Reduce drinking age or raise age of responsibility?

The debate over lowering the drinking age has been heating up in several states, fueled by some lawmakers who believe if men and women are old enough to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan they are old enough to consume alcohol legally.

Lawmakers in Kentucky, Wisconsin and South Carolina introduced bills that would lower the drinking age for military personnel only. A planned ballot initiative in Missouri would apply to everyone 18 and older and an initiative in South Dakota would allow all 19- and 20-year-olds to buy low-alcohol beer.

Many of you responded to the latest poll on the Edmond blog about lowering the drinking age in Oklahoma. Fifty percent said the law should be lowered for those in active military service while 33 percent voted no, 18 is too young. Only 16 percent said if a person is considered old enough to fight they should be considered old enough to drink.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says laws setting the drinking age at 21 have cut traffic fatalities involving 18- to 20-year-old drivers by 13 percent.

A 2007 Gallup Poll found that 77 percent of Americans oppose lowering the drinking age to 18.

Richard Prawdzienski of Edmond sent his comments by e-mail on lowering the legal drinking age in Oklahoma. "I agree, some people between 18 and 21 are immature and irresponsible. Maybe we need to change our laws to make it illegal to be immature. If an older adult allows an underage to be immature, that older adult should be fined and/or sent off to jail under a Social Host Law?

"We need to change the debate about drinking age. Instead, we need to ask why 18 year olds haven't learned to be responsible,” he said.