18 versus 21

**Deejay** · 2008-04-07 10:40

I think the main reason why the drinking age hasn't been brought to 18 is because there are studies that show the human brain is still in development until the age of 20-21. Large amounts of alcohol (ie binge drinking) could hinder that development. The government won't lower the age until theres enough proof that alcohol doesn't hurt an adolescent brain, which it potentially can.

**Tour** · 2008-04-07 10:45

It's nice to see these things getting discussed. It always struck me as a little off how states were essentially bullied into accepting the raised age. I completely believe that America's unhealthy relationship with alcohol has more to do with a culture of repression, than an inherent danger in drinking.

**Alleya** · 2008-04-07 10:45

As much as there's no argument for it, there's not really an argument AGAINST it either. Changing the minimum age doesn't magically make the effects of alcohol disappear; I think people overestimate the impact that a lower drinking age would have on statistical trends. It doesn't matter when you drink it, it still fucks you up. People will always drink to excess and the impaired judgment that goes with it (coupled with the already subpar judgment that young people posses) will always lead to bad decisions and tragedy, legality notwithstanding.

The argument everyone has been making here ("lol, people wait til 21?") is exactly why this doesn't matter. By the same logic that "making it lower will make accidents go down because it will be less taboo" you could argue that lowering it would just make kids start drinking even earlier, and then maybe alcohol poisoning related deaths or stunted mental development due to alcohol's effects on young brains would go up. There is no intrinsic benefit or detriment to the legal age, no matter what it is, so the question itself is entirely moot.

As for the physiological question posed by the OP- yes. There is a very weak and wholly irrelevant, but scientifically sound, reason for having the minimum age for alcohol higher. 18 is a poor definition of adulthood (and so is 21 at that). The brain is still undergoing drastic changes and those changes can be altered or stunted by the chronic presence of alcohol or any other drug of abuse. The reasoning is that by "not allowing" kids to develop drinking problems with laws, this can hopefully be avoided. But this same argument is still true at 21, only to a somewhat lesser degree.

So that brings it to the crux of the argument: The role that laws try to fill is one that they simply cannot. It is up to the parents to make sure their kids understand the real story behind alcohol, and it is up to the parents to be vigilant and watch for any sign that alcohol or any other drug is being abused by their kids.

The minimum drinking age law is drawn along lines of societal norms more than anything else.

P.S. I see a lot of talk about "repression" in this thread, and it's kinda silly. If we were a repressed society when it comes to alcohol, why is it glorified to nigh idolatry in every single media outlet?

Edit: I also wanted to mention that this debate has no end. Even if the drinking age is lowered to 18, kids will still complain about it. "I'm old enough to get behind the wheel of a car and risk a horrible auto accident at age 16, so why can't I drink?!"

**Tricen** · 2008-04-07 10:59

The way I see it, is that there has to be a law somewhere about it. So whatever they stick it at works, I suppose. Not everyone is the same, so alcohol/drugs affect people differently, but there needs to be a law for it somewhere.

**Fhqwghads** · 2008-04-07 11:02

Originally Posted by Alleya

P.S. I see a lot of talk about "repression" in this thread, and it's kinda silly. If we were a repressed society when it comes to alcohol, why is it glorified to nigh idolatry in every single media outlet?

Because alcoholic consumption is repressed. The same reason why naked bodies are used to boost product sales. Things which seem taboo have an air of mystery and intrigue about them to a large section of the community here in the US. If everyone grew up with no real "drinking age" to speak of, and people walked around nude, then it wouldn't be such a huge issue. It would be second nature and there would be no intrigue associated with it, because it would be commonplace.

**Acturus** · 2008-04-07 11:32

Originally Posted by Lordwafik

Originally Posted by Acturus

I'm going to ask the obvious, but this is US specific, right?

The US has the drinking age at 21 for the same reason that our government thought that Prohibition was a good idea back in the 20s. We're a country of repressed lemmings led by an outdated bible-thumping set of laws.

Where in the bible does it say you have to be 21 to drink? Religion bashing getting old and boring.

It's a "spirit of the law" argument. The US' identity as held by its citizens is still largely rooted in its Puritan ancestry, where any use of non-church approved substances is of the devil's making.

I'm not bashing religion, I'm focusing on the fact that most of our constitutional laws (and through these laws, the subsequent regional, state, and municipal laws) were built with a firm Christian belief in them with all of the overtones that the pious true-believer christian stereotypically holds.

**BRP** · 2008-04-07 11:55

Should be decided by the parents/guardian entirely(if still living under them). A great number of teens start drinking the moment parties start happening anyway.

**Khamsin** · 2008-04-07 11:56

Originally Posted by travOtaku

I don't really understand why the drinking age is 21, either. If the country thinks at 18 I am both responsible and capable enough to go help bring the US victory during a time of war, why doesn't the government think I can use that same sense of responsibility at home when I just wanna throw one back with my friends?

Because they don't want you saving the country while drunk!

Originally Posted by Alleya

So that brings it to the crux of the argument: The role that laws try to fill is one that they simply cannot. It is up to the parents to make sure their kids understand the real story behind alcohol, and it is up to the parents to be vigilant and watch for any sign that alcohol or any other drug is being abused by their kids.

The parents can only be vigilant until age 18. How do you propose the parents keep watching after their kid moves out?

