Lower the drinking age
Debate Rounds (3)
1. Teenagers are too young for the responsibilities.
The reason the drinking age is past 18 is because by the time a person would have become more accustomed to the responsibilities of being an adult. If the teenager is given the rights earlier they will automatically abuse the right.
2. Drinking is a different situation from war.
Teenager have a quicker access to alcohol than they do to war. It is quite simple for a teenager to get drunk and die in a drunk driving accident. This can be done within a manner of hours. How long will it take to register as a soldier, train, and work properly, then die in combat? Much longer. It is a matter of making the right choices.
Also, "Except don't twenty-one year old individuals who are considered "adults" abuse the right of drinking legally anyway?", don't you think that teenager of a younger age would be even more willing to abuse due to peer pressure and binge drinking which results in them becoming addicted much more quickly.What you are basically arguing for is for a human being to have the chance to start doing something bad earlier and suffer harder effects later.
Like I previously stated you are now allowing this addiction to occur at an even earlier and more critical age. A teenager's brain is still developing at this age and alcohol has more dramatic effects on a still developing brain of a teenager than a developed brain of a young adult. (http://www.learn-about-alcoholism.com...)
2. "We keep looking at teenagers that they have all this peer pressure but yes okay peer pressure is said to affect teens, but peer pressure can still happen when your older! "
As a teenager you experience, more peer pressure and are even more prone to it. By the time you are a young adult you have dealt with these things and are now becoming more used to them. A teenager is at the center of everything and cares more about his/herself socially than in any other way. (http://www.teenhelponline.com...)
3. "Lowering the drinking age makes teenagers think about their next step; we have them thinking about their future, showing something that can risk it as well as damage them might make them think a little harder - especially when they have the right to make their own decisions."
Why give them a decision where they can make the wrong choice and still have it be legal? We can have them think about what college they want to go to or what career they want to have because there are no negative effects of that. But if we give them the line "Get drunk tonight?" how is that going to help them in any way.
In the end lawmakers are simply trying to do the best they can for their youth. Preventing drinking while someone is still in high school or still in development is just going to harm their lives, cause them to have alcohol dependencies, and ruin the future for them. They are not ready to drink responsibly.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Sourced and structured argument from Con, Pro could not defeat this and sustain the BoP.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.