Name:
Professor:
Course:
Date:
Argumentative Essay on Lowering the Drinking Age from Twenty-one to Eighteen
Does the widely-believed perception that the minimum legal drinking age of twenty-one really hold true? Does it save lives by reducing traffic fatalities and accidents among underage drivers? According to a research by the Pew Research Institute, every day in the nation, over 8500 kids under the age of sixteen have their first full drink of alcohol CITATION Dre14 l 1033 (Desilver). Although most Americans perceive the MLDA of twenty-one to be efficient, it only serves to heighten the thrill of alcohol and breaking the law, lure young adults into drinking in unregulated environments, infringe on their right to make their own decisions since 18 is the age of adulthood in the nation, and this policy seems highly inefficient since teens consume alcohol regardless. The MLDA 21 should, therefore, be reduced to 18, to avoid infringing on the rights of people aged eighteen to twenty, to reduce the thrill of alcohol and curb risky behavior associated with drinking in unregulated areas.
The MLDA 21 infringes on the rights of over 18s to make their own decisions. In the US the age of adulthood is eighteen and hence they should be given the right to make their own decisions on alcohol consumption. According to the Amethyst Initiative, the current minimum legal drinking age of 21 years is ineffective in preventing youths from drinking alcohol and experiencing the negative effects of alcohol. The Amethyst Initiative is an advocacy group that encourages public debate about lowering the minimum drinking age from 21. This group partners with another group, Choose Responsibility CITATION San11 l 1033 (Jones and Lachman). These two groups argue that the observed decline in drinking and traffic fatalities since the minimum legal drinking age was set at twenty-one years is not due to the MLDA, but due to factors such as improvement in traffic laws and motor vehicle safety. Moreover, they argue, that eighteen is the legal adult age in the nation, and drinking should be an activity that should be determined by all adults. The two groups advocate for public discussions and debates on lowering the drinking age to avoid infringing on people’s rights
The MLDA 21 only heightens the thrill of alcohol and breaking the law and should, therefore, be reduced to eighteen years. According to an article by Forbes, Mark Kleiman, a UCLA professor of Public Policy stated that the current age restrictions “make drinking a badge of adulthood and therefore build in the minds of young adults, a romantic sense of the transgressive danger of alcohol. This hence results in the abuse of alcohol. CITATION Wil08 l 1033 (Wilkinson)” If alcohol consumption was normalized and people taught that it should be done moderately and responsibly, then the taboo surrounding alcohol would be eradicated and it would not be thrilling anymore. Despite heavy drinking reducing among older adolescents since the enactment of the MLDA 21, no such progress has been marked for college students. Studies reveal that approximately 75% of college students aged 18-20 years participate in binge drinking. This proves that lowering the age limit to 18 will lessen the connotative lure of alcohol.
The MLDA 21 lures young adults into drinking in unregulated environments. Prohibiting young adults from drinking in bars or in other licensed locations only makes them drink in unsupervised areas such as house parties and here, they may binge drink and expose themselves to risky behavior. According to a journal article published by the NCBI, recent trends have proved that young adults mainly partake in alcohol consumption without any regulation or surveillance CITATION Tob10 l 1033 (Nelson and Wechsler). This results in worse outcomes than if they had their drinks in unlicensed establishments. As a group, college students are heavy drinkers partly because college environments have easy access to cheap alcohol and have few and stringent policies in place that restrict access to alcohol. Despite the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act requiring college administrators to enforce the MLDA 21, the enforcement of this act is limited since most higher learning institutions tend to focus on programs such as education and security. Therefore, the MLDA 21 should be reduced to eighteen years to avoid the lure of drinking in unregulated environments.
In conclusion, many Americans perceive the MLDA 21 to be effective but in reality, it is not. The nation, especially, in American college campuses, is characterized by a unanimous drinking culture that involves dangerous, determinative, and heavy drinking. The current decline in traffic fatalities is not due to the MLDA 21 but due to factors such as improvement in motor vehicle safety and more stringent traffic rules. Moreover, the age group 18-20 does not drink as heavily as those aged 21-24, especially those in university. The MLDA 21 should, therefore, be reduced to 18, to reduce the thrill of alcohol and curb risky behavior associated with drinking in unregulated areas.
Works Cited
BIBLIOGRAPHY Desilver, Drew. Chart of the Week: Who really drinks the most? 16 May 2014. <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/16/chart-of-the-week-who-really-drinks-the-most/>.
Jones, Sandra and Vicki Lachman. “Continuing the Dialogue: Reducing Minimum Legal Drinking Age Laws from 21 to 18.” Journal of Addictions Nursing (2011): 138-143.
Nelson, Toben and Henry Wechsler. “Will Increasing Alcohol Availability By Lowering the Minimum Legal Drinking Age Decrease Drinking and Related Consequences Among Youths?” American Journal of Public Health (2010): 986-992.
Wilkinson, Will. “Bottoms Up!” Forbes 11 September 2008. <https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/0929/028.html#774328e37192>.
