, and First CBS. Advocating Lower Drinking Age. 2008. video. n.p. Web. 18 november 2011. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBdQP-8izDc&feature=player_embedded>.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Works Cited
, and First Amethyst Initiative. Lowering The Drinking Age To 18. 2010. video. n.p. Web. 18 november 2011. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xt-ejyTvJy8&feature=player_embedded
Friday, November 18, 2011
Media
This is going to be my final memo for now. My original research question was: Under what criteria should the drinking age be lowered to 18? I found a lot information so far that has supported my hypothesis (that most people will agree with me) and there has been some that does not. But I am going to hopefully support my hypothesis once more with these videos I found that discuss the matter. The two videos are related but still different.
The first video is a commercial for Amethyst Initiative. It is a group of college presidents who signed on a petition to lower the drinking age to 18. It was also founded by a college president by the name of Dr. John McCardell. The commercial brings up some pretty valid points such as, the fact that you can join the military at 18, vote, and even run for a political office.
Although the commercial was short, it struck right at the heart with me. In the beginning of the video it mentioned how the high drinking age can lead to binge drinking. Lowering the drinking age will help prevent binge drinking in the future because the people will have more time to learn responsibility. So not only does it being sounds like it makes sense, it can have benefits. I find this as the right criteria I was looking for the whole time. All my other sources just gave me reasons but this provided a benefit to lowering the drinking age.
The second video is a debate between Laura Dean- Mooney and Dr. McCardell. It is a good argument on both sides. Laura Dean- Mooney is head of MADD (mothers against drunk driving) and she thinks that the college presidents were mislead into things when they signed the petition. She argues that the drinking age of 18 did not work then so, why would it now. She claims the current age of 21 saved 1,000 young lives yearly. So it seems like why would we stop with what we are doing now?
But, Dr. McCardell has a few things to say. In 2006 alcohol related fatalities reached a ten year high. So this proves that it does not matter what age we set it to. We can never stop everyone from making bad decisions. It is getting worse. Then he goes on to talk about how it can prevent binge drinking. The high age makes young people want to do it more and then they consume it in large amounts. If people learn when to stop at an earlier age it can prevent them from making poor decisions in the future.
The media also connected to my previous research in some ways. The debate video helped the main female vs. male belief on the matter. More males were in favor for not denying adults the right to drink. It is a touchy subject but men and women have different mindsets. These videos also helped me answer some of my more minor questions like what does the public believe. They helped me find the committee I was looking for in my research.
Both of videos gave very good information supporting my question. I found benefits for keeping the current drinking but also benefits for lowering it. There are both sides to every story. There was a drop in the number of deaths when we raised it until 2006. There was a ten year high so that proves that no matter what we set the age to, there will always be drunk driving. But I am glad I finally found benefits instead of reasons.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Some research
Reid Blaine
Ms. Martina Mckoy
English II
November 15, 2011
The criteria that claim that the drinking age should be lowered to 18?
Under what criteria should the drinking age be lowered to eighteen? This question has boggled my mind for many years. When an individual turns eighteen, he is legally an adult and is recognized as such. By the time we are eighteen we have a myriad of responsibilities that are a part of adulthood. We can join the military and die for our country before we are old enough to have a drink. I have conducted some research on people’s opinions on this matter and some agree with my views and some do not. But, the purpose is to see if there is a criterion that meets my views and if so, what it is.
In the first article I viewed the opinion of US representative Jack Kingston. Although Kingston and I would disagree on most topics we can agree on one thing; soldiers of all ages have a right to drink. At least beer or wine should be granted to the ones that lay down their lives for us. Although it sounds reasonable, not everyone agreed with the bill proposed. Allowing alcohol in an area filled with firearms does have its setbacks. But we have to remember the firearms are locked up and not just lying around. Our soldiers are taught responsibility but it still can be a potential hazard. Nonetheless, if someone is old enough to fight and kill for a country they should at least be allowed beer or wine.
My next research article was a document on the controversy of this topic. It gave both sides of the argument. It also brought up that there are college and university presidents are in support of advocacy groups for lowering the drinking age to eighteen. But it also states that they signed it because they think it will help students aged from 18-20 make more responsible decisions in the future. It can help because if people learn their lesson when they are young it helps them in the future. Hopefully, reduce binge drinking. But, unfortunately, alcohol consumption leads to more than 75,000 deaths a year. If we can teach responsibility at a younger age it can reduce events like these. College students tend to engage in drinking with nonstudent peers. If we can allow a more suited environment where students can drink, then the decisions they make in the future will be more positive.
