# data[].attributes.headline
yes, the drinking age should be lowered. 

# data[].attributes.subject
yes, the drinking age should be lowered. 

# data[].attributes.body
college kids drinking is inevitable, but if students have the knowledge to know how much and how to safely drink there won't be as many accidents. when people first start drinking they don't know their limits.

-Emilie.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When was the first time you had a drink? Do you wish you knew more before you took the first sip? I bet a lot of you did it before turning 21. Perhaps you had no idea what you were doing, and it ended with you throwing up.

The drinking age is both relevant and disregarded. In the United States, the drinking age is universally set at 21, and while states have the option to adjust this number, they would end up losing 10 percent of federal funds for highways if they lowered it, thanks a 1984 attempt by Congress to strong-arm the country into a standard drinking age.

While having to be an adult to drink is totally reasonable, it doesn't make sense that the drinking age is 21 while the legal age of adulthood is 18. However contentious the subject might be, the U.S. needs to catch up on its standards.

In Germany and France, teens can purchase alcohol at the age of 16, although it is pretty regulated, with limits set and chaperones required for teens under 18. Most other countries make 18 the legal drinking age - the age commonly accepted as the first year of adulthood. Is it not somewhat ironic that we cherish our "freedoms" as what sets us apart from European countries, yet this is a very clear example that adults in Europe have significantly more freedom than here?

I find it rather confusing that when I turned 18, I had to register for the draft and possibly to fight in a war, yet I still cannot go out and have a drink in a restaurant. I am a legal adult, and I have all other responsibilities. It's like the law is trying to shelter teenagers from drinking, but maybe that's the wrong thing to shelter us from.

It wasn't always this way. The drinking age has changed flopped between 18 to 21. When the drafting age was lowered from 21 to 18 during World War II and, later, the voting age, U.S. lawmakers in different parts of the country chose to lower the drinking age in some states, one example being Wisconsin. It made sense.

Naturally, young adults under the legal drinking age traveled to the less restrictive states to drink and buy alcohol, and it sometimes ended badly with car accidents. That, along with the argument of "poor school performance," led to federal arm-bending to raise the drinking age. The lobbying of parent and religious groups helped usher in the change.

People thinking they know best for others; that almost never ends well.

There is the argument that some 18-year-olds are still in high school and might be too immature to drink, or else they might buy alcohol for their underage friends. That is a concern, but it is a far-fetched one, since laws can easily be written to limit or restrict the amount of alcohol one can buy. Lawmakers could perhaps limit people of a certain age to products with lower alcohol content by volume, for example.

Banning a substance outright is not the solution, and it doesn't work. The key is not legality, rather regulation. People are going to do what they want - the most the government can do is try to channel laws and behaviors in a progressive and logical direction.

And it is absurd to assume drinking doesn't happen in college among people under 21, because it does. People drink in college. A lot. Whether you live on campus or not, when you enter college you are an adult, and nobody is going to prevent you from going off-campus to some frat house.

Students drink before sporting events, during parties and pretty much whenever. A big part of the appeal and culture of being in a fraternity or sorority is the booze-based party culture. I really don't see another point for being part of one. A lot of the hardest partying and heaviest drinking seems to happen in the first year, or so I have seen with people living on campus. People have been hospitalized, blacked out, vomited down the stairs and done badly executed skateboard stunts.

It can be dangerous for younger drinkers to not know their tolerance level to alcohol or the effects of it. But lowering the drinking age might lessen the allure of alcohol and make it safer for people coming to college. Even just creating a safer and more regulated culture within college could go far. People could more readily recognize problems like abusive drinking behavior and get help.

When you turn 18, the time when you are sheltered is over, and you should be prepared to be treated like an adult. If the law recognizes me as an adult, I should be entitled to the same rights and punishments as any other adult; it is only fair.
Ben Timm is a freshman at the University of Utah. Contact him at monkebusiness@gmail.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. should consider a lower legal drinking age

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When was the first time you had a drink? Do you wish you knew more before you took the first sip? I bet a lot of you did it before turning 21. Perhaps you had no idea what you were doing, and it ended with you throwing up.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is against lowering the drinking limit. This article talks about how keeping the age limit at 21 is saving lives and keeping young people more healthy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Minimum legal drinking age of 21 saves lives | CDC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Excessive alcohol use can lead to increased risk of health problems such as injuries, violence, liver diseases, and cancer.The CDC Alcohol Program works to strengthen the scientific foundation for preventing excessive alcohol use.

