Wuthering Highs Essay, Research Paper
Catch 21
Sarah, an eighteen-year-old college fresher, walks into a convenience shop and moves shyly to the dorsum, trusting that no 1 she knows will see her. Opening the icebox door, she pulls out a chilled instance of Coors Light. Sarah nervously approaches the teller, with her bogus ID ready to be shown, and places the instance of beer on the counter. Upon first sight, the teller assumes that Sarah is non of legal age to purchase beer, because she is bantam and looks immature. When she places the instance on the counter, the teller asks her for her ID. Sarah, ready to demo her apparently unflawed bogus signifier of designation, hands it to him. At first glimpse, the ID seems to be existent, and the day of the month of birth appears right, but, when looked at closely, the image does non precisely resemble the minor client. The teller identifies this ID as false designation and refuses to sell Sarah the instance of Coors Light.
In the 1980 & # 8217 ; s, Sarah would hold been allowed to buy this instance of Coors Light, because so it was legal for eighteen-year-olds to purchase and imbibe alcoholic drinks. In 1984, the United States Government pressured the provinces to raise the legal imbibing age to 21. The authorities used fiscal inducements to corrupt the provinces, and & # 8220 ; As of 1988, every province had raised its legal minimal imbibing age from 18 to 21 & # 8221 ; ( Buckley, 174 ) . Today, this is a controversial subject among many eighteen-year-olds, because they have the same duties and privileges as grownups, yet people under the age of 21 are non allowed to devour alcoholic drinks. Legally, eighteen-year-olds have the duty to function their state in war, to pay revenue enhancements, and to be prosecuted in the tribunal of jurisprudence as an grownup. When people turn 18 they besides gain the privileges to vote, to come in into matrimony, to do legal contracts, to buy baccy and erotica, and to populate on their ain, among other things. Is it right to allow eighteen-year-olds all of these privileges and duties, and to curtail them from imbibing intoxicant? If eighteen-year-olds Don & # 8217 ; t have the discretion to imbibe responsibly, so how could they perchance handle the duties and privileges that grownups have? I believe that eighteen-year-olds do hold the ability to manage the freedoms and duties of being an grownup, which should include the privilege to imbibe intoxicant. Many eighteen-year-olds are college freshers, and, in most colleges, beer is available to people under the age of 21. & # 8220 ; Remorseless imbibing has long been every bit much a rite of university life as football, concluding test, and frat parties & # 8221 ; ( Gorman, 176 ) . I believe that the federal authorities is alluring these minor grownups by curtailing their legal ability to imbibe in such an environment as college campuses where it is legal for many of the pupils to devour alcoholic drinks. In order to be able to imbibe intoxicant, many underage grownups purchase bogus signifiers of designation ; & # 8220 ; Raising the legal imbibing age from 18 to 21 in the 1980s simply triggered a roar in the concern of making sham
ID cards” ( Gorman, 176 ) . People twenty-years of age and younger are buying these bogus signifiers of designation in order to let them to come in and imbibe in bars with their friends who are of age, and to let them buy beer in shops. Many may state that no affair what age the authorities sets as the standard legal imbibing age, people who are minor are traveling to hold friends who are of age. This state of affairs will ever be a job, but if the legal imbibing age would be lowered back down to eighteen, there would be fewer cases where this state of affairs would happen, because the bulk of eighteen-year-olds attend college with people who are older and of age. Besides, if the legal imbibing age were lowered down to eighteen, there would be less of a demand for the constabulary to cover with bogus IDs and parties affecting underage imbibing, and they could concentrate on more serious offenses.
In 1988, the United States Government raised the legal imbibing age in order to cut down the figure of drunk-driving deceases, but, since so, there has non been any drastic lessening in intoxicant related clangs. The job that society needs to cover with is how to learn immature people to imbibe reasonably and non to imbibe when drive, because some people are traveling to imbibe no affair what the jurisprudence says. Drinking and drive is a serious affair because it endangers peoples lives, but it is non merely people under the age of 21 that thrust under the influence of intoxicant, many people twenty-one or older choose to drive drunk. In order to rectify this job, the authorities should increase the badness for being caught driving rummy in order to reenforce the dangers of driving under the influence and to do certain that people have less incentive to drive drunk. In fact, if the authorities would take down the imbibing age back to 18 and so implement more rigorous drive regulations, I believe that the figure of intoxicant related impulsive accidents and deceases will diminish drastically.
Therefore, did it truly profit the United States to alter the legal imbibing age to 21? In my sentiment, it did non, because & # 8220 ; It is non obvious that larning to imbibe with moderateness, and non to drive when 1 is imbibing, automatically happens to a 21 twelvemonth old as distinguished from person three old ages younger & # 8221 ; ( Buckley, 174 ) . If eighteen-year-olds are given the privileges and duties of grownups, so the authorities must believe that they have the ability to do good determinations in of import affairs, of which should include imbibing alcoholic drinks.
Bibliography:
Buckley, William F. , Jr. & # 8220 ; Minimum Drinking Age Laws are Ineffective. & # 8221 ; Alcohol: Opposing Point of views. Eds. Scott Barbour, Bruno Leone, and Brenda Stalcup. Greenhaven Press: San Diego, 1998.
Gorman, Christine. Time. December 19, 1994. ( Taken out of Point of views )
Buckley, William F. , Jr. & # 8220 ; Minimum Drinking Age Laws are Ineffective. & # 8221 ; Alcohol: Opposing Point of views. Eds. Scott Barbour, Bruno Leone, and Brenda Stalcup. Greenhaven Press: San Diego, 1998.
Gorman, Christine. Time. December 19, 1994. ( Taken out of Point of views )
