down the axons. The conclusion stated that the adults 23-30 had more myelin in the front cortex which suggests that cognitive process do not fully mature until early adulthood.
To summarize what I just said--the adult brain, as related to the frontal lobe, is proven to be more mature and developed in the aspect of reasoning and cognitive processes. From these studies it's completely logical and correct to say that age is relevant to responsibility and maturation.
That research only proved through its test subjects that age proved more mature reasoning and cognitive processing. What about logic? Research? You cannot base every single youth in america off of this small piece of research. I guarantee you that there are countless adults who are more uninformed, apathetic, and irresponsible than today's youth. Currently, I know more about the two main presidential candidates than anyone in my family- parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles.
Statistically, these numbers are nice. But realistically, they mean very little. And if you do not support youth and youth involvement, I'm not really sure of why you are on this site? This site is a portal for youth activism and involvement.
We do not base our laws on the exception, mature 18 year olds are the exception. We have enough problems with underage drinking as it is, I see no valid reason why we would want to lower the age.
Heck, why stop at 18? aren't there some very mature 15 year olds?
You're taking my statement out of context. I say 18 because it is the age of adulthood legally. You can smoke, vote, watch adult material, go to strip clubs, and DIE FOR YOUR COUNTRY. Yet, you can't drink.... Underage drinking will always be there, lowering or raising the age wouldnt eliminate it. And in all actuality, the larger majority of people who are arrested for DUIs are 30-40.
Right, but being legal doesn't make you responsible.
Plus, if you are overseas and in the military you can likely drink as most countries have a lower drinking age than we do.
your not dying for those countries. and I agree being legal doesn't make you responsible, there are many irresponsible adults. But why factor out drinking at age 18 if nearly everything else is legal at 18?
soft drugs, marijuana, shrooms and all forms of hallucinogens except for exceptionally dangerous ones, hash, there may be others I'm not sure.
marajuana i agree with because the side affects arent much worse than cigarettes or alcohol.
But i'm not so sure about shrooms and hallucinogens. Those are a bit more harmful.
Actually, that is not the case, in fact, even more so then Marijauana, there is a strong argument for the benefits of hallucinogens. Check out that study.
But those were people who did it once and never again. People who do shrooms illegally now do it more than once. If it were legalized, they'd do it more than once still. The hard thing about hallucinogens is that its the hallucination that the person has that can be harmful. It can lead to death.
I'm sure you've heard some of the stories. People falling out of trees looking for rainbow Jesus. Running in front of cars.
If it were for medical reasons and were regulated incredibly well, I would understand somewhat. We could tax the hell out of it and help our economy greatly :)
actually I mis-stated the study, you should read it. Those are people who abused it. People die from alchohol poisoing and drunk driving all the time. Drugs will be abused, the point is that A) There are medical benefits. and B) It's safer then most drugs, including alchohol. Alchohol makes people violent, and destroys their judgment. Shrooms just make you hallucinate. The only reason alchohol is legal is because it is more traditional, in fact, they tried to make it illegal in america with disaterous results. You can't stop people from taking it, and we shouldn't because it's pretty safe. And we can make it safer with regulation
There still is a difference between alcohol and hallucinogens, however. Alcohol effects can differ- some get violent, some get happy, etc. Alcohol doesn't make you hallucinate. Hallucinogens do. The hallucinations are the dangerous thing to gamble with.
Regulation would be extremely difficult. However, if the government could pull it off somehow, we'd make a lot of money off of it and hopefully not let it affect the citizens too negatively.
all hallucinogen problems come from abuse, or are circumstantial. It's not like other governments don't regulate it. We can just make it so that you can only get it at coffee shops and bars. It would not be extremly difficult to regulate. If you only give out controled doses, it's not a gamble at all, where are you getting your information?
There aren't any statistics actually stating that controlling hallucinogens would be difficult, I'm basing it on regulating other things. Like gun control. Gun control is a complete failure. The government thinks by trying to regulate guns and doing background checks, we're safer. But all that does is create a black market for illegal gun purchasing. And ammunition isn't even regulated.
Even if we regulated hallucinogens, there would be those who wanted more or who wouldn't be "allowed" by the government to obtain them, therefore still creating some sort of black market for them.
And although other governments can regulate it, other governments still have black markets for it- as stated above. Also, I've noticed that other countries (europe and canada mostly) seem to be able to handle a lot of things that americans, in the society we have today, probably would abuse profusely. Look at how they handle sex. Their society is much more sexualized, yet they have lower STD/HIV/AIDs rates and lower teen pregnancy numbers. I'm not so sure how citizens would handle it in reality.
So far the only thing that would persuade me on shrooms/hallucinogens is the fact that we could tax it a lot, and help rebuild our economy.
I simply disagree. Your first stament proves my point, not yours. By "Regulation" I only mean that you can get them from legalized sellers. If we did that no one would go to the black market. And you're point about us being ready? Thats proposterous, our cities are very open and sexualized, I also believe in legalizing prostutustion, as this would lead to more saftey for prostitutes, and less spread of STDs.
When I asked "where are you getting you're facts?" I was asking where are you getting your information on the saftey of shrooms? Because it's completly false.
The fact that they can "handle" it is due to regulation and the fact that no one will go to the black market when you can legally get something just as good. And besides, guns kill, shrooms are safe.
Gun control is a bad example for this because most black market sales are illegal firearms (automatics) and the same thing just isn's available legally.
My first point was meant to demonstrate how the government tries to regulate things to make it "safer" for the citizens, but fail. If we were to regulated drugs, it wouldn't simply be legalized selling. There would be restrictions to prohibit abuse, etc. And the regulation would therefore create a black market.
I get my information on the danger of hallucinogens (not just shrooms) from seeing it. I haven't done it, but have seen personal acquaintances and have seen the impact. Someone I knew died because of something they did when they were under the influence of hallucinogens. So i disagree that they are perfectly safe.
I believe in prostitution legalization as well, but that doesn't mean that our society would handle legal hallucinogens in a responsible manner. Our society is very open and sexualized yes, but not responsible about it like Europe is. We have very high STD/HIV/AIDs rates and high teen-pregnancy rates as well. Although the teen pregnancy rates have been dropping, they are still high and STD rates are still very high as well. Americans are known to abuse these kinds of liberties.
I think it's time to agree to disagree, the collum is getting way to thin
You left out one of the most significant things an 18 year old can do, die for our country.
The fact is, kids are going to drink, and it is possible to make them more responsible and safer by introducing them earlier.
In UK the age is 5, it's not a huge deal over there, I think we need to be looking into more drug legalization, that way we could take care of the whole cartel industry.
exactly my point.
there's an organization called RALLY that pin-points college students and advocates teaching responsible drinking at a younger age (of 18).
What kind of drugs do you think should be legalized?