I think you missed the point of my message. My point was that any reasonable person agrees on the "protect the kids" statement. The common ground is obvious bu

I think you missed the point of my message. My point was that any reasonable person agrees on the "protect the kids" statement. The common ground is obvious but the "how" is not. There are valid medical arguments why a 16 year old should not drink alcohol (brain development). But there are also valid arguments why they should be allowed anyway. For example 16 matched the age where most western teens with the desire to drink alcohol make their first experience with alcohol anyway and it clearly is in no ones interest if they would have to break the law to do so. Possibly even push an already 18 year old friend to break the law by buying it for them. Also letting them make their first experience with alcohol with stuff that is unlikely to kill them is probably a good thing too. And yes, drinking before being allowed to drive a car seems to be commonly acknowledged as positive. So no matter which stance someone has on this, the goal is to protect young people we just dont all agree on the "how".