Well I know most people will say yeah, but what is your reasoning? I think if alcohol is not a mystery and and education is better then drinking deaths would not be as high. 21 is an obscure age when the rest of the world 18 or younger is acceptable. Are we smarter then the rest of the world?
If we can go to war and kill at the age of 18, if we are legally considered adults. We should be able to make the descision on what we consume.
As far as most people are concerned, the drinking age has absolutely nothing to do with the deaths associated with alcohol use/abuse and I think I agree with that. It's very difficult to say that people are more able to use a certain substance at a certain age, but I do know that alcohol is a very crippling drug no matter who you are. As far as a base limit goes, medically I haven't a clue. Legally, the ramifications of a higher drinking age doesn't have any effect on the deaths purported by liquor. I'm not saying that alcohol should be made illegal, don't get me wrong, and I agree with you that people should be educated about what substances they are putting into their body which is the opposite of what the whole D.A.R.E. scene expects from our education system. It's just not going to happen any time soon.
Being under 21 I will still say no. That would just make it easier for fucktards to get alcohol. We have a few running around NY
I concur. 18 should be the age of legality. However, drinking and driving? Totally different story. As crude as it sounds, natural selection would take care of the idiots.
uhhhhh no. This natural selection you speak of would probably take care of mothers, daughters, sons, fathers, grandparents, uncles, aunties, cousins and friends. Drunk driving hurts the person they hit more than the fucker who was driving.
I would say 16. I would lower the legal driving age to 15. I would also lower the voting age to 16 as well. But hey, that is just me. The only reason these people act like immature children, is because that is how they are treated and raised.
I hope you're not insinuating that natural selection can take care of drunk drivers as well. Sure, they're dead but so one or more other people.
I agree with you wholeheartedly there. We have an extremely easy life on this side of the globe and that definitely includes how we are raised, but to what extent?
The drivers usually survive the crashes. Yeah I support lowering the age. If you're legally an adult then the government should not be able to tell you what you can and cannot do with your own body.
I totally agree with lowering the drinking age to 18, even if it were just for beer. Much harder to fuck yourself up with beer than it is hard liquor.
I as well. Beer can be even more damaging to the body than hard liquor, but that's beside the point. You can become just as drunk over a mass quantity of beer than if you were taking shots of something harder.
Absolutely. 16 at that. Why can't children at 15, 16 year olds have a glass of wine or a beer with dinner? Because young people nowadays drink to get drunk. If instead of abstinence before 21 (which only makes people want to drink more), we taught responsible drinking like a beer or mixed drink on the weekends without going overboard is acceptable, I think things would turn around.
Honestly, in the US, in this day and age...hell no. Drinking age needs to stay 21. However, as a member of the armed services, and only on base, you should be able to drink at 18.
Well, my point is just reflecting your post. Perhaps I fucked it up though, I'm not entirely sure. It just seems like our culture is mostly wired so that we have the oldest children in the world, and that really reflects on the faith we put in our own people. When you put limitations like that on our youth when they already have all of the resources they need to make it on their own you're just causing immaturity and foolishness. Could it be a learned disorder? I don't know, but it seems that way.