Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Drinking Age Presentation


The Huddler

Recommended Posts

Huddlers,

 

I am doing a presentation on why the drinking age should be lowered to 18 for this summer class I am taking. I am also covering the topic of why the BAC should remain at .08 and should not be lowered to .05. I did not pick my topic as it was given to me. 

 

I have many good generic arguments, but I was wondering if I could pick the brains of some of you for ideas or arguments that aren't as obvious. I figured there are many young people on here who would be passionate about the topic or could have some good experience.

 

If y'all could give me a few perspectives on this I would really appreciate it. Trying to be creative because need a good grade on this. Gotta keep that GPA up to get into my major.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's not so obvious...

 

I would examine statistics on binge drinking, alcoholism, and drunk driving accidents/incidence rates in Western countries that have lower drinking ages.  For instance, beer and wine are available to those 16 and older here in the Netherlands, and I believe it's the same in Belgium.  Hard liquor is 18 and older.  Then compare those numbers to those in the United States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only thing I can think of for arguing for the 18 is that everything else in life when you turn 18 you are considered a adult.  But society is saying you are not responsible enough to drink. I wouldnt go the way you can die for your country at 18 but cant buy a beer.  That has been argued to death.  Make it about having 18 being responsible and how society keep pushing the age back on when someone is supposibly a responsible adult.  Back in the history it used to be 13 then 16 then it went to 18 and now it is suppsode to be 21. 

 

 

As far as BAC.  This one is actually a little easier.  BAC isnt about tolerence it is percentage of alcohol in the blood.  A bigger person can drink more alcohol and registry the same as a smaller person who drank less.   While tolerence would be a better indicator of how drunk some. I know I out  drank alot of people twice might size and wasnt drunk as them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.08 ain't drunk, much less .05!

 

If the government can pluck you out of your graduating high school class and send you to a foreign country to kill people, you are more than mature enough to drink a beer!

 

I know these are worn out arguments, and probably not what you were looking for, but these need to be answered first!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you could look at data of drunk drivers with .08 compared to over the limit. i don't know this data but it would be interesting to hear.

 

you could also look at how alcohol sales will drop because people will be scared to have a beer/glass of wine with a meal

 

you could look at how there could be an increase in jailed people/court costs ect. because of the bac dip

 

tie all that in to see if it is even worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not sure if you can get into the whole 18 for beer and wine, and 21 for liquor, but I think this would serve as a good logistical transition

 

 

also there is plenty of data suggesting that when you are overtired you are just as dangerous if not more dangerous of a driver than someone whose BAC is .07

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's not so obvious...

I would examine statistics on binge drinking, alcoholism, and drunk driving accidents/incidence rates in Western countries that have lower drinking ages. For instance, beer and wine are available to those 16 and older here in the Netherlands, and I believe it's the same in Belgium. Hard liquor is 18 and older. Then compare those numbers to those in the United States.

Id also say that public transit and infrastructure there is leaps and bounds ahead of the us. That s like comparing NYCs duis per capita

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as BAC.  This one is actually a little easier.  BAC isnt about tolerence it is percentage of alcohol in the blood.  A bigger person can drink more alcohol and registry the same as a smaller person who drank less.   While tolerence would be a better indicator of how drunk some. I know I out  drank alot of people twice might size and wasnt drunk as them. 

 

You may have appeared to be less drunk than the larger person was.  However, studies and statistics have shown that your reaction times are more impared (even if you don't outwardly show it by staggering. sluring, etc).

 

The studies have shwon that there is a direct correlation to your actual impairment and the % of alcohol blood content....regardless of how you show it.

 

Not arguing for or against a .05 threshold....just stating statistics and facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

90oo78.jpg

 

For the average person, the "relative risk" barely changes until you hit .12. This means the average person is no more dangerous on the road until he goes above .12.

 

The exception as you can see in the graph above is 16-20 year old male which starts rising materially at .04. Basically the rest of the population is being punished.

 

This is an example of a law addressing the lowest common denominator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Watching Rams/Eagles. Celebrating the St Louis Rams team that won the SB (Warner, Holt, etc..) while playing in Los Angeles seems wrong.  If I were in Los Angeles, no way I would attend a Rams game.  Probably wouldn't attend a Chargers game either.  Becoming a fan of a team that likes to move around just seems like a waste of energy as a fan.  
    • The only responses I am getting after providing statistics to put opinions in perspective seem to be from people who get angry and attack stats and people whose opinions differ from their own.  Have people on the Huddle ever overreacted, exaggerated, been wrong about players before?  Sure they have, so an alternative opinion with statistical support should not cause you to attack me or my views.  I am sorry your public schools failed you.  But your reactions are very revealing--you are stuck in Piaget's concrete operational stage--learn logic, how to debate a topic, and learn the difference between facts and emotional opinions.  When I paralleled Cam's stats with Jones' to point out how remarkably similar their careers have been to this point, It blew some 40 watt minds.  I think Jones, in a better situation, could be good--that should not upset you--
    • penalties and poor hands is what cost us in the RZ Bryce missing "high" in the back of the end zone is not an issue, you're taught as a QB to throw high in the back of end zone were only the receiver can catch or no one The duo of Ian Thomas and Tommy tremble can both go at the end of the season, both been here for multiple seasons and they've barely developed
×
×
  • Create New...