Originally Posted by Gazoo
"Not considered mature enough to handle drinking alcohol" . . . if not supported by science, what else would it be supported by?? Who is the "they" who does this serious consideration about legal drinking ages, and what do "they" base their serious consideration upon? Feelings?
It is not supported by science. 21 is an arbitrary number, not a number supported by science. Japan is 20, Europe is 18, other ages around the world. . . but it's arbitrary. Only 6% of the world's countries have 21 or higher as the legal drinking age. I guess the rest of the world's teenagers are more responsible. . . or we have better science-y people.
http://drinkingage.procon.org/view.r...ourceID=004294
Illegal underage drinking = below 21 is not because he's "not considered mature enough to handle drinking alcohol" and it's not backed by science, it's backed by a desire to lower drunk driving accidents in a highly car-centric society. They picked the higher number (18 vs. 21) because of Bible-belt protestants.
|
Oh boy. Okay, again I didn't say it was supported by science and I will admit that I believe it isn't supported by science. But generally, that's the justification given for the law. For instance, there are justifications to keep marijuana illegal. One is it is a gateway to harder drugs. Well, nothing scientific supports this but that is some people's justification for keeping it illegal. I tend to believe that stats can be twisted to show this, however what stats don't cover is that people that smoke pot illegally have a tendency to not care about the law and will be more apt to try other illegal drugs. Have they checked where it's legal yet? In other words, where it's legal to smoke pot, is the percentage of pot smokers that do harder drugs as high(no pun intended)? I'm guessing not.
Now, again I'm going to admit that there's nothing scientific to state that a person at 21 is more able to handle liquor than a person that's 18. However, I believe it's an assumption that allows it to be law and probably true due to the fact that up to a large number, a person is more mature at an older age. But as I know you'll come back and say "then why not 25 or 30 or 35...?" You're right, in that case it's arbitrary. The real reason it's pushed is the more of the population it's illegal for, the more the justice system rakes in. Just like the real reason pot is mostly illegal is the pharma companies don't want to lose money to a cure or pain killer that causes less damage and can be made in your own home without any chemistry experience. And, the justice system rakes in money for it being illegal. And the alcohol industry certainly doesn't want the competition etc...
However, ask any lawmaker or politician why either is illegal, drinking under 2 or possession of marijuana, and they will give the standard non scientific reasons rather than the monetary ones.
