I just read an article entitled, The Debate for the Drinking Age is Heating Up. Of course it is. The argument is that those that can fight in war are certainly just as responsible for holding their liquor. Valid, I’ll give them that. I also think that surely those who’re fighting in the war may wish to relieve their war time TSS with a little booze, however the argument can be taken the other direction.
The logic people are using the lower the drinking age is the same logic used to lower the voting age. It doesn’t work the same way. The drinking issue has nothing to do with people sending you to war, as did the voting issue.
The drinking issue is often a question of maturity. Are 18 year old individuals mature enough to handle their liquor and not do something rash, like step into a car and drive home? Well, as history tells many 30 and 40 year olds aren’t even that mature. If an 18 year old is mature enough, they won’t be drinking because it’s illegal. So, the logic here is: if you’re mature enough to drink at 18, than you’re also mature enough to not drink at 18 either.
However, I guess it doesn’t matter too much. I mean I knew people in middle school getting hammered…a far cry away from 21. The term “boys will be boys” could apply. If people are going to do it, they’ll do it. We have to draw the line somewhere though.
Tags: drinking at 18, lower drinking age, teen drinking, teen drinking age, underage drinking
Leave a Reply