Rutland Herald editorial: Time to debate 21

On Tuesday, the editors of the Rutland Herald covered last week’s hearing in Vermont and decided that the debate about the drinking age is one worth having:

“McCardell is doing us a service by drawing attention to the pathology of drinking that exists around the nation. His view was shaped by his years as president of Middlebury College, where he saw the toll taken by the binge drinking and other immature behavior caused by the 21-year-old legal age and the need for students to socialize in secret. Even if discussion of a lower age is mostly abstract, it is useful for how it forces us to recognize the ways we encourage our young people to behave in a self-destructive fashion.”

The editors also pointed out that the result of Legal Age 21 is “to sequester those below 21 into dorm rooms or forest clearings where the excitement of the forbidden gives an extra thrill to the excesses that occur.” To put it bluntly, they wrote, “It is as if we want kids to go off by themselves beyond the reach of common sense.”

Read the rest of the editorial and leave your feedback in the comments.

One Response to “Rutland Herald editorial: Time to debate 21”

  1. Edwin Says:

    The drinking age must be lowered to 18 along with education and licensing. It’s good that that the editors are saying that a debate is needed surrounding the ageist drinking age but the comment by one of the editors is ageist for calling university students “kids”. It’s always time to debate the ageist drinking age because it encourages abuse of alcohol by those 18-20. The locations which are sometimes chosen by those 18-20 are not well suited for medical help to come to. Vermont’s legislature must debate hard.