August 14th, 2007
Debate on lower drinking age bubbling up
The debate over the legal drinking age is again a hot topic, enough so that it is the lead story on MSNBC.com right now (thank you to hops for providing the link).
…“Raising the drinking age to 21 was passed with the very best of intentions, but it’s had the very worst of outcomes,†said David J. Hanson, an alcohol policy expert at the State University of New York-Potsdam. “Just like during national Prohibition, the law has pushed and forced underage drinking and youthful drinking underground, where we have no control over it. 
Having been born in a country where the legal drinking age is 18, I can definitely see the advantages of having a drinking age of 18. It can easily be argued that 18+ year olds are drinking whether the law permits them or not, and having laws in place that prohibit that are, as the article points out, driving them ‘underground’.
The drinking climate in England is such that, well, it’s not that big a deal to go out and have a couple pints. Here, there is this huge stigma attached to drinking like it’s this highly dangerous and immorale activity. Granted, the effects of alcohol have been well-documented, but in light of the fact that it’s a prevalent activity among college students, is it not better to provide a society in which they are not forced to hide in basements and ‘have a few drinks because its cool’. Fact is, I enjoy beer, because of its subtleties and nuances, and how, with few exceptions, no two beers are the same. I’m not condoning underage drinking here, so don’t misinterpret my words.
Additionally, with the military service age being at 18, I find it a little peculiar that the government sees fit to send its young men and women overseas to fight a war, but doesn’t see fit to permit them to enjoy a nice, hopefully craft, beer.