British Literature/1st hour

30 March 2009

A Modest Proposal For Preventing Underage Drinking

It is a poor reflection of our country when you walk around and see children, under the age of 17, drinking and engaging in other risky behaviors. "Youth who drink alcohol are more likely to experience school problems, such as higher absence and poor or failing grades" (CDC). When underage drinkers achieve poor or failing grades; they increase the number of students who dropout of school, leading to minimum wage jobs or homeless youth on the streets. "Although drinking by persons under the age of 21 is illegal, people aged 12 to 20 years drink 11% of all alcohol consumed in the United States" (CDC). According to research, " In 2003, the average age of first use of alcohol was about 14, compared to about 17 ½ in 1965" (NHAAA). If fourteen year olds are drinking, then why don't we just give alcohol to anybody? In a few years the age of the youngest drinkers will be most likely be under 12 years old.

If people under the age of 21 are going to drink, why do we even put a limit? When you tell teenagers not to do something, you make it more appealing for them. Even though, not yet 21, minors state that it is very easy to get alcohol from various sources. "80% of teens get alcohol at parties, 67% get alcohol from home (without parental knowledge), 36% use fake ID's, and 32% get it directly from their parents" (Safestate). Each year, " 5,000 young people under the age of 21 die as a result of underage drinking; this includes about 1,900 deaths from motor vehicle crashes, 1,600 as a result of homicides, 300 from suicide, as well as hundreds from other injuries such as falls, burns, and drowning" (NHAAA). By making alcohol available, we kill approximately 5,000 youths, so why can't we just get rid of alcohol? By getting rid of alcohol, there would no longer be the temptation of underage drinking; therefore decreasing the mortality rate of teenagers. Another solution is to take all the underage drinkers and kill them, so that the tendency to drink will not pass on to future offspring. Underage drinkers are killing themselves anyway, so why not cut to the chase and kill them before they have the chance. By killing all of the underage drinkers, the population would decrease and there would be less chaos ensuing. All of the deceased should not be of waste, so I propose that we eat what we can, and use what we can't eat to make clothes.

Underage drinkers will be more prone to be alcoholics as adults, sometimes, leading to high school dropouts, unemployment, and becoming homeless. "People who reported starting to drink before the age of 15 were four times more likely to also report meeting the criteria for alcohol dependence at some point in their lives" (NHAAA). If we keep letting people who are underage drink, we will eventually create a world where there is even more crime and death associated with drinking. If we don't stop alcoholism at the origin, then as each new generation is exposed to alcohol, the more likely we are going to keep increasing the number of underage drinking, deaths, and dependency.

As previously stated, having a age limit for alcohol makes it more appealing for minors to get alcohol at any cost. Having alcohol seem more appealing is the problem of our society; where to be cool you have to drink alcohol. If we do not fix this problem now, all of our descendents will suffer because we could not learn from our mistakes.