The Drinking Age of 21, should be lowered to 18.

This is a topic I enjoy debating, and I am thankful to be on the Con stance. So going on to the actual debate portion, For maximum clarity, I will refute the Pro stance and then present a few points advocating the Con stance. Pro- 1. To every argument there must be claim/ warrant/ and impact. and while this argument my opponent is presenting here has all three of these essential components, they don't do much to prove that we should lower the legal drinking age. He is simply saying "they do it anyway, so let them do it" however it is not the most morally acceptable thing to do. If there where a spree of murders would we emphasize this laissez faire attitude? absolutely not! so unless my opponent provides a better reason to advocate his stance, we must not accept it; we must preserve moral integrity, as it makes us human. 2. Here, my opponent is making the same exact argument in a new guise; now he's implying that we need to lower the drinking age to 18 simply "they're getting caught" if some-one close to you was consistently getting caught for doing something wrong, you would not just say, "Well legalize what they're doing so they wouldn't get in trouble" you would try and help them. the fact that these under-age drinkers are continuing to drink is not a sign that we need to just lower the drinking age, but it is a sign we must more closely enforce the laws regarding drink. as for drunk driving; it will always happen, in fact if we give 18 year old's the ability to legally drink it will just raise the drunken driving rate. People will see that it's legal for them to drink (these people who are not yet fully developed mentally) and they after drinking, they'll drive anyway. 3. This is also a fallacy, it's a simple truth that Drinking is considered taboo. It's not something deemed very societally appropriate. humans are creatures of rebellion, and lowering the drinking age would only make the forbidden fruit more appetizing because these teenagers would see their friends who where only slightly older than them doing it, and they too would have this desire to consume alcohol. there would be no change for the better; only change for the worse. and so now that we see the Pro stance does not work, let's proceed to the Con's stance Con- for the sake of Character usage, I will not be sourcing my points with evidence. but if so requests I will post my sources in the comment section. 1. The brain is not fully developed until the ages of between 21 and 25- Accordingly these young adults won't be able to drink responsibly, their having a buzz will prohibit proper self-control. I am not trying bash those younger than the age of 21, I fall under this category. I am simply saying that the human mind does not reach complete cognitive development until between these ages. so by allowing people younger than the age of 21 to drink alcohol, you ultimately doom them to make poor decision. 2. Newly legal adults need time to adapt and adjust to living on their own before being allowed such a vice into their lives- This is true universally and can be applied to almost any situation, if all power is give to a person at once, they have no reason to practice self-control. In the United States, at the age of 18, people are considered adults. but not yet do they have the full rights of this title but in every step of human growth, we inch into the next level there are still many restrictions they must adhere. not to mention at the age of eighteen many people are still high school. by voting for the Pro, we allow our children to exposed to alcohol. 3. Alcohol kills brain cells which stunt mental development- between ages 18-20 and even beyond that many adults go to college to better themselves, alcohol limits them, and lessens their potential. (I spoke briefly about this in my first point) and despite what my opponent would have you believe in his first point, college is not some huge party where every waking moment is flooding with alcohol. it's all a matter of who you surround yourself with. when I was in high school, I didn't drink. it wasn't even a problem. Now that I'm in college I can assure you, that avoiding alcohol hasn't been much of a problem here either. and so the Conclusion, my Coup De Gras; we must look toward the Con stance. the Pro does not solve for any kind of issue by lowering the Legal Drinking age, nor does he provide any kind of moral reasoning for why it ought to be lowered. essentially he provides absolutely no reason for why you need to vote for the Him. while on the inverse I show how lowering the Legal Drinking age would have an adverse affect on society. I talk about human development and show only a few of the many great implications that would come with Lowering the Legal Drinking Age. With all of this in mind, in order to protect society you must vote for con. I hand it back over to my opponent, here's to a wonderful debate!