Here’s why I think this, and my reasons are pretty anecdotal, so that’s why I’m not in GD with this. I came of age the year before the drinking age was raised to 21, so I was “legal” when a lot of my peers were not. When you are old enough to vote, marry, serve in the military or sign up for the draft, give legal consent, and smoke, it stands to reason that legal drinking would be part of that package. It still seems strange to me that one adult privilege would be separated from all the others be three years instead of being conferred at 18 like everything else.
IMHO, the higher drinking age also sets up a situation where (finally!) being “legal” is such a big deal, that binge drinking becomes the norm for younger type folks. Hearing about someone dying from alcohol poisoning after drinking 21 shots on their birthday is not an extremely rare occurrence. It seems to me that if the drinking age was not separated out from other adult rights, this type of situation would be less common. When legal drinking is so long-awaited, the “rite of passage” for the *only * right to be conferred at 21 not at 18, tends to be exciting and dangerous. It seemed as if, when I was 18, it was not such a huge deal. Turning 21 didn’t have any huge significance on me like it did to my slightly younger peers.
Anybody else feel the same way? (especially oldsters like me who remember when 18 really meant “legally adult”.
IMHO.