During the period in the 70's when many states were lowering their drinking ages scientists started doing studies to determine whether or not the younger drinking ages had any effect on automobile accidents. These studies generally concluded that traffic accidents significantly increased among teenagers after the MLDA was lowered.(Toomey 1) It can, however, easily be ar

Many people believe that there are other ways to decrease the number of accidents and teenage deaths associated with teenage drinking. Many states have "Zero Tolerance Laws" which severely punish underage teens who are driving with any blood alcohol in their bodies at all. The punishment is usually the loss of the offending teens license, and those officials who stand on the side of lowering the drinking age feel that this would be enough of a deterrent to keep underage teens from drinking and driving. The current standard MLDA is 21, many feel this is unfair because it crosses to many age and social barriers. For instance, many college juniors and seniors can drink, but sophomores and freshman cannot. This automatically breeds unlawful activity, because college freshman and sophomores can't party with some of their friends according to the law. By the time most high school seniors graduate they have already turned 18, and those who haven't soon will. If the minimum drinking age were lowered to 18 or 19 it would dramatically cut down on the number of incidents of illegal drinking on college campuses.

When the government found that many of the states were lowering the drinking age to 18 and 19, it began to worry about the safety of teens in those and neighboring states. One of the ways that the government tried to discourage this was by offering increased highway incentives for any states who maintained a minimum. The states were only too quick to volunteer to raise their minimums. The government also threatened to reduce the amount of federal money offered to the states for improvement of the highways. Obviously the states didn't want to lose any money so they complied with the government.

By making young adults wait until their 21st birthday only breeds disaster, and makes underage drinking seem more mysterious and desirable. Prohibition didn't stop the American people from drinking, it just forced them to do it in secret, much the way in which states with an MLDA of 21 do today. Popular thought dictates that lowering the MLDA to 19 would not have a harmful result, but a positive one instead.(Drinking 1)

that affects more people than just the ones who live in the states that propose change. This is why Jason Gain, a 19-year-old student at West Virginia has created a web site devoted to this sensitive issue. Gain is quoted in his web site as saying, ``I don't see how 21 keeps alcohol out of the hands of younger people. They are drinking anyway,'' Scott Gorton Marine spokesman at camp Pendelton in San Diego also feels as Gain does and adds, "`If you're going to ask a young man or young wife to go to war and potentially spill blood or die for their country, I think it's safe to say they're old enough to handle alcohol."(Castaneda 1)

gued that since these s

Some topics in this essay:
San Diego, , Tolerance Laws, Rights Act, Drinking Age, MLDA Louisiana, Blood Borders, Klug Washington, Representative Klug, West Virginia, drinking age, legal drinking age, legal drinking, minimum legal, minimum legal drinking, lowering drinking, lowering drinking age, mlda 21, minimum drinking age, federal government, minimum drinking, drinking ages, alcoholic beverages, drunk driving, intended influence individual,