|
| quote: | Originally posted by jad
However, it's understandable that this law has been implemented, considering the amount of alcohol related deaths attributed to this age group. |
Which would be what number, precisely?
I for one have had quite enough hyperbole in this thread. People making generalized statements that are either outright lies or - at best - lazy and false assumptions. May i ask that if anyone from this point on would like to throw out assertions regarding verifiable fact, that they actually go to the trouble of verifying these facts.
Back to the point - the 19-21 age group actually consistently records fewer alcohol related deaths and injuries, both as a raw score and as a percentage, here in Ontario, compared to those 21-35.
(Here's just one source attesting to this fact, but there are others, Might i suggest, oh, say, Statscan, as a reasonable starting point.
Source: http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents...11759e_2000.pdf)
Anything asserting to the contrary is selling something.
It's lazy, and it does nothing but look foolish.
| quote: | Originally posted by jad
Think of it this way, the legal drinking age is 19, which gives teenagers 3 years to learn how to handle their alcohol responsibly before they're able to have a drinks before driving.. seems like a logical buffer period. |
No, think of it this way - since the driving age is 16, people already have 3 years of driving experience to prep them for responsibility before they can legally drink at 19.
Since we know in fact that this age group gets in fewer alcohol related accidents anyway, when we put things this way, sure does sound reasonable, doesn't it?
|