Do you remember your first taste of alcohol? How old were you? Twenty-one? All 50 states currently demand that their citizens reach age 21 before they can legally drink. But there's a growing movement that says mandatory minimum laws may do more harm than good. When determining the right date when a young person can take one of their final steps towards personal responsibility and freedom, what's the right answer?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
5
5
8
3
5
4
6
4
1
4
5
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
The Full Story on Traffic Fatalities
- From Choose Responsibility
By Choose Responsibility - Balance, Maturity, Common Sense
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Full "Full Story"
Perhaps it should be mentioned that the authors' of the article indicate that the other two effects (ALR and .08 per se) are likely methodological artifacts. THAT'S full disclosure! I would encourage everyone to read the article themselves.
- JSearles
August 19, 2008 10:03AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Thank You
I am glad that Choose Responsibility has been successful in convincing you to read further into the sources used by the government. Please let us all know if you find anything in that study that seriously counters CR's arguments.
The fact is that almost all of the statistics used by proponents of the MLDA 21 are before 1995 and are presented incompletely. Since the government and organizations like MADD receive millions of dollars in funding, it isn't surprising that the public has only heard their argument and limited facts.
- PhilyG
January 29, 2009 9:27PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Your welcome
Actually, CR had nothing to do with my reading of this peer-reviewed artile. It's what scientsits do to keep up on the literature. It is disingenuous to fault a study for using the only data available. This was a study on the effects of policy and policies don't change on a regular basis. The data suporting the MLDA-21 laws are overwhelming. Here is the bottom line: lower the MLDA and adverse outcomes increase; raise the MLDA and adverse outcomes decrease. Pretty simple, really!
- JSearles
January 30, 2009 10:10AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Statistics are irrelevant
Should Abraham Lincoln consider whether crime statistics might rise if the slaves are freed? No amount of statistical analysis of historical crash data can establish that the government has a right to impose alcohol prohibition on an innocent person who never consented to it. In a free country, the citizen would decide what to eat and drink.
- TomAlciere
February 16, 2009 5:56PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.