# data[].attributes.body
https://badgerherald.com/opinion/2019/11/25/why-the-legal-drinking-age-should-be-lowered-to-18/

Pro
Lowering the drinking age allows for increased education. It also allows for more safety among college students and other young students.

# data[].attributes.body
Pros and cons about whether the drinking age should be lowered or not. Each state has their own alcohol consumption laws. (21st amendment)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
© VTT Studio/stock.adobe.com
To access extended pro and con arguments, sources, and discussion questions about whether the drinking age should be lowered in the United States, go to ProCon.org.
All 50 US states have set their minimum drinking age to 21 although exceptions do exist on a state-by-state basis for consumption at home, under adult supervision, for medical necessity, and other reasons.

The repeal of alcohol prohibition by the 21st Amendment on Dec. 5, 1933 allowed each state to set its own alcohol consumption laws. At that time, most states established the MLDA for alcohol at 21 years of age, although two states set an MLDA of 21 for men and 18 for women: Illinois (1933-1961) and Oklahoma (1933-1976). The 1976 US Supreme Court case Craig v. Boren ruled 7-2 that this age difference violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Following the July 1, 1971 passage of the 26th Amendment, which lowered the legal voting age from 21 to 18 years of age, 30 US states lowered their MLDA to 18, 19, or 20; by 1982, only 14 states still had an MLDA of 21

Reports in the 1970's showing that teenage car accidents increased in states where the MLDA had been lowered from 21 prompted Congress to pass the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984.

Although the Act did not require a national MLDA of 21, it effectively mandated it by stipulating that some federal transportation funds would be withheld from states that failed to make 21 their minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcohol. Since 1984, all states that had previously lowered their MLDA from 21 have all raised their MLDA back to 21. South Dakota and Wyoming were the last states to do so in 1988.

While the MLDA is 21 in all 50 states, in 47 of 50 states age 18 is the "age of majority," which entails having the rights and responsibilities of adulthood. Every state sets its own age of majority that often corresponds with the age at which one can vote, join the military, serve in jury duty, sign contracts, marry, apply for loans, make decisions regarding medical treatments, and be prosecuted as an adult. Alabama (age 19), Mississippi (21), and Nebraska (age 19) are three states that have an "age of majority" above 18, although certain rights such as the right to vote remain at 18 in these states.

136 college and university presidents have signed a pledge stating that the drinking age of 21 is "not working," citing binge drinking, fake IDs, and the fact that adults age 18-20 are able to vote, serve on juries, and enlist in the military. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), three million deaths annually (5.3% of all deaths) result from the harmful use of alcohol. WHO also reports that 13.5% of all deaths among people ages 20-39 are attributable to alcohol.

The discrepancy between the MLDA and the age of majority-and its many responsibilities and authorities-along with continued incidents of alcohol abuse reported on college campuses have fueled debate on whether or not setting the MLDA at 21 is fair, smart, and effective.

18 is the age of adulthood in the United States, and adults should have the right to make their own decisions about alcohol consumption.

Allowing 18- to 20-year-olds to drink alcohol in regulated environments with supervision would decrease unsafe drinking activity.

There are fewer drunk driving traffic accidents and fatalities in many countries with MLDA of 18.

The decrease in drunk driving fatalities as a percentage of total traffic fatalities in the United States does not correlate to the MLDA.

Lowering MLDA from 21 to 18 would diminish the thrill of breaking the law to get a drink.

MLDA 21 is largely ineffective because teens consume regardless.

High non-compliance with MLDA 21 promotes general disrespect and non-compliance with other areas of US law.

MLDA 21 enforcement is not a priority for many law enforcement agencies.

MLDA 21 is not statistically associated with lower rates of suicide, homicide, or vandalism.