It makes sense to lower the drinking age. But, then again, it has its dangers. There is no progress without mistakes though. People will still drive drunk regardless of what age they are. The current age is set to lower these sad events but there is no stopping it. When an individual is eighteen they can fight and die for their country, vote, and (by the time they are sixteen) drive. Would lowering the drinking age really make a negative difference?
Monday, November 7, 2011
Preliminary Links
Here is my works cited and some other helpful sites in case you would like more information. It is unbiased so the websites go both ways
This is an article about Jack Kingston’s point of view with this matter. I like his idea. He believes that people in the military 18 years of age, should be able to buy and consume wine and beer on base.
This is a short one paragraph list of times when drinking ages were raised. Also is longer and is on a pdf file and can help you find other articles. You do have to register to get the pdf though. But it can still help you find articles.
This is a legal journal that explains some statistics about the amount of drunken driving deaths and the ages. It is very helpful in understanding both sides of the argument. If you are veering towards the “no” side of my argument you might prefer this article. It does expand too on a pdf but the given information is helpful enough.
This is a great one if you want more than basic facts. It is very long, but good if you want to read the whole thing. I has data from different places in the world also.
.The Public Opinion
Hypothesis:
In the US, the legal age to have an alcoholic beverage is twenty- one years old. Before we are twenty one years old, we are declared adults under the law and are mature enough for so many responsibilities. My hypothesis is that there are many reasons why the drinking age can, and should be lowered to eighteen.
Context:
My target audience is the younger generation of Americans because we are the ones who are having this experience. Particularly 15-20 year old. I chose this audience because it obviously would not matter as much to people who older than the required drinking age. It will not make a difference in their lives but it will make a difference in ours. My results are valid and reliable because they are unbiased. I tried my best to make sure the questions did not veer towards my opinion. Everyone was able to say whatever they wanted to say without having to agree with me.
Results:
Figure 1-
Male yes | Male no | Female yes | Female no | UNSURE | |
Are you happy with the current drinking age? | 30% | 20% | 20% | 30% | 0% |
Do you think it is wrong to deny the right for adults to drink? | 40% | 10% | 20% | 30% | 0% |
If an 18 year old is mature enough to defend this country, are they mature enough to drink? | 30% | 20% | 20% | 30% | 0% |
Do you find it unconstitutional for not allowing our underage soldiers to drink? | 30% | 20% | 30% | 20% | 0% |
Do you think war veterans of all ages should be able to drink? | 30% | 20% | 30% | 20% | 0% |
Do you think there is a valid reason they stopped allowing soldiers to drink? | 30% | 10% | 30% | 0% | 30% |
Data analysis:
The data shows that over half the people that have taken my survey believe that war veterans of all ages should be allowed to drink. That aids the research greatly. All of the time,19-20 year old kids come back from war broken in different ways and are not allowed to drink. That is mainly the people I am doing it for. 60% out 100% say yes to allow underage veterans to drink. The results were also the same for both males and females. The results were mostly 30% yes and 20% no for each. It was also divided up 50/50 between males and females on that were happy with the current drinking age. Some people are happy with the drinking age but some still want underage veterans to be able to drink. So, I believe that what they are saying is that soldiers of all ages should be able to drink but not regular citizens. There was also a pattern with the data. The majority of the people that voted for one thing, voted for a similar answer on the next. It wasn’t because the question was restated; it is just because they all intertwine.
Conclusion:
There are reasons why the drinking age should be lowered and most people believed it should be. I did notice that people kept their beliefs while taking my survey. But with all of the counter beliefs the majority still did agree with me. I also like the fact that they stayed true to their thoughts because that helps me in my research. It is always good to have two sides no matter what point you are trying to prove
Follow up:
I will do a little more focus on all the other responsibilities 18 year olds have. It will be the responsibilities the 18 year olds who are not providing for the defense of the US have. I am still going to go with my original essential question. I am also going to look for more information that will counter my topic. That way there is a better understanding between the opposing views.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)