rresponsible manner because drinking by these youth is seen as a badge of rebellion against authority and a symbol of adulthood. Clearly, this kind of devious attitude does not encourage responsible drinking. While young people in foreign countries learn to regard moderate drinking as an enjoyable social activity, young Americans view it as something they have to sneak around to do. If 18 year olds do not have legal access to even a beer in a public place, they are ill equipped to deal with the responsibilities that come with drinking when they do have the right. The drinking age should be lowered because the current age has no real basis. With a lowered drinking age, fewer problems will be present. Safe drinking needs to be taught, along with drinking in moderation. All of the arguments for having a raised drinking level or retaining the current one are weak. The problems that make a drinking age limit necessary are better solved through a lowered drinking level. Tightening the laws on underage drinking is wrong, as laws will still be broken and people 20 years, 364 days and younger will continue to consume alcohol. The answer to the problem of underage drinking is not to add more restrictions, rather, it is simple: get rid of the "underage" part. With the thrill of breaking the law gone and the access to the bar granted, people, especially college students ages 18 to 20, would be treated like the adults that the U.S. Constitution says they are. A wave of moderate drinkers would emerge because it would become a societal norm for adults to enter a bar and have a drink at their own discretion. Society must not look to reprimand and restrict, but rather to promote and accept. Treating legal adults like actual adults is the first step. “In the 1970’s the argument was: If I can be drafted to fight in a war, why can't I vote on who decides whether I go or not? That battle was won, and the same type of argument holds here...