Drinking alcohol is an enjoyable activity.

Lowering MLDA 21 would reduce the number of underage people who are hurt from alcohol-related injuries or accidents due to fear of legal consequences if they sought medical attention.

State governments should have the right to establish a lower legal drinking age that reflects their unique demographics, legal context, and history.

Lowering MLDA 21 would be good for the economy.

Lowering MLDA 21 would be medically irresponsible.

Lowering MLDA 21 to 18 will irresponsibly allow a greater segment of the population to drink alcohol in bars and nightclubs, which are not safe environments.

The right to drink should have a higher age of initiation because of the dangers posed by drinking.

MLDA 21 reduces traffic accidents and fatalities.

MLDA 21 reduces alcohol consumption and the number of underage drinkers.

MLDA 21 should not be lowered to mirror European drinking age limits because the rate of drinking among US teenagers is lower than most European countries.

MLDA 18 is not a right.

The American public overwhelmingly supports MLDA 21.

Lowering MLDA 21 would give high schoolers and even middle schoolers easier access to alcohol.

MLDA 21 helps prevent underage binge drinking.

MLDA 21 exerts valuable social pressure on potential underage drinkers and those who may serve them.

The MLDA should stay at 21 because people tend to be more mature and responsible at 21 than 18.

Lowering the drinking age will invite more use of illicit drugs among 18-21 year olds.

This article was published on April 2, 2019, at Britannica's ProCon.org, a nonpartisan issue-information source.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some argue that keeping the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) at 21 in the United States has not stopped teen drinking, but has instead pushed underage binge drinking into private and less controlled environments, leading to more health and life-endangering behavior by teens, while others argue that the MLDA should not be lowered because teens have not yet reached an age where they can handle alcohol responsibly, and thus are more likely to harm or even kill themselves and others by drinking prior to 21.

# data[].attributes.body
Article is pro concealed carry, and gives us 7 reasons why we should because of safety, and protection.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Reasons More People Should Concealed Carry

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Police are the ideal intermediaries, but personal safety cannot be entirely entrusted to others. It is time for citizens to responsibly conceal a firearm.

# data[].attributes.body
Pro's of safety and reliance and cons of increase of crime and public safety

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Carrying a concealed handgun in public is permitted in all 50 states as of 2013, when Illinois became the last state to enact concealed carry legislation. Some states require gun owners to obtain permits while others have "unrestricted carry" and do not require permits.

Proponents of concealed carry say concealed carry deters crime, keeps individuals and the public safer, is protected by the Second Amendment, and protect women and minorities who can't always rely on the police for protection.

Opponents of concealed carry say concealed carry increases crime, increases the chances of a confrontation becoming lethal, is not protected by the Second Amendment, and that public safety should be left to professionally qualified police officers. Read more background...

Pro & Con Arguments

Pro 1

Concealed handguns deter crime.

In a landmark study that analyzed FBI crime data, John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, found that states that implemented shall-issue concealed carry laws reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7%, and robberies by 3%. Lott calculated that 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults, and 12,000 robberies could have been prevented between 1977 and 1992 if concealed carry had been legal in every US state during that time period.

John Malcolm, JD, Vice President of the Institute for Constitutional Government, and Amy Swearer, JD, Visiting Legal Fellow at the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, stated, "Between 2007 and 2015, murder rates dropped 16 percent and violent crime rates dropped 18 percent, even though the percentage of adults with concealed carry permits rose by 190 percent." They continued, "Regression estimates show a significant association between increased permit ownership and a drop in murder and violent crime rates. Each percentage point increase in rates of permit-holding is associated with a roughly 2.5 percent drop in the murder rate."
Read More

Pro 2

Carrying a concealed gun keeps the individual carrying the gun and the public safer.

Larry Keane, JD, Senior Vice President for Government & Public Affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, stated, "Although the news stories rarely get coverage beyond their immediate media market, individuals with legally concealed carry firearms have successfully protected themselves and have come to the assistance of their fellow citizens on numerous occasions. They have also aided law enforcement officers who were in grave danger. As the number of permits holders has risen there has not been a 'Wild West' of reckless gunfire that the anti-gun activists have long predicted."

