Allie Cuccoli
ENGL 102-039
Toulmin Argument Essay
8 May 2013
“Cheers!”:
Lowering the Drinking Age to Eighteen
Recently, a film that has become popular among teenagers and young adults is Project X (2012). The movie revolves around three teens, Thomas, J.B., and Costa. J.B. and Costa are planning to throw a “rage” at Thomas’s house, in honor of his birthday. The friends advertise the party at school and on the extremely popular website, “Craig’s List,” to ensure that people actually attend the party. Surprisingly, people show up to the party, bringing with them immense amounts of alcohol and other drugs. Events at the party get wildly out of hand; the alcohol overtook the party-goers’ consciousness and inhibited their abilities to make logical, smart, and safe choices. This movie aggrandized the all too familiar practice of binge drinking, an activity that has become a major health and social issue among minors. Currently, a great debate among lawmakers is whether the drinking age should be lowered from 21 to 18. However, lawmakers are hesitant of making the significant change because they are wary of the impact a lower drinking age would have on young adults’ behavior. Lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18 will prevent underage binge drinking, as well as serious injuries or deaths that result from such behavior.
First, it is important to consider how society deems individuals to be adults at the young age of 18. From this age continuing throughout individuals’ lives, young adults are held legally responsible for their decisions because society believes that people at this age are capable of making rational, qualified decisions that will impact their lives positively or negatively in the short term and the long term. Society also believes that eighteen year olds can be held responsible for any events that result from their decisions. The Washoe County Bar Association from Nevada created a website to inform eighteen year old individuals about their new legal rights. According to the Washoe County Bar Association’s “ Now That You Are 18: A Survival Guide,” individaulas eighteen and older can: get married without parental consent, move out and have an apartment under lease, sign binding contracts, be charged with a felony, a gross misdemeanor, or misdemeanor, join the military, vote in state and federal government elections, acquire a gun license, purchase cigarettes, purchase lottery tickets, and become a bar tender and serve alcohol (“You are 18”). Despite all of these rights and responsibilities, society does not believe 18 year olds are capable of making the decision regarding how much alcohol they wish to consume because it will negatively impact them, both physically and mentally.
Keeping the drinking age at such a high age is leading to more cases of binge drinking because it has become a social norm among adolescents, however by lowering the drinking age to 18, binge drinking would be greatly reduced because moderate drinking would become a normal social activity. Binge drinking is when a person consumes alcohol with the intention of becoming intoxicated as a result of heavy, quick drinking. According to an article published by the American Medical Association, roughly 11 million American young adults and youths consume alcohol, and around half of them binge drink, “consuming five or more drinks in a row, one or more times in a two-week period” (“Minimum Legal Drinking Age”). A shocking number of young members of society participate in this form of drinking because they believe it to be socially acceptable among their friends, and do not see drinking casually often in their lives because it is illegal for adolescents. According to Amy Ackleh et al, in an article from the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, college presidents launched the Amethyst Initiative because they see first hand how college students feel a sense of freedom upon arriving at a university and begin binge drinking. College presidents and faculty members also witness how students believe that binge drinking is a social norm because they see it frequently, all around them on campus (“Episodic Drinking”). As a result of binge drinking, minors encounter social, academic, and health issues. On college campuses, students are sent to the hospital as a result of binge drinking. Furthermore, if and when this form of drinking becomes a habit, students’ grades begin to slip because they focus their attention on the next party, rather than centering their focus on schoolwork. In Bill Schorr’s cartoon about binge drinking on campus, the students’ parents thought the report of his 3.0 was his GPA, but to their shock it was his blood alcohol count (See Fig. 1.).
Fig. 1. In, Bill Schorr’s cartoon, he is depicting how college students are participating in binge drinking rather than participating in class (“Binge Drinking”).
