Letter to the Editor: Arbitrary age

To the Editor:

Edith Mulhern brought attention to the many arbitrary age restrictions in our country in her column "Always too young" (DP, 10/14/05). However, she presents a solution to underage alcohol consumption that is equally arbitrary and creates more problems than it addresses.

Ms. Engs, an Indiana University professor quoted by Mulhern, believes, and Mulhern agrees, that the solution to excessive drinking is as simple as lowering the legal age to 18. Effectively, the underage drinkers would then become 15- and 16-year-olds who are just learning to drive. This is as arbitrary as the current law and likely more dangerous.

While it is a great leap from current law, I would sooner support lowering the drinking age to the 10- or 14-year-old age range before making the law 18 or 19 years old.

It's logical on many levels. First, a child of that age does not have the autonomy that one with a driver's license does. The result is that they will not easily be able to drink without adults nearby. Rather, children will be introduced to it by their parents and in a safer, more controlled environment. Of course, some parents will allow their 12-year-old sons and daughters as well as their friends to drink irresponsibly, but I imagine that these parents already encourage such behavior.

In all cases, I would rather keep arbitrary laws that already exist before replacing them with different, equally arbitrary laws.

Jeff Scott

The author is a junior at Drexel University

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.