Drinking Age the Minimum Drinking

¶ … Drinking Age

The minimum drinking age in America should remain at the age of 21 for reasons that cannot be disputed. It is extremely difficult to argue with facts, especially when that argument is based in the general illogical consensus of "because I want to" or "if I'm old enough to go to war, I'm old enough to drink." The desire of someone under the age of 21 to have a drink is not enough to warrant that drink. If everyone experienced what they desired, the world would be a larger mess than it already is. Lowering the drinking age would only benefit those under 21 and those selling to them.

In an argument such as this, logic reigns because it is extremely difficult to dispute fact. The National Institute of Health released a fact sheet that states, "traffic related deaths per population have been cut in half with the greatest proportional declines among persons 16-20 years old" (NIH). At the time the fact sheet was released, it reported alcohol is involved in 40% of traffic fatalities and the percent of traffic fatalities between the ages of 16 and 20 is 36. The report also claims that the number of alcohol-related deaths among 16 to 20-year-olds decreased from "5,244 in 1982 to 2,115 in 2004 in large measure because the legal drinking age of 21 and Zero Tolerance' (NIH). In addition, the fact sheet reports that those who begin drinking before age 1 are "four times more likely to develop dependence during their lifetime than those who began drinking at age 21 or later" (NIH). These acts are more than enough to understand why the argument for keeping the minimum drinking age at 21 is not simply an argument but common sense. It is not simply a matter of being able to drink; it is a matter of behaving responsibly and considering society as a whole.

While many think that if someone is old enough to go to war, one is old enough to drink, they miss the fact that going to war is a voluntary act. No one forces an individual to join any armed force. The decision is one that the individual makes for himself and there is no standing behind him or her forcing him or her to do so. The drinking age has nothing to do with this. Under the same logic, we could also say that if one is old enough to go to war then one is old enough to speed, kill one's parents, or commit tax evasion. Just like underage drinking, these things are illegal and just because one is old enough to go to war one is not old enough to break the law. The argument simply does not hold up.