Tala Miller

3/15/15
English 120-MWA2
18 Years Old Or 25 Years Young?
The legal drinking age has been a topic that has been up for discussion many
times by the U.S government. People still talk today about whether raising the drinking
age is the right choice to do because it will save lives, or whether lowering the drinking
age is the route to go because teens at 18 have the right to chose whether to drink or not.
The purpose of this paper is to give the voice of reason as to why the drinking age should
be raised to the age of 25, and why it would be safe for everyone. The drinking age
should be raised to 25 because it will prevent and protect teens and college students from
getting into the unnecessary trouble that comes from underage drinking. It will also have
a positive ripple effect for other people.
The first advantage of raising the drinking age in the U.S would be that teens and
college students will be less likely to become alcoholics at a younger age because the
availability of alcohol to underage students at parties would be lowered and therefore be
less available to them. Underage drinking is a big problem in the U.S among college
students and teens can get easy access to it by 21 year olds who would supply it to them
if they asked for it. For example, when there is a party on campus or somewhere else
there will most likely be alcohol present. There is no guessing that most of the students
who attend those parties are illegally drinking alcohol with their friends who may or may
not be of age to drink as well, who will decide that they are old and mature enough to
have a drink, however the problem is that most teens and college students do binge drink,
and it results in a variety of different problems for them. In an online academic journal
author Laura Dean-Mooney agrees and expresses that, The Support 21 Coalition stands
behind the indisputable scientific research that demonstrates lowering the drinking age

would make the difficult problems of underage and binge drinking far worse.(Mooney,
A Lower Age Would Be Unsafe , P2). If the drinking age was to be raised to 25 it would
cause things to move in a positive direction. For one thing, if the age group that was
aloud to drink were to be older, than the teens and college students would be older as
well, which would solve the problem of having young alcoholics. Also, if the age group
that was legally aloud to drink was older, than more teens and college students would not
binge drink at a young age, which would also make and influence on their siblings not to
drink either.
Underage drinking is a very risky thing to do because it can lead to horrible
things, and one example would be such as drunk driving. The second advantage of raising
the drinking age would be that it would lessen the deaths of teen and college students by
drunk driving. It has been proven that drunk driving in the state of New Mexico is among
the top ways that a person can pass away from, and it is the highest among teens and
college students. When the drinking age was 18 in the U.S there were more teen and
college students than recorded when it went up to 21 years of age. In another academic
journal by Maria Carmona she states that National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration statistics show a 59 percent decline in the rate of drinking drivers aged 20
and younger involved in fatal crashes between 1982 and 1998 and estimate that 26,000
lives aged 18-20 have been saved as result of MLDA 21. (Carmona, No, Effective Public
Policy Should Not Be Discarded, P1). The statistics from this author prove that when the
drinking age was legally 18, more teens and college students died as a result from it.
Also, when the drinking age was raised to 21 it saved more lives, and by raising the age
to 25 there will be possibility that there will be thousands of more lives that will be saved
in time.
DUIs are a serious threat to teens and college students because of how often they
binge drink and party, but some people agree that they do not need to meddle with that
part of teen and college peoples lives, and believe that the drinking age should be

dropped down to 18. Some people think that the drinking age should be lowered because
if the teens and college students are 18 years or older and they can drive or go into the
military, than they should be able to drink. In an opposing article about lowering the
drinking age author John McCardell he illustrates, We begin to see the dilemma this law
creates, especially in the face of other laws that make 18 the age of majority. At age 18,
one can serve on a jury, sign a contract, and be responsible for one's debts. At age 18, one
is able to put one's life on the line in the service of country. But one may not buy a beer.
(And do not be misled. To be sure, one may not rent a car or a hotel room at age 21. But
federal law does not mandate these rules.) (McCardell, Yes, The U.S. Legal Drinking
Age Should Be Lowered, P1). The thing that is wrong with this view is that when teens
and college students are considered adults, they are not truly adult, which is why there are
more laws that require people to be 21 than people who are 18 years of age. The 18 year
old brain is not really equipped for alcohol consumption because the brain is still school
and learning, and anything drug would be hindering learning as well as growth of
anything.
However, there are reasons other than the U.S and its teens and college students
that people consider wanting to lower the drinking age. The second reason why people
would like to lower the drinking age is because other countries trust their teens and
college students to drink at 18 and 16 or has none. Some people believe that we have the
same culture, and that by having the drinking age lowered, the U.S will have less
problems, and have a better culture about drinking. The same article explains that,
Alcohol is a reality in the lives of young adults today, in this country as in most of the
rest of the world. We can either continue to try to change the reality, which has been our
attempt since 1984, and which, as is always the case in times of prohibition, has simply
failed. Or, through enlightened public policy, we can create the safest possible
environment for this reality. Current policies have created the least safe environment. It is
time for us to consider better ways to put fewer lives at risk. (McCardell, Yes, The U.S.