According to Amy Swearer, JD, Legal Fellow at the Meese Center, and Cooper Conway, a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation, "Americans defend themselves with their firearms between 500,000 and 3 million times every year. It's unclear how many of these defensive gun uses involve concealed-carry permit holders carrying in public places, but our own records show that concealed-carry permit holders can and do save lives." They continue, "Moreover, concealed-carry permit holders have intervened to stop many scenarios that likely would have turned into mass killings but for their actions."
Read More

Pro 3

The right to carry concealed handguns is protected by the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment states: "a well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

The federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, in the Dec. 11, 2012 case Moore v. Madigan, ruled that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms "must be interpreted to include a right to have a concealed gun in public, to have it ready for use, and to have it for self-defense."

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Hawaii's restrictive carry policies in July 2018. The ruling stated, "We do not take lightly the problem of gun violence. But, for better or for worse, the Second Amendment does protect a right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense."

Joseph Greenlee, JD, Director of Research at the Firearms Policy Coalition, explained, "The Supreme Court has elucidated that the scope of the Second Amendment is defined by the founding-era understanding of the right, as informed by American history and tradition. A historical analysis shows that both concealed and open carry are protected by the right, and that a government may only restrict one if the other remains available for law-abiding citizens to exercise."
Read More

Pro 4

Concealed handguns protect women and minorities who can't always rely on the police for protection.

David French, senior writer at the National Review and a veteran of the Iraq War, explained, "when you [concealed] carry your weapon, you don't feel intimidated, you feel empowered. In a way that's tough to explain, the fact that you're so much less dependent on the state for your personal security and safety makes you feel more 'free' than you've ever felt before."

John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, found that, "between 2012, and 2018, the percent of women with permits grew 111% faster for women and the percent of blacks with permits grew 20% faster than for whites. Permits for Asians grew 29% faster than for whites."

Women who have been victimized as adults were more likely to own a gun, more likely to own more than one gun, and more likely to carry a gun for protection. According to Pew Research, women are slightly more likely to report owning a gun for protection (71% to 65%), but men report owning guns for more activities (hunting, sports shooting, etc) and men report owning more types of guns (shotguns and rifles rather than just a handgun) than women, so women are more likely to own handguns only for protection.

Jim Curcuruto, Director of Research and Market Development at the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said, of the increase in gun sales during the 2020 civil rights movement, "The highest overall firearm sales increase comes from Black men and women, who show a 58.2% increase in purchases during the first six months of 2020 versus the same period last year," As Bruce Tomlin, a Black gun owner, explained to NPR, "I just feel like in my viewpoint, every Black person in America, especially Black males, needs to have some type of protection with them as often as [they] can, because I think the political climate [is] getting to the point where it's just going to be a lot of violence coming our way. I just feel safer now having a gun. And I didn't always feel that way. I've never been the world's biggest fan of guns, but I just don't feel safe without one... I'd rather go to trial than go to the cemetery"
Read More

Con 1

Concealed guns increase crime.

A 2018 study conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded, "There is not even the slightest hint in the data that RTC [right-to-carry] laws reduce violent crime. Indeed, the weight of the evidence from the panel data estimates as well as the synthetic control analysis best supports the view that the adoption of RTC laws substantially raises overall violent crime in the ten years after adoption." The authors found, "Ten years after the adoption of RTC laws, violent crime is estimated to be 13 [percent to] 15 percent higher than it would have been without the RTC law."

A 1995 study of five urban cities, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, concluded that gun homicide rates increased "on average by 4.5 per 100,000 persons" following the enactment of "shall-issue" laws.

A May 2009 study found that "shall-issue" laws were associated with increased numbers of aggravated assaults between 1977 and 2006.

Former Los Angeles Police Department Chief Charlie Beck said, "I have seen far too much gun violence in my lifetime to think that more guns is a solution... a gun is more likely to be used against you than you use a gun in self-defense."
Read More

Con 2

Carrying a concealed handgun increases the chances of a confrontation becoming lethal.

