Not Lowering the Drinking Age Essay Example

Not Lowering the Drinking Age Essay Example Not Lowering the Drinking Age Essay Not Lowering the Drinking Age Essay Bryan Blejski ENG 101-010 Ms. Abbott 28 July 2011 Not Lowering the Drinking Age Many teenage deaths in the United States are caused in some way by the influence of alcohol; however, many people still believe that the legal drinking age should be reduced to eighteen. This issue has been going on for years, but the law has not been changed since the change to twenty-one in 1980. States have become stricter about preventing under-age drinking, but teenagers have no problem getting alcohol. There are many arguments in favor of changing the drinking age back to eighteen. The facts show that drinking alcohol is too large of a responsibility for an eighteen-year-old to handle. In 1980 the government raised the drinking age to twenty-one because the number of drunk driving accidents was causing many teen-age deaths. The young adults of America considered this law a second prohibition. Prohibition was the period in United States history in which the manufacture, sale, and transportation of intoxicating liquors was outlawed. The push for Prohibition began in the beginning of the nineteenth century. After the American Revolution, drinking was on the rise. To combat this, a number of societies were organized as part of a new Temperance movement which attempted to dissuade people from becoming intoxicated. At first, these organizations pushed moderation, but after several decades, the movements focus changed to complete prohibition of alcohol consumption. The Temperance movement blamed alcohol for many of societys ills, especially crime and murder. The problem with the arguments for lowering the legal drinking age is it is simply not in the best interest of the publics safety to do so. Teenagers who drink are a danger to themselves and others especially on the highways. The drinking age was first lowered to eighteen in many states back in the Vietnam War era. The country was asking thousands of its young men to fight and die for their country on foreign soil, so the popular thinking was, How can we ask them to die for their country and not let them have a drink if they want one? But the lower drinking age begin to take a toll on the nations highways. The number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities began to rise at alarming rates, and a high percentage of those involved young drivers. Congress again put pressure on the states to raise the drinking age because of this startling increase in highway deaths. Many groups perform a series of arguments about the status of legal drinking age and few seem happy to leave it at twenty-one, where it has been for many years. One persistent argument in the discussion is on youth rights and privileges, means the age at which you can drink alcohol legally should be lowered to the age where you obtain right to vote and die for your country, eighteen. Currently, the legal drinking age is twenty-one in the U. S. , which is higher than the legal drinking age in many other developed countries. Supporters with an argument for lowering the drinking age, argue that if you have certain rights and obligations that seem more adult in a younger age that are fighting for the country, pay taxes and they marry, should be able to drink. These supporters who make this argument to lower the legal drinking age also suggest that the current legal drinking age simply encourages the illegal use of alcohol, many teenagers have tried alcohol, and some heavily and persistently before they reach the age of twenty-one. Although the above argument for lowering the drinking age may be most logical, it is a more convincing and persuasive argument. Research confirms the argument that the legal drinking age should be twenty-one, in short, adolescents have not developed the cognitive mechanisms, social, and psychological need to make thoughtful decisions and logically about alcohol and also, their bodies have not completed their physical maturation. The government’s changing the legal age to drink from twenty-one to eighteen would be the same as the promotion to avoid the time adolescents have to mature, which is vital for human development and it lays the foundation for responsible participation in society. In summary, research supports the argument that the drinking age should consider the overall perception of how successful undeveloped teens could handle alcohol. Those who want to see the legal drinking age was reduced from twenty-one to eighteen often argue that the legal drinking age in Canada and many European countries are in the middle of adolescence, and argue further that this lower drinking age has not resulted in the dismantling of the social structure (Heath 28). As some scientists and social researchers have pointed out, however, drinking habits of young people has changed considerably in recent years as the influence of American advertising and the availability of U. S. products has spread (Heath 231). Although the argument that a lower legal drinking age may be based on data from other countries, we must remember that the culture of alcohol are different in many of these countries and should not serve as a valid basis for a discussion of American matters. Once again, science and research should lead to an argument for reducing or increasing the legal drinking age. Interestingly, on a cultural tone, in relation to the argument against lowering the drinking age, the fact that younger teens are allowed to drink helped researchers suggest that there is an increase in binge drinking, which have been associated with a dramatic increase in harmful and fatal. accidents, social deviance, and increased distance between adolescents and their parents (Heath 231). Thus, those who support the argument for maintaining the legal drinking age of twenty-one in the United States points out that the vision we have of European drinking heavily romanticized, even dangerously so. There is an extensive amount of research which substantiates the claim that teenagers are simply not prepared, mentally or physically, for alcohol use. Recognizing that teens want to experiment with alcohol drinking regardless of the legal age, lifting the current age or declining it would approve the study, and perhaps even normal use, in an age where teens have not fully matured cognitive or physiological systems (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services VI). Cognitive maturity is necessary for people to make thoughtful and logical decisions in matters that require much thought and insight, while the physical maturity necessary to control the physiological effects of certain drugs, including alcohol. The consumption of alcohol, particularly in large quantities before the bodys systems are ready to form can stunt the healthy development that causes lifelong deficits. At sixteen or even eighteen years, is a teenager able to think ahead and make decisions based on such information. For this reason, the legal drinking age, instead of helping them by holding illegal use until the development has reached its conclusion (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services VI). Research findings about alcohol among teenagers is dramatic and confirms the need for the legal drinking age to be maintained at twenty-one. According to Loeb, Talley, and Zlatoper, the minimum legal drinking age â€Å"has a statistically significant impact on youthful fatality rates† (64), and there is evidence to suggest that lowering the drinking age to eighteen or sixteen would have the effect f increasing deaths caused by traffic and other types of accidents. People tend to view college drinking as a harmless rite of passage. But the problem is not that students drink. Its the quantity in which they drink too much. At least forty percent of students report binge drinking having five or more drinks in one sitting according to the National Center on Addiction and substance abuse at Colu mbia University. Excessive drinking has contributed to more than 1,700 college student deaths and more than 500,000 student injuries in 2001, says the National Institute on alcohol abuse and alcoholism. Thousands of sexual assault among students, are also linked to binge drinking. For all the reasons mentioned here, the legal age of drinking should be maintained in current age: twenty-one. Although it would be naive to think that teens do not experiment with alcohol, not the government and we as responsible citizens, we cannot agree with the previous use of a substance that can have harmful effects if not used correctly. In addition to maintaining the current age, as well as government and people, especially teachers, parents and other adults who are in direct contact with young people, should increase their efforts to educate young people the dangers of early alcohol use. Although alcohol consumption can be integrated into the adaptive form of social routines, context, and limits the proper use should be taught. Cognitive and physical development of young people must be protected. As an adult he can, and hopefully to make considered decisions on alcohol use, but less than twenty-one, they are unable to do so. Heath, Dwight B. International Handbook on Alcohol and Culture. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1995. Print. Heather, Nick, and Tim Stockwell. The Essential Handbook of Treatment and Prevention of Alcohol Problems. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2004. Print. Loeb, Peter D. , Wayne K. Talley, and Thomas J. Zlatoper. Causes and Deterrents of Transportation Accidents: An Analysis by Mode. Westport, CT: Quorum, 1994. Print. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking. Washington, D. C. : U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007. [Electronic Version]. surgeongeneral. gov/topics/underagedrinking/calltoaction. pdf United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Federal Highway Administration. Highway Safety Program Standards. GPO, 1973. Print.

