Comments on: The Debate On Lowering The Drinking Age

60 Minutes: Some Say Age Should Be Lowered To 18, But MADD And Others Strongly Disagree

[hereismyopinion]

It is beyond unlikely to believe that these severe punishments will ever be accepted. Please, let's be realistic here. Even if these penalties were real, would they help? Wouldn't underage drinking just go underground and behind-closed-doors more than it already is? Wouldn't this exacerbate the problem? Teenagers are rebelling against the law as it stands at 21. If we made the law stricter, it is more likely that the underage drinking problem would get worse. What we really need are better-informed teenagers. If teens were raised to understand drinking in moderation as opposed to abstaining from drinking, the desire to binge drink (and to rebel against what they've been taught) would decrease. Perhaps you are right that the drinking age should be kept at 21, but increased punishments would only increase rebellion.

[hhudson14]

So if kids in high school now or college and have parties and there is someone there who is to wasted to stand on their own feet then they just leave them somewhere and dont check to see if they are ok or call 911 then why would they do if or when the drinking age is lowered why would they change their ways of helpping someone who is so drunk that they cant stand.

[Okami0719]

If I was in college and under the drinking age and drunk I would not call 911 and have cops show up. I would'v done the same thing and waited till the morning when I was sober. Now if the drinking age was 18 I would not of hasted to call 911 because I am doing nothing illeagle.

[Sparrow52606]

So the way I see it....... They should keep the 21 drinking age, and yes the under agers are still going to get alcohol but who cares we can at least make it harder for them to get it. A good reason why it should stay at 21 is because the younger you are when you drink, the more dependent you become of alcohol. It's as simple as that. Most people don't even know that, so kids who obtain alcohol, and even parents who give their kids alcohol, are ignorantly drinking themselves into a future hell of sickness and limited control of their own body in a sense that, your body is still growing and if you give it a substantial amount of alcohol (or any drug for that fact) during that time, you teach your body to function with it and then it becomes a part of you and eventually your body will know nothing else. And if this particular drug (including alcohol) is not there, your body will attack itself and torment you into giving it what it "needs" to function. And obviously it's going to affect your relationships, careers, and just your life overall. And the only reason kids are going out and binge drinking is because that's the only way they've learned how to do it. Any story involving alcohol comprises of how a person passed out, doesn't remember, did something crazy, and/or how much they've consumed (which is always a rather large amount). And these stories unfortuneately are not just kept between adults, our children hear these stories, they SEE their parents endlessly downing one right after the other, and sadly sometimes even joining in with them. If the government would make a mandatory Alcohol Education Class through schools, organizations, etc. etc..... and TEACH children the health risks involved, what a safe and responsible amount is to consume, and that the reason for a get-together is not just about getting wasted. Instead it's to simply spend time with family, friends, or getting to know new people. And they should really be shown how stupid they would look if they decided to embark on the life of binge drinking (because it really does damage the appearance of your intelligence level to an open minded, informed individual)......... They might find that binge drinking may very well decline quite significantly. And hopefully alcoholism will eventually fade out with it. So the higher drinking age is not in place to be unfair, it's in place to save you from yourself.

[repb_kory]

you are a ******* idiot. its those communist ideas that will ruin this country yet. continue spreading your trash. we all see through it mr. stalin

[DRINKINGAGEDOWN]

shut the hell up...ur stupid..research before u comment...ur completely wrong...if you allow kids to be exposed to alcohol at a younger age, they wouldnt use it irresponsibly. look at the european countries. they dont have a problem because theyre kids can drink at like 8 years old...its ppl like u that ruin this country...and another thing...ITS A FREE COUNTRY!!! it isnt right now though because all these stupid laws

[zildjians_mom]

this is the dumbest s*** i have ever heard in my life. drinking age should be 18. everyone with a brain knows this.

[fronczek]

im 18 and im also a united states marine so your saying that i can go fight for my country and die for you to have an opinion but i cannot have a beer before i leave for war i cant legally go into a bar with my fellow soildwers and have a beer before we go fight for your rite to have an opinion in this great country! well i say how selfish of you

[justbyluck13]

I think the real advantage of lowering the drinking age is that it pushes back the age of those who would be interested to an age where they can supervised. When you're out on your own for the first time at eighteen, the allure of alcohol is strong, and the fact that it's illegal makes it stronger. When you're 16 or 17 and still under some parental supervision, it at least keeps you from abusing it to the extent that young college kids do.

