Underage drinking: Why 21?
It’s a debate that just won’t go away: the furor over the minimum drinking age of 21. Both sides say, "What’s to debate?" A Jan. 12 op-ed piece, in the Christian Science Monitor, "There’s No Benefit to Lowering the Drinking Age," by Robert Voas, responds in highly readable style to the principal anti-21 arguments posed today. Excerpts from his article are reprinted below, along with additional comments, as a convenient way to understand the case for retaining the minimum 21 law.
After nearly four decades of exacting research on how to save ...
** Subscribers Log in to read this full article.
