Teens not responsible enough to handle lower drinking age

by Beka Rutledge, entertainment editor

 

Underage drinking has become a trend among American teenagers.

Some consider it a rite of passage. While not everyone partakes, the ones who do usually are heavy drinkers and get involved in activities such as binge drinking.

The Amethyst Initiative is pushing for the drinking age to be lowered to 18. The motive behind this thinking is that it could hinder the growth of binge drinking among underage drinkers.

I disagree. Instead, I think it might encourage even younger drinkers to try to access alcohol. Allowing 18-year-olds to buy liquor will make them the “cool people” on high school campuses. Therefore, freshmen and sophomores will look to them to provide. This age group would probably never seek out alcohol if not for these kids being so accessible to them.

Most 18-to-20-year-olds aren’t mature enough to be able to drink, so those younger than them definitely aren’t. Lowering the drinking age will be putting more young drivers who have been drinking behind the wheel. Half of them already have horrible driving skills to begin with. Then our roads will be filled with not only the young idiots who try to text and drive, but also the young drunks.

Many of the Amethyst Initiative supporters believe that lowering the drinking age will allow teenagers to learn to drink in controlled areas, and that this will keep them from having secret parties.

However, even if they are out in the open drinking instead of in some country field hiding from the cops, their behavior while drinking will not change. Because of the immaturity level of people their age, their dim-witted conduct will become magnified.

Just because they may be in a club or bar drinking does not mean they will become better behaved. Instead, these venues will have to put up with more intoxicated people, and most likely, more fights and other bad behavior.

Part of the thinking is that maybe the 18-year-olds who are still seniors in high school and still living at home will learn to drink around their parents. The parents can then be in charge of teaching them how to drink responsibly. But seriously, how many kids are going to want to sit there and drink in front of their parents?

I see them going off to parties or clubs and bars to be unruly with their friends, rather than sitting home with Mom and Dad to kick a few back.

While it is true that there are those out there who say it isn’t as fun to drink after you become legal, I believe that only because at the age of 21, your maturity level has risen considerably. I don’t believe the same will be true for 18-year-olds becoming legal.

I do believe that this will encourage even younger people to drink just because of the thrill you get with thinking you might get caught. Also, the high school seniors who are legal will still be a big part of the picture. They will have a status that college students used to have. They will be the suppliers.

This could mean more alcohol at high school parties where underclassmen will be attending. In my small town, even some junior high students have been known to attend high school parties. This means that kids as young as 13 could be exposed to more alcohol than generations of kids their age before them.

Really, when it comes down to it, if teenagers want to drink, they are going to find a way, whether they are legal or not. Most are probably going to drink much more than is safe or healthy. Also, it is probably going to be in an environment that is not supervised, even if the drinking age is lowered.

I can’t see many parents being supportive of The Amethyst Initiative. I know my parents probably would have forbidden me from drinking as young as 18, even if it were legal. I don’t think they would be alone in that either. It is probable that they would have let me drink with them and only them. But what teenager would want to?

I don’t see lowering the drinking age solving any problems. I only see it adding to the list of problems already there.