Quote:
Originally posted by Rudey:
There was a valid reason for changing the minimum drinking age. For that very reason, many European countries are considering an increase as well. European nations have the highest rate of drinking related deaths (alcohol poisoning, drunk driving, etc.). And most of those that die as a results are those within that same young age bracket. I can't remember the paper that carried this article (very likely to be NY times) but I think the numbers had become so absurdly high that it was on the same level as a more common disease like throat cancer or heart disease (can't remember the small little details - sorry). I'll try and find the article.
)
|
whoa - i was taught in modern history class that the reason was pretty much reactionary, as an unfounded attempt to make the public feel better about drunk driving (which, if anyone here is old enough to remember [i'm not], wasn't considered uncommon or criminal 40 years ago - once it was realized it was a problem, public opinion turned hard). It came up in class as a comparison to the illegalization of marijuana, which was based on lobbying action from tobacco producers who didn't want the competition and made it a scapegoat. Didn't the change to 21 occur roughly around the change to 55mph - also, this is why the age limit (set by states) is actually tied to the federal gov't (as the states will lose highway funding) - missouri was 18 until relatively recently, as an example.
Also, i was under the impression Canada (as an example) has a significantly lower occurance of drunk driving deaths and alcoholism - maybe my facts are wrong, can anyone help w/ this (and maybe extend it to europe)?
Anyway - thanks, good post