Should the alcoholic drinking age be lowered?
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
lannan13
| Started: | 2/29/2012 | Category: | Miscellaneous |
| Updated: | 1 year ago | Status: | Post Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 843 times | Debate No: | 21618 |
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)
|
Currently the drinking age in the United States is 21. Should the drinking age be lowered, raised, or remain at 21?
I accept stating that the drinking age gets risin' to age 25 which is when the reason section of your brain has matured. while we wait for Pro to post listen to this song. |
![]() |
|
Great point to bring up. Yes the brain would be fully developed, but that does not mean underage patrons would comply. According to 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health from 2.4% at age 12 to 22.4% at age 16, and 56.7% at age 20. Since then the numbers have only increased. More then half of underage patrons do not comply with the current law in effect. What good would raising the age be if the people do not comply? It is also dangerous. It is human nature to want to do something you are told not to. These kids are told they can't drink, and that is enough reason for some of them to start. They want to see what all the hype is about and they take it upon themselves to find out. In doing so there are mass amounts of young patrons with damaged records from drinking tickets or arrests. These charges follow them for the rest of their lives. It is ashamed because most of these young patrons don't truly fit the criteria of a criminal and most of them never will in their life but they will have a damaged record just like a criminal. On a more detrimental level it is important to realize these patrons are not being taught how to drink responsibly or in moderation. As a result we loose around 5,000 young lives a year. Upping the age would only amp up the hype. If we could lower the age and teach young patrons to handle alcohol instead of abuse it, we could begin to take steps in the right direction. It would take time but eventually, naturally, you would have less kids drinking less amounts, and the damage done on the brain would drop across the bored as well. It would be better to have a decrease then to remain where we are or see more problems arise. At 25 your brain fully develops but if almost no one will comply with that, would it be worth in doing so?
1. You don't have a source so you could've made this up. 2. Underage drinking acounts for 14% of the deaths. 3. In 2007, drivers between the ages of 16-20 were involved in 1,719 drunk driving accidents. 4. Nearly one-third (31%) of driver deaths ages 16-20 were drinking drivers, which is an increase from 2009. 5. One-half (50%) of deaths ages 21 to 25 were drinking drivers, up from 44% in 2009. The 26-30 age range improved to 45%, down from 51% in 2009. Thus meaning only 19% of deaths were age 25 and higher. SO when the reason area in our brain has matured it will have us make better chooses. Source: http://www.edgarsnyder.com... |
![]() |
|
eosh89 forfeited this round.
|
![]() |
|
eosh89 forfeited this round.
|
![]() |
|
eosh89 forfeited this round.
All points extended. |
![]() |
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by TUF 1 year ago
| eosh89 | lannan13 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 7 |
Reasons for voting decision: Via forfeit.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 1 year ago
| eosh89 | lannan13 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 |
Reasons for voting decision: FF

















*like*