Joining the armed services, voting, and legally getting married are all granted at the age of 18, but in order to drink or purchase alcohol you have to wait until you are 21. You can take someone else's life and even lose your life for your country, but after a long day out doing patrols and protecting our freedom, you can't unwind and drink a beer. You can elect the leader of our great nation, one who is going to make all the decision for our country, but yet the law tells you that you can't have a drink of alcohol unless you are 21 years of age. You can make all these life decisions at the age of 18 yet for some reason the law prohibits you from making the simple choice of having an alcoholic beverage.

One of the reasons I am interested in this topic is because I think it is one of the many injustices in our legal system. To me, it doesn't make much sense to have something as simple as alcohol be such a highly regulated thing. Especially in our society when you can do many other way more harmful and important things at a younger age. Also, having the age limit set at what it is to this day imposes abuse of the substance, and that creates a bigger problem. This affects me because I am currently under the legal age limit to drink alcohol: but I am of age to join the military, elect people for high positions in political office, and legalize a bond between two lovers. I just think it is an unfair law that is in place in our nation. There are plenty of other countries out there that have drinking ages of 18 years and even younger and alcohol doesn't pose nearly as much of a problem in their culture because it is accepted at such a young age. I think I am qualified because I am on the opposite side of the law on this one, and it affects me because I can do other things that are of more significance at my age. Although I am not allowed to sip a beer at the end of a long day. 

The first article I have chosen is an informative article I found on Google Scholars. It mainly lays out the statistics of having the legal drinking age at 21 and why it was raised to that I in the first place. It also touches on the subject of why all states decided to change the legal drinking age. With other states still being 18 at the time; teens could easily just cross borders and buy alcohol in a state with lower legal drinking age, so this really only created a bigger problem. That's why this article states how the federal government forced a law that was more of a punishment for states with a lower drinking age. This article was mainly informative so the major values were primarily unbiased. All three authors who added to this pieces all have PhDs relating to alcohol and health, so they are highly credible to add input on this topic.

My second source is an argumentative piece found on google. The author has a strong opinion to change the drinking age to 18 from 21. She brings up numerous points on how the higher drinking age is only creating more problems with underage drinking. She states that with a lower drinking age there should be other precautions to go with it, like educating the youth on alcohol so the abuse rate will go down. Coinciding with this, she brings up a point to compare that to driving a car and taking driving tests. Kids just don't get the keys to a car when they turn 16 and know all the rules of the road, why should alcohol be the same way? Also, she brings up a counterclaim to her point and how there are other factors that go into play that aren't just because of a lower drinking age. This article has a heavy bias towards lowering the drinking age. The author is credible for this topic because she is a professor at a well-established university, and she also has a PhD. She is also part of the department of public health at the University of Indiana. 

My final source is an article posted in the New York Times. The author makes a stance on lowering the drinking age to 18 from 21. She makes a point of how the 21 drinking age has done nothing but made illegal underage drinking more prevalent and dangerous. Younger kids, like freshman in college, who are around 18 and are surrounded by alcohol are abusing alcohol. They do this because they don't have proper education on the effects of alcohol. This leads to worse problems than if the legal drinking age was lowered. This has spiked the amount of binge drinking that has gone on. Then she begins to bring up other things that people can do at the age of 18 that hold more responsibility than drinking alcohol. She is a profound writer and journalist. She works for the New York Times and also teaches at a well-established university. This all gives her credibility to talk about this subject.

This question is arguable because there are two sides to this problem. You either want to lower the drinking age or you do not. Both sides have evidence that support your beliefs and you can argue both sides. The two arguments with bias both bring up what you can do at 18 and hold more responsibility than having a sip of alcohol. Also the informative piece brings up a reason why the age was raised, but the other sides refute that statement. They don't really effect my perspective because I agree with the majority of my sources. I don't think I will have to revise my research question at all because it is pretty specific and you can argue both sides.
