<p>lower drinking age would just mean more deaths…I’m sure nobody here wants that</p>
<p>People under 21 are going to drink if they want to regardless, so I guess it doesn’t matter. Personally, I don’t think I’ll drink until I’m legal just because I don’t have any interest in it. Even then I might not.</p>
<p>Regardless of the age limit, I think law should be very strict about it.</p>
<p>Being this is an old thread, who knows how long it will stay open, but here’s a thought on the topic.</p>
<p>I think that if the adults who are 18-20 are not being given the rights of a 21 year old adult and being treated as a juvenile, then they should also be treated as juveniles as far as the law is concerned if they get caught breaking that law. If a 19 yr. old gets busted for drinking, the record should be sealed when they turn 21 and not follow them around for life. I don’t like that the govt. can have it both ways. They are either an adult or not, and if you aren’t treating them as an adult for the right to drink, they they shouldn’t be able to treat them as an adult when doling out the consequences for drinking under age.</p>
<p>As long as this thread is open…</p>
<p>I know that the 21 drinking age has led to a decrease in drinking-related auto accidents and fatalities. But I wonder it if has encouraged an unhealthy pattern of surreptitious high-intensity binge drinking among the young adult demographic that might have very negative long-term health consequences for people who don’t learn to drink responsibly in a public sociable atmosphere.</p>
<p>I remember being my D’s age (19) and being able to meet people in bars and restauarants with bars over the summer, on breaks etc. It made social life so much easier. College freshmen and sophomores are too old to be congregating like 16-year-olds in mom and dad’s basement, but they’ve got nowhere else to go. Many establishments in our area effective card and exclude under 21s because they don’t feel like monitoring their drinking and it’s not worth the inconvenience. The 21 drinking age has created this strange void in the public social space for the 18-21 year-old set.</p>
<p>@NJSue. I agree completely. That’s why when our older teen is out of the U.S. (we live overseas) we let him have wine w dinner. Better to associate alcohol as a ho hum, civilized accompanying beverage w dinner, than forbidden fruit to binge on.</p>
<p>I have an acquaintence who teaches at a small LAC in our city. She said a lot of college personnel would like to see the drinking age lowered to 18. That way, alcohol consumption is out in the open and colleges can step in to police it somewhat. As it is now, it’s all underground and colleges have to deal with the fallout from underage drinking. And this is strictly anecdotal, but when I was in college, the drinking age was 18, and there just didn’t seem to be as much binge drinking and “pre-gaming” as there is today. Also, the kids who came from the strictest homes regarding alcohol were the biggest party animals, at least as freshmen and sophomores. Forbidden fruit and all that. I came from a home where alcohol was a part of daily life and was drinking wine with dinner on special occasions by age 10. As far as my parents were concerned, I could drink myself blue in the face as long as I stayed off the road, but it just wasn’t that big a deal to me, probably as a result of this kind of upbringing.</p>
<p>Legal age for voting, armed services, drinking, smoking, basically making adult decisions should be 18.</p>
<p>I make an exception for driving. In some states there may be less of a need for a 16 year old to drive, but here - geographically, it makes it very difficult for a teenager to work without a driver’s license. Train them and let them drive, if they abuse the privelege, take it away (excessive tickets, driving without insurance, truancy, getting in other trouble with the law, etc.) It’s training for adulthood.</p>
<p>
I worry about this too. Another thing that worries me is that I don’t think it’s good for civic responsibility to have a law that is so widely ignored. People between 18 and 20 currently behave much as the whole population did during Prohibition.</p>
<p>
Those who do not remember history are condemned to repeat it.</p>
<p>I would rise the minimum military age to 45.</p>
<p>“People between 18 and 20 currently behave much as the whole population did during Prohibition.”</p>
<p>Prohibition was a HUGE success. Drinking rates fell (the whole population did NOT drink during Prohibition), alcohol death rates fell, cirrhosis rates fell, industrial accidents fell, age of first use rose, and family life significantly improved on almost every measure. It wasn’t a success for a massive alcohol industry, because those who wanted to drink learned how to make their own, and crime rings controlled imports from Canada.</p>
<p>Moderator’s note: Please do not resurrect old threads. I am closing this one.</p>