Therefore, many colleges joined the Amethyst Initiative to advocate that the MDLA21 be lowered to 18 because they found that it would curb the students’ desire to rebel against the strict law and would make drinking among eighteen to twenty year olds a normal social event. Drinking would become a normalized occurrence for 18 year olds, and thus the frequency of episodes of binge drinking would be greatly reduced because 18 year olds would no longer feel the need to over use and abuse alcohol in such a manner.
However, keeping the drinking age at 21 has brought about an insignificant amount of improvement in regards to injuries and fatalities as a result of excessive drinking, specifically in regards to drunk driving fatalities. When lawmakers raised the drinking age to 21 in 1984, they thought they were saving lives and preventing future deaths caused by drunk driving. According to Minor and Tetalbaum, there was never a significant life-saving affect as was originally intended (“Dangers of Drinking Age”). In Minor and Tetelbaum’s article, “The Dangers of the Drinking Age” they discuss how “virtually all the life-saving impact of the MLDA21 comes from the few early-adopting states, not from the larger number that resulted from federal pressure.” The government and federal states believed that by raising the legal drinking age to 21, they would have a positive impact on the overwhelming amount of traffic deaths related to alcohol consumption. In actuality, there has been no significant change. According to Will Wilkinson, a journalist for Forbes Magazine, research has shown that there has been no statistically significant decrease in traffic fatalities due to alcohol consumption for 18-to-21 year olds; rather, the steady decline in traffic fatalities is better attributed to “safer cars, improved driver education and better medical technology” (“Bottoms Up!”). The preventative measures taken by the government in raising the drinking age to 21 in 1984 have been somewhat fruitless in avoiding fatalities due to drunk driving.
In fact, according to alcoholalert.com, in the article, “2009 Drunk Driving Statistics,” the legal drinking age cannot and should not be correlated to the number of drunk driving fatalities. In the report, it was determined that of the fatal crashes in 2011, “the highest percentage of drivers with a BAC level of .08 or higher was for drivers ages 21-24” (“Drunk Driving Statistics”). There has been little research that directly correlates raising the legal drinking age to 21 to decreasing amounts of alcohol related traffic fatalities. To add to this, the non profit organization, Choose Responsibility, published the article, “FAQs”on their web site. The article answers questions about the comparison between countries where the legal age is 18 versus the United States and its imposed drinking age. When the number of alcohol related traffic fatalities in America was compared to the number in twelve other reporting European countries, America had the highest proportion of traffic fatalities that were related to excessive alcohol consumption (“Choose Responsibility). Despite the government’s attempt to curb the number of drunk driving deaths, raising the legal drinking age to 21 had little to no impact on reducing the number of fatalities.
If the minimum legal drinking age was lowered to 21, binge drinking episodes would be reduced, and therefore, as would the injuries and deaths that result from being in risky, life-endangering environments during a case of binge drinking. Choose Responsibility reported in the “FAQs” article, that there is no association between MDLA 21 and the decline in the number of alcohol related deaths from alcohol suicides, cases of drowning, accidents, murders and alcohol poisonings (“Frequently Asked Questions”). An excess amount of alcohol is poisonous to the human body; when adolescents take part in binge drinking, they are deliberately poisoning their bodies. As a result of the sudden poisoning, people are more susceptible to risky behavior, as well as minor and major alcohol related injuries. Such behavior could be seen in the popular 2012 film, Project X; minors were engaging in sexual activities, jumping from rooftops; driving cars into pools, and setting things on fire. Teenagers across the country were amused by the popular movie about a “raging” house party, and minors strived to throw parties that could possibly result in the out of control events similar to those that unfolded in the movie (See fig. 2.).
Fig. 2. This promotional picture for the movie, Project X, shows a teenager who fell from a house because of his impaired judgment and physical abilities as a result of binge drinking during a massive house party (ProjectXthemovie.com).
