<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Plugging Holes in Drinking Age Argument</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.youthrights.org/2006/10/20/plugging-holes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.youthrights.org/2006/10/20/plugging-holes/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: FightforRight</title>
		<link>http://blog.youthrights.org/2006/10/20/plugging-holes/#comment-313</link>
		<dc:creator>FightforRight</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 08:52:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.youthrights.org/2006/10/20/plugging-holes/#comment-313</guid>
		<description>Ah, yes, they seem to keep referring to the fact that deaths and accidents RELATED to alcohol go down when a 21 age is implemented. Notice I said related, it could mean that a drunk teenager or a drunk 40 something housewife could've caused the accident. Anyways, of course the numbers of deaths are going to go down when you make alcohol consumption illegal for a portion of the population. However, a far more logical step to cut drunk driving would be to totally prohibit alcohol. It would DRASTICALLY cut down on drunk driving, along with a lot of other alcohol related problems. I mean, trying (in vain) to keep alcohol from the portion of the population under 21 may cut down on alcohol related problems a slight bit, but total prohibition of alcohol would almost make them disappear. I'll have to find some statistics from the Prohibition era, but I'll bet I'm right. Personally, I wouldn't mind total prohibition, it'd make my life a lot easier on the road, plus the law wouldn't be based in ageism, which has no real logic to it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, yes, they seem to keep referring to the fact that deaths and accidents RELATED to alcohol go down when a 21 age is implemented. Notice I said related, it could mean that a drunk teenager or a drunk 40 something housewife could&#8217;ve caused the accident. Anyways, of course the numbers of deaths are going to go down when you make alcohol consumption illegal for a portion of the population. However, a far more logical step to cut drunk driving would be to totally prohibit alcohol. It would DRASTICALLY cut down on drunk driving, along with a lot of other alcohol related problems. I mean, trying (in vain) to keep alcohol from the portion of the population under 21 may cut down on alcohol related problems a slight bit, but total prohibition of alcohol would almost make them disappear. I&#8217;ll have to find some statistics from the Prohibition era, but I&#8217;ll bet I&#8217;m right. Personally, I wouldn&#8217;t mind total prohibition, it&#8217;d make my life a lot easier on the road, plus the law wouldn&#8217;t be based in ageism, which has no real logic to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
