Drink to that?

Amid all the reaction and over-reaction to more restrictive laws during a national emergency, there’s a tendency in some quarters to hunt for laws that may actually be eased. The Tampa Tribune found some, which could be “eased in the name of logic and liberty.”

The Trib, in a recent editorial, zeroed in on business regulations that only a bureaucrat could love and the federal tax code that gives byzantine a bad name. Hear, hear.

But what’s with easing off the legal drinking age of 21? Just because it used to be 18, which matches the dubious legal age for voting, is not rationale enough. If you can’t handle the responsibility to vote, then you don’t, which is the case with most 18-21 year olds. Or you vote the way your parents or social studies teachers suggest. Democracy survives and you learn as you go.

But if you can’t handle liquor responsibly at 18, the consequences can be horrific and tragic. Especially on the road. That’s why the age limit was raised from 18 to 21 in the first place. Moreover, when the legal drinking age is lowered to 18, the ages of those trying to pass for 18 is commensurately lowered. Logic — and human nature — should tell us that.

A legal drinking age of 21 is obviously not a panacea for eliminating teen-aged drinking. A societal sanctioning of 18, however, is an invitation. To disaster.

No one should want to drink to that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.