Binge drinking usually takes place in dangerous situations because it is an underground activity due to the fact that it is illegal for individuals under the age of 21. As a result, serious injures or deaths occur because of poor judgment, risky behavior and the inability to seek medical care with out being prosecuted for illegal possession of alcohol. According to Carla T. Main, if the drinking age was lowered to 18, “Youth drinking would come out into the open and binge drinking would be largely reduced or eliminated” (“Underage Drinking”). Bringing the drinking age to down to 18 would be beneficial to young adults because it would prevent alcohol related deaths or injuries that result from binge drinking.
On the other hand, part of the population supports the MDLA 21. Advocates for MDLA 21 argue that the drinking age should be kept at 21 because the brain is still developing at 18, and does not stop until the mid twenties (“FAQs”). Thus, if eighteen-year-old individuals consumed alcohol, they would interfere with their brain development. Also, they argue that eighteen year olds are incapable of making the decision to drink at 18 due to the theory that the decision making part of the brain is not fully developed (“FAQs”). However, according to the founder of Choose Responsiblyity, John McCardell, teens should be allowed to drink regardless of their brain development. In his article, “Let Them Drink at 18,” he says that the law acknowledges that at age 18, young adults possess the proper maturity and judgment to operate a motor vehicle, serve in the military, perform jury duty, sign contracts, yet they are denied the right to purchase or consume alcohol” (McCardell). Despite the fact that the law agrees that adolescent brains are not fully developed, the law still deems eighteen year olds physically and mentally competent to make significant decisions. Therefore, the law must accept that eighteen year olds are also capable of making the decision to pick up an alcoholic beverage.
Taking all of these points into consideration, the drinking age should be lowered to 18 years old in all fifty states because it will prevent a greater amount of cases of binge drinking and most cases of alcohol related injuries or deaths that result from excessive drinking. Keeping the drinking age at 21 is unintentionally inflicting more harm among minors. Despite the government’s efforts at reducing traffic fatalities, raising the drinking age to 21 has shown no significant decline in alcohol related traffic fatalities. Also, MDLA 21 has made no significant impact on preventing other alcohol related injuries and deaths such as suicides, poisonings and accidents. In fact, MDLA 21 has lead to more cases of binge drinking which is the leading cause in drunk driving incidents and fatalities as well as the other injuries and deaths due to alcohol consumption. By lowering the drinking age to 18, drinking moderately will become a social norm among the young adult age group, which would bring about less cases of binge drinking and the traffic accidents and deaths and other injuries or fatalities that result from heavy drinking. Thus, a minimum legal drinking age of 18 would help young adults to stay safe and healthy.
Works Cited
"2011 Drunk Driving Statistics." Drunk Driving Statistics. AlcoholAlert.com, n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2013.
Ackleh, Azmy S., et al. "Heavy episodic drinking on college campuses: does changing the legal drinking age make a difference?" Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs Jan. 2011: 15+. Academic OneFile. Web. 1 Apr. 2013.
"Frequently Asked Questions." Choose Responsibility: Balance, Maturity, Common Sense. Choose Responsibility, n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
Main, Carla T. "Underage drinking and the drinking age." Policy Review 155 (2009):
33+. Academic OneFile. Web. 1 Apr. 2013.
McCardell, John. "Let Them Drink at 18." Editorial. New York Times 29 May 2012: n.
pag. Choose Responsibility: Balance, Maturity, Common Sense. Choose
Responsibility, 29 May 2012. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.
"Minimum Legal Drinking Age." Minimum Legal Drinking Age. American Medical
Association, n.d. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.
Minor, Jeffrey A., and Elina Tetelbaum. "The Dangers of the Drinking Age." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 15 Apr. 2009. Web. 01 Apr. 2013.
Project X. 2012. Photograph. Project X. Warner Bros., 2012. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.
Schorr, Bill. "College Drinking." Cartoon. Political Cartoons. PoliticalCartoons.org, 28
Oct. 2011. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.
Wilkinson, Will. "Bottoms Up!" Forbes Magazine 29 Sept. 2008: n. pag. Forbes.com. Forbes Magazine, 04 Sept. 2008. Web. 1 Apr. 2013.
