[LibertyGirl77]

No, it depends on whether the people of the community/city/state he chooses to live in feel safe with allowing such young people adults between the ages of 18-20 to have access to such dangerous things legal (and I daresay enjoyable) substances.

I would hardly call a glass of wine with dinner 'dangerous.' Yet it is illegal for a 19-year-old wife and mom to comsume. It's illegal for an 18-year-old serviceman to relax with a beer. I realize some younger adults will abuse this right. But a lot of 35-, 45-, and even 65-year-olds abuse this right as well. It doesn't make it any better or worse when it's a young person doing it.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"But a lot of 35-, 45-, and even 65-year-olds abuse this right as well. It doesn't make it any better or worse when it's a young person doing it."

Using situation ethics to frame an argument is not a solid course of action.

[Texaggie79]

I completely agree. I just am saying that the people of a state/city/community have the constitutional ability to prohibit 18-20 year olds access to alcohol. They have the constitutional ability to prohibit alcohol completely even. The Constitution does not prevent stupid state laws.