Argument: 21 drinking age usurps parental role on responsible drinking
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision | Newer revision→ (diff)
John J. Miller. "The Case Against 21. Lower the drinking age." National Review Online. 19 Apr. 2007 - the higher drinking age has had negative consequences. It encourages disrespect for the law. It usurps the role of parents in teaching their children about the proper use of alcohol, especially in the many states where it’s illegal for them even to let their 18-year-old children have a glass of wine at a Thanksgiving dinner.
“There used to be an intergenerational social intercourse that’s now completely gone—the law obliterated it,” says McCardell. “If you expect adult behavior, you’re more likely to get it than if you infantilize people.” Is it a coincidence that one of the most commonly cited campus problems is binge drinking?