According to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, "members of the public who carry guns risk escalating everyday disagreements into public shootouts, especially in places where disputes frequently occur-in bars, at sporting events, or in traffic."

For example, on Jan 13, 2014, a retired police officer with a legally concealed handgun shot and killed another man during an argument over text messaging in a movie theater.

John J. Donohue III, JD, Professor of Law at Stanford University explained, "For example, the Philando Castile case in St. Paul, Minnesota. [After he was stopped by police,] he immediately told the officer that he was a right-to-carry holder and had a gun, which you're advised to do. And then the officer shot at him seven times. It scares the hell out of people when they think someone has a gun. Obviously, that right-to-carry holder wasn't doing anything wrong, but he ended up getting killed anyway. When more people are carrying guns, things can get more heated. There are times in which the gun could be involved in a way that thwarts a crime, but for the same reason that the officer shot Castile, guns tend to escalate the situation."
Read More

Con 3

The Second Amendment does not guarantee concealed carry.

The Second Amendment states: "a well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

There is no mention of concealed guns in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the court's majority opinion in DC v. Heller: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited... the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment."

In May 2014, the US Supreme Court declined to hear Drake v. Jerejian, a case challenging New Jersey's issuance of concealed weapons permits only to citizens who can prove a "justifiable need."

In 2016, the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal to a 9th Circuit ruling that stated, "Based on the overwhelming consensus of historical sources, we conclude that the protection of the Second Amendment - whatever the scope of that protection may be - simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public."
Read More

Con 4

Private citizens with little or no expert training jeopardize public safety.

Economics PhD student, Anna E. Kyriazis, found that switching from permitted carry to constitutional carry (no-permit carry), "increases the rate of people fatally shot by police by 5.2%. This effect is due to the fact that citizens considered unqualified under RTC can carry concealed weapons under PC, increasing the risk that police officers face when interacting
with the public."

The current trend in concealed carry laws is to move toward constitutional carry: 16 states have constitutional carry as of Dec. 2020.

When a permit is not required, or when permit laws are lax, crucial screenings, background checks, and gun safety training are not required.

When he vetoed a permitless carry law in 2017, Montana Governor Steve Bullock stated, "While I will fiercely defend the 2nd Amendment rights of our citizens, I cannot support an absurd concept that threatens the safety of our communities by not providing for the basic fundamentals of gun safety or mental health screening."

Mark Schauf, Police Chief of Baraboo, Wisconsin, said, "as police officers, we're required to have training before we get our weapons and a certain number of training hours throughout the year. If we have to be trained, it would only make sense that a person in public would want to be trained, as well."

Everytown for Gun Safety explains, "Permitless carry laws and legislation... often allow carry by irresponsible and dangerous people, such as violent criminals and weapons offenders, people who pose a safety risk, and teenagers. Permitless carry legislation is part of the NRA's broader agenda to weaken and repeal important gun safety measures, allowing more guns in public and undermining public safety."
Read More

Did You Know?

1. Carrying a concealed handgun in public has been permitted in all 50 states since 2013, when Illinois became the last state to enact concealed carry legislation.

2. State laws on concealed carry can fall into four categories: no-issue, may-issue, shall-issue, and unrestricted (also called no permit or constitutional carry).

3. In 1989 the National Rifle Association (NRA) launched a nationwide campaign to increase the number of states with shall-issue laws. At the time nine states had such laws. By 2000, 30 states had shall-issue laws.

4. "There were 2.7 million concealed handgun permit holders in 1999, 4.6 million in 2007, 8 million in 2011, 11.1 million in 2014, and now 19.48 million in 2020," according to the Crime Prevention Research Center in Nov. 2020,

5. As of Nov. 2019, 16 states allowed carrying a concealed weapon on public college or university campuses and 23 states allow each college or university to make decisions on concealed carry on campus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Concealed Guns - Pros & Cons - ProCon.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Carrying a concealed handgun in public is permitted in all 50 states as of 2013, when Illinois became the last state to enact concealed carry legislation. Some states require gun owners to obtain permits while others have "unrestricted carry" and do not require permits.