18 Or 21
...He fought hard for his country, carried an M-16, and saved lives. All he wants to do now is to go to the bar and drink a beer with his buddies. So he goes to the bar with his buddies, dressed to impress in his marine outfit. When he gets to the bar, his name is shouted over the intercom with a, "Welcome home Joe." He approaches the bartender and asks for an ice cold Bud Light. To his amazement the bartender asks him for his ID. Joe gives his ID to the bartender, but Joe is denied his beer because he is only 20 years old. Is this right? Joe's only wish when he got back home was to have a beer with his buddies, which he was denied. If somebody has the courage to go overseas to fight for their country, then they should have the right, as an adult, to purchase liquor. Should the legal drinking age be lowered to 18 or remain at 21? Is the raised drinking age worth taking away a freedom from an established adult? The legal drinking age should be lowered to 18 because, as adults, we should have the right to drink, society is capable of handling a lower drinking age, and a lower drinking age will reduce rebellious drinking.
On October first, 1986, to lower the number of teen drinking and driving, all states were required to establish a minimum drinking age of 21. Each state that failed to comply with the federal law would consequently loose five percent of their federal highway funds for 1987 and ten percent for each following year. In 1987 there were 42 states that complied with the federal law. South Dakota wasn't happy with the law and went to the supreme court claiming that by establishing a national 21-year-old drinking age, Congress has violated the 21st amendment. South Dakota was rejected, and after a year, every state had a minimum drinking age of 21 (Opponents say, 1987).
At age 18 we are considered adults and should, as adults, be able to...
View Full Essay
