ROANOKE TIMES

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, January 11, 1994                   TAG: 9401260002
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A5   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: ALEX SWEENEY
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium


LOWER THE DRINKING AGE AND RAISE THE DRIVING AGE

WITHIN THE past 15 years, laws have been enacted in every state determining the ages when young adults are permitted to do certain things.TextWITH GROWING concern for safety on the highways, every single state increased the drinking age to 21 back in the early 1980s.

The National Transportation Safety Board has been recommending a nationwide crackdown to reduce the number of deaths in teen-age driving. However, teen-agers may obtain a driver's license when they are only 16 years old. Operating an automobile requires much responsibility, and I believe that this is too much responsibility for someone who is not yet an adult.

If you think about it, it is not the actual drinking that causes these deaths, but it is the driving. If the driving age were increased to 18 years old, the number of deaths and accidents that occur on the roads obviously will decrease.

People do not seem to comprehend what the actual dangers are of careless and reckless driving. By careless and reckless I do not just mean drunken driving. I am talking about unnecessary risks that are taken every day, in sober condition, such as speeding and lack of paying full attention while driving. The common violators of speeding and lack of attention are the minors who have obtained driver's licenses when they turned 16.

If these teen-agers had to wait until they turned 18, they would probably drive more responsibly, on the highwaywhen they understand that they have become adults and will be treated as adults.

Courts are very lenient toward juvenile drivers who have violated the law. For minors only, the courts have special classes to improve their driving records. Half of these minors should not even be allowed to be driving in the first place.

The drinking age is a different story from the driving age. Twenty-one seems too high for the minimum age at which someone can purchase and consume alcohol. Reason for the increase in the drinking age from 18 to 21 was to prevent drunken driving. Setting the age unrealistically high is definitely not the solution. We should allow 18-year-olds to drink alcohol, but nobody should be allowed to drink and drive.

Eighteen-year-olds are permitted to drink in Europe. I guess America does not trust its own as much as other nations do theirs. According to Tom Gerety's commentary, "Let Them Drink" in The Washington Post on April 13, 1993, "allowing 18-year-olds to drink as they do in Europe teaches them to do so in moderation."A large percentage of minors drink, but the ones who concern us are those who do not know how to drink in moderation. Minors always find a way to obtain alcohol, whether it be from stealing, using fake IDs, or using someone of age to purchase it for them. By lowering the age, those who drink will become more responsible in handling the effects of being intoxicated. Everyone has to remember that many minors do certain things just because they are illegal.

The keg-registration law imposed last year by the Virginia legislature imposed earlier this yeardoes not really solve anything. It is not properly enforced; in fact, it is useless. One purpose of the keg law was to ensure that minors were not going to be drinking; yet the registration does not do anything to prevent them from doing so. For some reason, it seems that America is turning back to prohibition; that is, for those under 21. The history books tell us that prohibition in the 1920s didn't work, so why is it going to work in the 1990s?

There are several problemsThis country has several problems in determining the age someone becomes responsible enough to do something. Guns can be purchased when a person becomes 18. Let me remind you that guns are used to shoot something that the shooter intends to injure or kill. Being able to own something that kills, but not being able to drink at the same age, seems very backwards to me.

At 18, one is permitted to vote, pay taxes, and join the military and possibly kill another in combat. At 16, a person can operate an automotive vehicle in which he or she can accidentally slaughter a family of five due to carelessness and reckless behavior. We can't drink a nice cold beer after a day at work or school until we become 21.I don't understand it, but Don't these rights seem a little out of order?

\ Alex Sweeney, a sophomore at Radford University, is 19.



 by CNB