The whole “I could die for my country at 18 so I should be able to drink at 18” reasoning for lowering the drinking age is bullshit in my opinion. For one thing, no matter how old you are if you are in a warzone you can’t drink anyway. For everybody who uses that excuse would you be opposed to allowing people under 21 drink if they show a military ID? Or would you be mad because you could no longer use the military reasoning for why the drinking age should be lowered?
A couple of things to consider: in the past it was estimated that most drunk drivers were between 16 and 20, which is probably a big reason it is 21. MADD especially pushed for the higher drinking age because of the amount of young drunk drivers Also, your brain continues to develop until you are 25 and you really shouldn’t be drinking before then. Military service can reasonably be done by somebody who is physically and mentally fit and your average 18-year old servicemember has a 20 or 30-something sergeant supervising them.
Honestly, I don’t care if people under 21 drink as long as they don’t drive. It is their body and as long as I don’t suffer for it they can do what they want. I just think they could come up with so many other reasons why the age should be lowered than the military since most people who use that excuse would never join anyway. Now, if the draft was reinstated then it would be reasonable to lower it but until then nobody forces you to enlist.
Log in to comment