|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
Safer at Twenty-One
The argument of whether or not the drinking age should be lowered started in the early 70’s and is still an on going debate. Minimum legal drinking age laws provide an example of how scientific research can support effective public policies. A study done between 1970 and 1975 showed that when 29 states lowered their minimum legal drinking age, scientists found that traffic crashes increased significantly among teenagers. ... Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of a higher minimum legal drinking age in preventing injures and deaths among youth (Wagenaar 1). The minimum legal drinking age should not be lowered from twenty-one because of its effectiveness and the negative results in the past from lowering the drinking age.
The effectiveness of the minimum legal drinking age is an important reason why it should not be lowered. Using various research methods, at least fifty studies have evaluated the effect of changes in the minimum legal drinking age on traffic crashes (Wagenaar 1993). The effects of the legal drinking age policy were studied across multiple states. These studies evaluated the effect of the minimum legal drinking age changes on varity of outcomes, including total traffic crash fatalities for youth; drinking-driving convictions; crashes resulting in injures; and single-vehicle nightmare crash fatalities (Wagenaar 3). Most studies on the effect of lowering the minimum legal drinking age found an increase in traffic crashes and traffic deaths among youth (Wagenaar 1993).
Approximate Word count = 1112
Approximate Pages = 4.4
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|