**Gilanth** · 2008-04-07 12:09

We are over 18 and i wish it would go to over 21's here , It's a nightmare dealing with drunk children on a night out imo this country suffers as a result of lower drinking age imo.

**Correction** · 2008-04-07 12:10

To be perfectly frank, I'd raise the legal voting age back up to 21, because you motherfuckers aren't voting anyway. Maybe you'll get around that law like you do the drinking law and vote to rebel for a fucking change.

And why do you need a law to drink at 18 in America? Too hard to get liquor from older friends and relatives?

**Alleya** · 2008-04-07 12:11

Originally Posted by Khamsin

The parents can only be vigilant until age 18. How do you propose the parents keep watching after their kid moves out?

Hopefully by then they have instilled their kids with enough maturity and knowledge to make informed, rational decisions and exercise good judgment. That's how it would work in an ideal world.

The rest of my post dealt with the practical question since the world obviously isn't ideal.

**Intense** · 2008-04-07 12:12

Originally Posted by Shuemue

I think it's incredibly insulting to tell a man he's old enough to die for his country but not old enough to toast fallen comrades with a drink.

The legal drinking age here is 18, and personally I'd lower it to 16. I drank heavily when I was a kid, I was a horrible cunt. I lost interest in alcohol almost as soon as it became legal. It's a rebellion thing, the more we say DRINK IS BAD, kids will go nuts for it.

Was? :wink:

**archibaldcrane** · 2008-04-07 12:23

Since national lawmakers are at the very youngest 25 (30 in the Senate), they cannot possibly be expected to properly represent adults in the 18-24 age range. These are people that don't vote reliably, have very little political clout or money, and therefore they are the scare-tactic whipping boy for anything that can be politicized.

My parents grew up being able to drink at 18 - while in high school for both of them. I never touched alcohol until I hit college because I was the only one of my friends with a car, so if there was alcohol I was the de facto designated driver. But I spent my first two years at UW-Madison, which is a pretty insane party school, and went to house parties with 5+ barrels nearly every weekend. We all drank to get as drunk as possible weekly for years - it was the culture we were presented with, and we didn't know how to drink any other way. The laws just meant that when we got our hands on alcohol (which was routine and simple, despite good enforcement at the retailer level) that we binged, because it wasn't always around.

The problem isn't so much the drinking age of 21. It's the atmosphere of taboo around alcohol for people of the age (13+) who become interested in drinking it, and how that affects their drinking patterns. By the time I was 21 I was a much more sensible drinker, but if I'd started at 15 I would've been much more sensible at 18.

The law is just more of an unrealistic insult to young adults.

**Correction** · 2008-04-07 12:42

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

By the time I was 21 I was a much more sensible drinker, but if I'd started at 15 I would've been much more sensible at 18.

The law is just more of an unrealistic insult to young adults.

For every one of you 'sensible young adults who experiment to become responsible' there are dozens who are not you, and continue the spiral well into the years where it's legal to drink.

Fuck 'young adults.'

**MisterBob** · 2008-04-07 12:58

Originally Posted by Correction

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

By the time I was 21 I was a much more sensible drinker, but if I'd started at 15 I would've been much more sensible at 18.

The law is just more of an unrealistic insult to young adults.

For every one of you 'sensible young adults who experiment to become responsible' there are dozens who are not you, and continue the spiral well into the years where it's legal to drink.

Fuck 'young adults.'

Not to mention drinking at a younger age statistically increases your chance of being an alcoholic.

There are a few major reasons the drinking age isn't going to get moved to 18:

-The "shock" that will occur. All the 18-20 year olds will go on a binge if something like this were to pass. The result? Massive increase in DUIs and other alcohol related incidents.
-The lower the age on the law, the lower people start thinking its "ok" to drink. Earlier drinking = more likely to be an alcoholic
-Accident rates are the highest in the 18-20ish range. Yeah, lets make it legal for them to drink so they'll be more likely to drive.
-Many other countries with low/no drinking age (take a look at France, for example) have much higher rates of liver disease and associated death than we do. Do not just look at the short term effects of a lowered drinking age.

Also, a lack of enforcement of the US age 21 law is not a reason to say "Oh, we should just move it to 18 since everyone drinks anyways". Also note that changing the law ABSOLUTELY WILL increase the amount of drinking that occurs between the 18-21 gap.

**Woozie** · 2008-04-07 12:58

Originally Posted by Correction

To be perfectly frank, I'd raise the legal voting age back up to 21, because you motherfuckers aren't voting anyway. Maybe you'll get around that law like you do the drinking law and vote to rebel for a fucking change.

lol, I like the way you think. People who don't vote annoy the hell out of me

**Shuemue** · 2008-04-07 13:25

Originally Posted by Obev

Originally Posted by Shuemue

I think it's incredibly insulting to tell a man he's old enough to die for his country but not old enough to toast fallen comrades with a drink.

Personally I think it's insulting that over here you can get married at sixteen but can't rent a porno 'til you're eighteen. Talk about mixed messages.

That's beyond insulting, that's ludicrous.

Originally Posted by Intense

Was? :wink:

lol, you got me. I did mean I was a different kind of cunt though, much less reasonable.

**pohibaba** · 2008-04-07 13:42