QUOTE(paperplane @ Mar 22 2009, 02:07 PM)

What I consume myself is absolutely a personal freedom. As a legal adult, it should be my choice whether I drink. Does that mean I think I have the right to hurt other people in effect? Absolutely not. But that is why we have a justice system to prevent and punish people who act irresponsibly. Once again, kindly do not tell me that I live in a bubble until you actually go out and try living yourself. It's funny that you keep making this bubble comment, when really you're endorsing the government putting us in bubbles past the point where it is their duty to protect us as minors (18). I don't think your perception of bars is very accurate. Have you ever been near a college town? Most bars aren't going to be full of skeezy men. It's really not that difficult for anyone of any age to leave or avoid a place that they feel uncomfortable. I don't know what makes you think that at 21 people are suddenly going to be infinitely wiser about drinking than they would be at a slightly younger age. I do not know a single person who refrained from drinking until they were actually legal, so chances are 21 year olds know how to handle their booze primarily from their underage experiences.
You cannot say that the government needs to protect 18-21 year old adults, but that they don't need to protect citizens from living in poverty. It's inconsistent. And yeah, no shit I live here. Meaning that these are the useless restrictions that actually effect me, so of course I'm going to want things changed to make the most sense.
People do not magically become mature and responsible at 21. If that were the case, and people were really still too useless to make decisions for themselves at 18, then one would cease to be a minor at 21, rather than 18.
Ok, story time. At my school we had a group called Watch Dawgs that would give people free, nonjudgmental rides home Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights to prevent people from drinking and driving. It's a great program, but they're not operating this semester because, long story short, the university won't give them a space on campus to store their equipment. Why won't the school help such a great organization whose aim is to keep people safe? Because they refuse to take a stance against underage drinking, as that would be judgmental. I applaud the group for maintaining their principles, but the larger issue at hand is that this show how the university is more interested in looking good than actually protecting its students from harm. Saying "oh you're underage you can't drink" is about a million times less helpful than saying "you may or may not have been drinking legally, but we want to get you home safely regardless." Current alcohol laws are preventing the 18-20 year olds who, let's face it, do drink from being taught how to do so responsibly.
Okay, maturity usually comes with age and people soon realize that stupidity is a choice. But not with all people... some people never learn. I do think that a person who is raised in a stable family until they are 18 years old is more likely to make the right choices because they have had guidance. So, with some people maturity comes at different ages depending on what you have gone through personally. But, I still think that maturity doesnt come before more-or-less 18 with most people.
But, there are more cons than pros to changing the legal age. More teenagers being able to drink at bars and restaurants increases the amount of DWIs, crashes, disturbances.. Especially since young people are more rambunsious than older people (I swear I sound like an 80 year old but its true.) There will have to be more regulation on the streets when our policeman have more important things to be doing than babysitting drunk people. It increases the chances of innocent people being killed in DWI related crashes.
But I think those Watch Dawgs groups are good to have because people are going to drink and people above the age of 21 could benefit from those groups too.