French and Indian War - French and Indian War Seven Year War

French and Indian War - French and Indian War Seven Year War Previous: 1758-1759 - The Tide Turns | French Indian War/Seven Years War: Overview | Next: Aftermath: An Empire Lost, An Empire Gained Victory in North America Having taken Quebec in the fall of 1759, British forces settled in for the winter. Commanded by Major General James Murray, the garrison endured a harsh winter during which over half of the men suffered from disease. As spring approached, French forces led by the Chevalier de Levis advanced down the St. Lawrence from Montreal. Besieging Quebec, Levis hoped to re-take the city before the ice in the river melted and the Royal Navy arrived with supplies and reinforcements. On April 28, 1760, Murray advanced out of the city to confront the French but was badly defeated at the Battle of Sainte-Foy. Driving Murray back into the citys fortifications, Levis continued his siege. This ultimately proved futile as British ships reached the city on May 16. Left with little choice, Levis retreated to Montreal. For the 1760 campaign, the British commander in North America, Major General Jeffery Amherst, intended to mount a three-pronged attack against Montreal. While troops advanced up the river from Quebec, a column led by Brigadier General William Haviland would push north over Lake Champlain. The main force, led by Amherst, would move to Oswego then cross Lake Ontario and attack the city from the west. Logistical issues delayed the campaign and Amherst did not depart Oswego until August 10, 1760. Successfully overcoming French resistance, he arrived outside of Montreal on September 5. Outnumbered and short on supplies, the French opened surrender negotiations during which Amherst stated, I have come to take Canada and I will take nothing less. After brief talks, Montreal surrendered on September 8 along with all of New France. With the conquest of Canada, Amherst returned to New York to begin planning expeditions against French holdings in the Caribbean. The End in India Having been reinforced during 1759, British forces in India began advancing south from Madras and recapturing positions that had been lost during earlier campaigns. Commanded by Colonel Eyre Coote, the small British army was a mix of East India Company soldiers and sepoys. At Pondicherry, the Count de Lally initially hoped that the bulk of the British reinforcements would be directed against a Dutch incursion in Bengal. This hope was dashed in late December 1759 when British troops in Bengal defeated the Dutch without requiring aid. Mobilizing his army, Lally began maneuvering against Cootes approaching forces. On January 22, 1760, the two armies, both numbering around 4,000 men, met near Wandiwash. The resulting Battle of Wandiwash was fought in the traditional European style and saw Cootes command soundly defeat the French. With Lallys men fleeing back to Pondicherry, Coote began capturing the citys out-lying fortifications. Further reinforced later that year, Coote laid siege to t he city while the Royal Navy conducted a blockade offshore. Cut off and with no hope of relief, Lally surrendered the city on January 15, 1761. The defeat saw the French lose their last major base in India. Defending Hanover In Europe, 1760 saw His Britannic Majestys Army in Germany further reinforced as London increased its commitment to the war on the Continent. Commanded by Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, the army continued its active defense of the Electorate of Hanover. Maneuvering through the spring, Ferdinand attempted a three-pronged attack against Lieutenant General Le Chevalier du Muy on July 31. In the resulting Battle of Warburg, the French attempted to escape before the trap was sprung. Seeking to achieve a victory, Ferdinand ordered Sir John Manners, Marquess of Granby to attack with his cavalry. Surging forward, they inflicted losses and confusion on the enemy, but Ferdinands infantry did not arrive in time to complete the victory. Frustrated in their attempts to conquer the electorate, the French moved north later that year with the goal striking from a new direction. Clashing with Ferdinands army at the Battle of Kloster Kampen on October 15, the French under the Marquis de Castries won a protracted fight and forced the enemy from the field. With the campaign season winding down, Ferdinand fell back to Warburg and, after further maneuvers to expel the French, entered into winter quarters. Though the year had brought mixed results, the French had failed in their efforts to take Hanover. Prussia Under Pressure Having narrowly survived the previous years campaigns, Frederick II the Great of Prussia quickly came under pressure from Austrian General Baron Ernst von Laudon. Invading Silesia, Laudon crushed a Prussian force at Landshut on June 23. Laudon then began moving against Fredericks main army in conjunction with a second Austrian force led by Marshal Count Leopold von Daun. Badly outnumbered by the Austrians, Frederick maneuvered against Laudon and succeeded in defeating him at the Battle of Liegnitz before Daun could arrive. Despite this victory, Frederick was taken by surprise in October when a combined Austro-Russian force successfully raided Berlin. Entering the city on October 9, they captured large amounts of war materials and demanded monetary tribute. Learning that Frederick was moving towards the city with his main army, the raiders departed three days later. Taking advantage of this distraction, Daun marched into Saxony with around 55,000 men. Splitting his army in two, Frederick