3 ms·
> Rolling back the drinking age to the modern world standard of 16 would drastically reduce student drinking by equating it with kid behavior. Nobody's interest
by max76 7y ago
> Rolling back the drinking age to the modern world standard of 16 would drastically reduce student drinking by equating it with kid behavior. Nobody's interested in doing highschool shit in college.
Wouldn't this just move student drinking from college to highschool, not reduce overall student drinking? I don't think it's a good idea to having the driving and drinking age be the same. I'm sure lots of parents of teenagers would be very upset if their children could legally drink.
- bliblah 7y agoI come from latin america and my family let me drink at family events under supervision at 16. Around 17-18 I went out to parties and never came back home super wasted. Nowadays I barely drink. Seems to me if you treat your kid with respect and guide them they can be responsible adults. Also mind you that the legal smoking age in the US is 18 and pretty much everyone agrees that it is much worse than drinking.
- max76 7y agoI think the differences between Latin America drinking cultures and Untied States is much bigger than just the legal drinking age. Changing that one variable won't make a big impact IMO.
- beenBoutIT 7y agoThe best thing that could ever happen to the cigarette business would be increasing the legal smoking age to 21. That puts them in the 'illicit cool things adults do' category. Dropping the age lower to 16 would put it in the realm of childish things.
- beenBoutIT 7y agoThere's no shortage of data to prove that increasing the driving age to 21 would save a massive amount of lives, although that would reduce car sales. Car wrecks are the leading cause of death for teenagers. Lowering the drinking age would prevent alcoholism and increasing the driving age would save lives but our laws aren't based on data or science.