Spring Break
Teenage wasted land
Drinking age should be reconsidered, college teens don't need to be babied when it comes too alcohol
By: Michael Warren
Issue date: 9/8/08 Section: Opinion
Engs' research revealed that the percentage of students who reported "vomiting after drinking" and "getting lower grade because of drinking" rose after the law came into effect, among other activities which are indicative of alcohol abuse. A study by an organization working in tandem with the United States Department of Health and Human Services found that an estimated 57.8 percent of full-time college students aged 18 to 20 admitted to using alcohol in the past month, and 40.1 percent said that they had engaged in binge drinking. The alcohol taboo has created what Amethyst Initiative calls "A culture of dangerous, clandestine 'binge-drinking'"
Again, the country finds itself with an unworkable drinking age policy. Even as we begin to see the patchwork nature of the 1980s policy as a major cause for increased deaths, eight states (Kentucky, Missouri, Minnesota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Vermont) are considering their policies at the state level, and in so doing reinstating the practice of drunken adolescence for minors everywhere. Probably not the best choice.
What exactly should the federal government do? First of all, some other laws need to be tweaked like raising fines for alcohol related crimes or mandating alcohol awareness classes for people who are coming of age. The age doesn't have to be lowered to 18;
adding one year would have a similar effect
without destroying senior class attendance in every high school in the country. Other things could be done with the drinking age, like having one age for the purchase of beer and wine, and another for stronger spirits, as is the case in several European countries.
As is the case with most things worth discussing, there is no correct answer. The intensity of the debate will wax and wane as battle lines are drawn and forgotten, and the age probably won't drop until we're the ones shouting that our 18-year-old babies are too fragile to be drinking that devil water. Oh it will pass! And we'll have earned every gray hair we get as a result.
Again, the country finds itself with an unworkable drinking age policy. Even as we begin to see the patchwork nature of the 1980s policy as a major cause for increased deaths, eight states (Kentucky, Missouri, Minnesota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Vermont) are considering their policies at the state level, and in so doing reinstating the practice of drunken adolescence for minors everywhere. Probably not the best choice.
What exactly should the federal government do? First of all, some other laws need to be tweaked like raising fines for alcohol related crimes or mandating alcohol awareness classes for people who are coming of age. The age doesn't have to be lowered to 18;
adding one year would have a similar effect
without destroying senior class attendance in every high school in the country. Other things could be done with the drinking age, like having one age for the purchase of beer and wine, and another for stronger spirits, as is the case in several European countries.
As is the case with most things worth discussing, there is no correct answer. The intensity of the debate will wax and wane as battle lines are drawn and forgotten, and the age probably won't drop until we're the ones shouting that our 18-year-old babies are too fragile to be drinking that devil water. Oh it will pass! And we'll have earned every gray hair we get as a result.
Be sure to include your name, major, and class year. Submissions without this information are subject to deletion.
By submitting a comment, you agree to thebatt.com's Terms of Use.
You may also send a Mail Call to The Battalion at mailcall@thebatt.com