notes from the desk Under the influence of bad legislation

Author: Zamir Ahmed

I've been at Middlebury for over three years now. In that time, I have met students who have planned fundraisers, mentored local children, volunteered their time to put out a newspaper, organized marches to raise awareness of climate change and persuaded this College to commit to carbon neutrality by 2016. These students are also all connected by one thing, and it's not just their lack of free time. It's the fact that none of them can consume alcohol because they're under 21.

Despite all their incredible accomplishments, these students are not mature enough to drink beer, wine and liquor - at least not in the eyes of the law. They may smoke cigarettes, buy pornography, get married, join the military, get drafted into the military, pay taxes, choose which college to attend and vote for the "leader of the free world," but touch a drop of alcohol and they risk being busted by the liquor inspector when dancing under the influence at a party in Pearsons.

Are we to believe that students mature enough to spend their time working to help others are not mature enough to drink, a pastime that has ingrained itself, for good or bad, into American culture? I know "adults" - in this case, those 21 and older - who are not mature enough to drink. Yet they still go out, consume enormous amounts of alcohol and then climb behind the wheel of a car with the intention of driving home.

I'm well aware that not everyone over 18 is a mature, responsible human being. I understand that drunken driving claims a significant number of underage drinkers every year. However, drinking and driving is not a problem restricted to those underage. One look at a newspaper reveals the DUI arrests of celebrities, athletes, teachers, doctors, lawyers, parents and, yes, even presidents. Instead of making stupid choices, maybe these supposedly respected members of society can set a better example for future generations.

Some opposed to lowering the drinking age argue that the brain does not fully develop until age 25, and thus alcohol impairs neurological growth. Even if this is true, alcohol does not stop having detrimental effects on the human body after someone turns 25. Research has shown that prolonged use of large quantities of alcohol can lead to permanent damage to vital organs, certain types of cancer, sexual dysfunction, lowered resistance to disease and high blood pressure. Wouldn't educating about the dangers of alcohol be better than prohibiting it entirely until age 21 and then thrusting alcohol on people without their full knowledge of its effects? Instead of treating alcohol as a taboo subject in society, wouldn't teenagers benefit from being talked to about drinking by their parents and taught shown how to drink responsibly?

Like it or not, alcohol is part of the American culture, even if it's not talked about. Go to a wedding and alcohol is served. Go to a memorial service and you may find alcohol. Go to fundraising initiatives and step up to an open bar. Individuals between 18 and 21 are allowed to do everything but drink. Rather than enforce a double standard, why not educate about responsible drinking and making informed choices? Why not allow parents to share a beer or wine with them over dinner so that someone who cares for them can show how to enjoy alcohol in a social setting. And while you're at it, maybe "adults" can learn how to set a better example through their drinking so that the next generation may learn to follow in their footsteps. Until that happens, I raise my glass to you, my underage brethren, and drink to a better future.

Zamir Ahmed is from Las Cruces, N.M. and the Managing Editor.