immediately led one wing against Daun. Attacking at the Battle of Torgau on November 3, the Prussians struggled until late in the day when the other wing of the army arrived. Turning the Austrian left, the Prussians forced them from the field and won a bloody victory. With the Austrians retreating, campaigning for 1760 came to an end. Previous: 1758-1759 - The Tide Turns | French Indian War/Seven Years War: Overview | Next: Aftermath: An Empire Lost, An Empire Gained Previous: 1758-1759 - The Tide Turns | French Indian War/Seven Years War: Overview | Next: Aftermath: An Empire Lost, An Empire Gained A War Weary Continent After five years of conflict, the governments in Europe were beginning to run short of both men and money with which to continue the war. This war weariness led to final attempts to seize territory to use as bargaining chips in peace negotiations as well as overtures for peace. In Britain, a key change occurred in October 1760 when George III ascended to the throne. More concerned with the colonial aspects of the war than the conflict on the Continent, George began to shift British policy. The final years of the war also saw the entry of a new combatant, Spain. In the spring of 1761, the French approached Britain regarding peace talks. While initially receptive, London backed out upon learning of negotiations between France and Spain to widen the conflict. These secret talks ultimately led to Spain entering the conflict in January 1762. Frederick Battles On In central Europe, a battered Prussia was only able to field around 100,000 men for the 1761 campaign season. As most of these were new recruits, Frederick changed his approach from one of maneuver to one of positional warfare. Constructing a massive fortified camp at Bunzelwitz, near Scheweidnitz, he worked to improve his forces. Not believing the Austrians would attack such a strong position, he moved the bulk of his army toward Neisee on September 26. Four days later, the Austrians assaulted the reduced garrison at Bunzelwitz and carried the works. Frederick suffered another blow in December when Russian troops captured his last major port on the Baltic, Kolberg. With Prussia facing complete destruction, Frederick was saved by the death of Empress Elizabeth of Russia on January 5, 1762. With her demise, the Russian throne passed to her pro-Prussian son, Peter III. An admirer of Fredericks military genius, Peter III concluded the Treaty of Petersburg with Prussia that May ending ho stilities. Free to focus his attention on Austria, Frederick began campaigning to gain the upper hand in Saxony and Silesia. These efforts culminated with a victory at the Battle of Freiberg on October 29. Though pleased with the victory, Frederick was angered that the British had abruptly halted their financial subsidies. The British separation from Prussia began with the fall of William Pitt and the Duke of Newcastles government in October 1761. Replaced by the Earl of Bute, the government in London began to abandon Prussian and Continental war aims in favor of securing its colonial acquisitions. Though the two nations had agreed not to negotiate separate peaces with the enemy, the British violated this pact by making overtures to the French. Having lost his financial backing, Frederick entered into peace negotiations with Austria on November 29. Hanover Secured Eager to secure as much of Hanover as possible before the end of fighting, the French increased the number of troops committed to that front for 1761. Having turned back a winter offensive by Ferdinand, French forces under Marshal Duc de Broglie and the Prince of Soubise began their campaign in the spring. Meeting Ferdinand at the Battle of Villinghausen on July 16, they were soundly defeated and forced from the field. The remainder of the year saw the two sides maneuvering for advantage as Ferdinand again succeeded in defending the electorate. With the resumption of campaigning in 1762, he soundly defeated the French at the Battle of Wilhelmsthal on June 24. Pushing on later that year, he attacked and captured Cassel on November 1. Having secured the town, he learned that peace talks between the British and French had begun. Spain the Caribbean Though largely unprepared for war, Spain entered the conflict in January 1762. Promptly invading Portugal, they had some success before British reinforcements arrived and bolstered the Portuguese army. Seeing Spains entry as an opportunity, the British embarked on a series of campaigns against Spanish colonial possessions. Utilizing veteran troops from the fighting in North America, the British Army and Royal Navy conducted a series of combined-arms attacks that captured French Martinique, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, and Granada. Arriving off Havana, Cuba in June 1762, British forces captured the city that August. Aware that troops had been withdrawn from North America for operations in the Caribbean, the French mounted an expedition against Newfoundland. Valued for its fisheries, the French believed Newfoundland to be a valuable bargaining chip for peace negotiations. Capturing St. Johns in June 1762, they were driven out by the British that September. On the far side of the world, British forces, freed from fighting in India, moved against Manila in the Spanish Philippines. Capturing Manila in October, they forced the surrender of the entire island chain. As these campaigns concluded word was received that peace talks were underway. Previous: 1758-1759 - The Tide Turns | French Indian War/Seven Years War: Overview | Next: Aftermath: An Empire Lost, An Empire Gained