news-record.com

OPINION

Editorial essay: Drinking age should stay 21

Article
Comments (2)

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

(Updated 3:00 am)

Underage drinking and colleges seem to be synonymous with one another. As a college student, I've observed the dangers of underage drinking. I've known my peers to skip class and have their grades plummet because of their drinking habits.

This summer, more than 100 college and university presidents tried to find a quick solution to the problem by signing the Amethyst Initiative. This states the current legal drinking age of 21 is not effective and should be lowered.

These presidents are under the false impression that if the drinking age is lowered, the number of students who binge drink will be reduced.

College students are the focus of the discussion, but it is important to remember the impact on high-schoolers. Since many students turn 18 their senior year, they would be able to purchase alcohol legally and to drink legally, while still in high school.

I know there are high school students who drink now. But they have to leap over several hurdles to get alcohol. By lowering the drinking age, we are eliminating a major obstacle -- access.

This law would also have severe implications on the road. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, motor-vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for U.S. teens.

Learning to drive is a difficult process. It takes time to learn and master it. There are already many distractions for teen drivers. Let's not provide students with another one. This could be a deadly mix.

I know many of my peers support this initiative. They want to drink in a relaxed atmosphere without the fear of getting caught. They need to look beyond their personal desires and understand all of the negative effects.

There is a reason the law was changed in 1984. And it wasn't just to increase highway funding for states.

Pam Richter is an intern with the News & Record and a sophomore at Elon University.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

aaponline

November 26, 2008 - 11:17 am EST

What about the age of 19?

The only people who are following the law currently - responsible law abiding young people - are the same people who would be responsible drinkers.

drstrangelove4321

November 29, 2008 - 5:56 pm EST

Pam, your article is built on a false premise: that all drinking is bad.

Alcohol has been a traditional part of human culture for thousand and thousands of years. Abstainers and heavy drinkers are both outlived by moderate drinkers, who also enjoy lower blood pressure, better brain functioning, and less mental illness. (See http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/alcoholandhealth.html )

The flip side is binge drinking and alcoholism, which kills thousands in car accidents, wrecks the budgets of the working poor, and exacerbates other bad behavior by removing good-natured inhibitions.

Drinking has a good side and a dark side, regardless of age. It's intellectually dishonest to lump all "underage drinking" together under the umbrella of problem drinking. In Italy, France, and Spain, school children drink diluted wine with dinner. French high schools actually teach wine appreciation. And yet the United States has far higher rates of addiction, binge drinking, and liver disease.

Where then does that leave your hypothesis that all "underage drinking" should be forbidden in all forms? And what happens 662,695,445 seconds from birth that makes alcohol innocuous, or at least acceptable? Why is a glass of wine with dinner forbidden for a nineteen year old adult, but waking up in a pool of vomit is the accepted norm for a twenty-two year old?

There is no logic in it. The Amethyst Initiative is but a statement of the obvious: that the world's highest drinking age has failed. The Amethyst Initiative isn't about creating a free-for-all, but about changing the way we think about alcohol education. Its backers are proposing a "drinking license", much like a drivers license, to be issued on a graduating basis only after education.

Maybe it will move us to a Mediterranean drinking culture, or maybe not. But it's better than the alternative, which is to continue a failed and paternalistic policy of Prohibition for adults under twenty-one.

-Ken