Legal Drinking Age Should Be Lowered, P1). The author as well as other people should
recognize that the culture in the U.S is a lot different in other countries. For example, the
police officers in Albuquerque have been tied to many shooting of innocent people, and
the police in Germany are not even aloud to touch their gun or else they are immediately
terminated. Another thing would be that there is a lot of crime in the U.S, in fact, it is one
of the leading countries for crime rate. Switzerland is probably the lowest crime rate
reported, and it has the drinking age of 16 and 18 years old. Switzerland is a safer place,
which would make it easier to have a lower drinking age. Opposing viewpoints have to
understand that the U.S culture is not the same and never will be the same as other
countries, especially those of which have legal age on alcohol.
Aside from opposing views of people would like to lower the drinking age, there
is a more important reason that people should raise the drinking age. The last advantage
of raising the drinking age is that there would be less violence crimes such as rape. There
are many acts of violence that can come from binge drinking for example date rape and
accidental murder either vehicular or man on man. Much like the other examples of why
the drinking age should be raised, the higher the age of the drinking people, the less likely
crimes there will be that are alcohol related. In an article referenced before, author Maria
Carmona expressed that, The landmark 2004 Institute of Medicine report, Reducing
Underage Drinking: A Collective Responsibility, asserts that MLDA 21 has been a critical
factor contributing to significant reductions in the prevalence of underage drinking (or
regular drinking by persons under the age of 21). This has translated into measurable
decreases in six types of fatal injuries: car crashes, suicides, homicides, falls, drownings,
and alcohol poisonings. (Carmona, No, Effective Public Policy Should Not Be
Discarded, P1). As the author knows, and as statistics can report, if the legal drinking age
gets raised to 25, there will be less crime and fatalities among teen and college students
who are just starting out life. Like all the connection made in the previous reasons, the
less crime and harm that is done to teens and college students the more that the siblings

of those students will be less exposed to those crimes as well, and parents will not have to
worry as much.
As mentioned before, the raising and possible lowering of the legal age for
alcohol consumption has been a topic that has been talked about for years, and will
probably be a topic that will be discussed many other times, because it is an issue that has
not been solved yet. The only solution that is suitable for the U.S to do is to raise the
drinking age to 25 because it will be a prevention for a lot of other variables that come
into play when you are talking about a life of a young person.
Work Cited
Carmona, Maria. "No, Effective Public Policy Should Not Be Discarded." Insights On
Law & Society 10.3 (2010): 19. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 19 Mar. 2015.

Dean-Mooney, Laura. "A Lower Age Would Be Unsafe." U.S. News & World Report 15
Sept.

2008: 10. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.

McCardell, John. "Yes, The U.S. Legal Drinking Age Should Be Lowered." Insights On
Law & Society 10.3 (2010): 18. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.
Content
Area
Argument

Analysis

Organization

Description of An Exemplary Position Paper

Points

The introduction presents an overview of different stances on the issue, __33/35

demonstrating an understanding of these views and contains a main
claim statement. The writers main claim is clearly defined and the
writer refers back to this claim throughout the paper. The writer
presents an opposing viewpoint (acknowledges a counter argument)
and successfully argues against that view. The writer uses at least two
scholarly articles or book chapters with opposing viewpoints to situate
his or her own argument. The writer has a clear understanding of these
articles and uses the research to enhance the writers own argument.
The writer uses secondary sources (articles or book chapters) in their
_23_/25
paper to create an effective dialogue with the opinions of other writers.
The writers critical thinking skills enhance their analysis helping the
writer to present his or her own stance on the issue as an extension of
another writers argument or as a synthesis of two opposing arguments.
The paper is organized in a logical manner that enhances the flow of the _14_/15

Presentation
& Format

Style
Cover Letter

Total: 92/100

writers argument. The writer has included an introduction and forward

thinking conclusion. Body paragraphs have topic/point sentences that
show the reader the paragraphs relationship to the argument and
concluding sentences. The writer has used transitions between ideas
and paragraphs to add to his/her ideas clarity.
The report is free of
_10_/10
distracting errors of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. The report
meets the page length requirement. The writer has used Times/Times
New Roman 12 point font; the document in double spaced, and uses 1
inch margins.
The writer uses an economic style meaning that the language is concise, _5_/5
not repetitive or overly wordy. Sentence structure and meaning is clear.
The writer has supplied a cover letter that discusses the rhetorical
__7/10
situation for their document (3 points), overview of
strengths/weaknesses (2 points), a request for specific feedback (1
point), and a reflection on the required SLOs (4 points).