[yame12345]

Just read the 14th amendment. If you are against following the constitution, common sense should do it. Go to your local community college and take a statistics class, then take a second look at the claims that MADD makes.

[collegeopinion13]

This article has an excellent point. You cannot stop underaged teens from drinking, it is simply unfeasible. The United States has one of the highest legal drinking ages in the world and to be honest there I don't really see how we are benefiting from it.

Oddly enough, high school students in much of the rest of the developed world ? where lower drinking ages and laxer enforcement reign ? do considerably better than U.S. students on standardized tests. So that is obviously not the reason.

Many base their opinions on the fact that the human brain continues developing beyond the age of 21 yet these assertions reek of junk science. They're extrapolated from a study on lab mice, as well as from a small sample of actual humans already dependent on alcohol or drugs. Neither is enough to make broad proclamations about the entire population.


Many of the deaths similar to Gordie's could have been prevented if he had not been underaged, maybe someone would have gotten him help had they not been afraid of the consequences of being caught. Most teens and college students binge drink because they don't know the next opportunity that alcohol will be available to them, so they drink everything they have in one sitting this is a major problem

i feel that lowering the drinking age would be an excellent solution

[poncenbee]

What a joke these so-called self proclaimed experts and sactimonious deans of colleges. There are many laws that can be and are enforced, for example DUI. The only law in america where you are presumed guilty in court, thanks to MADD. So a law can be enforced and DUI is. Does it stopp drinking, yes but not completely, but it sure has worked on millions. Suggetsion: Upon acceptance to college, the studen must agree to not drink prior to age 21. If he does he is immediately expelled with no tuition refund. Fraternities and Sororities that provide alcohol to underage students lose their certification and must close. Any person in an official capacity at the University or College who refuses too or ignores these rules by failure to prosecute will be immediately dismissed with no tenure to protect them. Draconian Maybe, but these sactimonius leaders of our colleges who say they can't enforce rules are lying to save their collective ***** fronm lawsuits against the schools.
Prompt enactment of these simple requirements will stop 90%+ of the incidence of underaged drinking in higher education. You are guilty of DUI if your blood alcohol is equal to or above 0.08 whether or not you are impaired. There are thoudands of people who can drive safely at 0.10 but it doesn't matter you are guilty.
strick enforcement works.
We don't neea bunch of self proclaimed experts ????? to make dozens of excuses for this behaviour. One offense is suspension for one full year. Second offense is permanent expulsion and cancelling all college loans.

[bshanks]

> Perhaps if we lived in a society which only forbade things with the agreement of 70% of the population, rather than 50%, there would be less crime.

(clearly, if less things were forbidden, there would be less "crime", but I mean that there might also be less breaking of the laws which remained in place in both cases, for instance theft)

[bshanks]

Number of deaths is not the only thing to consider. The existence of laws which are not supported by a significant proportion of citizens breeds disrespect for the law.

In this case, a large proportion of the public is OK with people under 21 drinking, and covertly permits and even encourages them to do so. When people see that their parents and their friends' parents are OK with them breaking the law, the public perception of the law is changed. Instead of seeing the law as a set of rules which are written and supported by your community, people begin to see the law as some weird bureaucratic obstacle to be subverted, or possibly as laws written by some enemy faction of the community which is oppressing you.

The effects of this are harder to measure than highway deaths, but there is some scientific evidence that suggests that it's possible that sanctioning breaking the law in one case may lead people to break the law in other ways, too (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1161405).

Granted, a majority of citizens seem to support the current laws; but the proportional strength of the opposition is substantial also. Perhaps if we lived in a society which only forbade things with the agreement of 70% of the population, rather than 50%, there would be less crime.

Another argument in favor of lowering the drinking age is individual rights. Assume for the sake of argument that it is better for the community if the drinking age remained 21. Should people be legally obligated to do what's best for the community? Or do people have individual freedom (defined here as the right to control their own lives provided that they don't hurt others). Note that, if people have a right to freedom, then the argument that you shouldn't drink because maybe you'll drive doesn't work. If you are free, then you have a right to drink as long as you don't drive while drunk.

[Revobution]

Hehe... I love how they use the idea of eighteen year olds buying beer for fifteen year olds. In most high schools they already have twenty one year old friends who buy beer for them regardless of how old they are, or they are friends with people who have buyers. So really they wouldnt gain anything out of the drinking age being lowered.