A number of college and university presidents have asked for a debate about the age 21 drinking law.  Their rationale is that the law has not curtailed underage drinking and, indeed, it has taken drinking between the ages of 18 and 21 "underground."

Good idea.  I'd add another argument, that is touched on in this editorial.  When a common activity is criminalized, the respect for the law decreases, creating two societal negatives:  1) Normal people become more comfortable violating the law; and 2) Criminal behavior - even more serious criminal behavior - is normed.

When seatbelt laws were first introduced, people were told that they would not be stopped for seatbelt violations.  Opponents to seatbelt laws argued that we would have police officers distracted from efforts to control dangerous behavior because they were enforcing seatbelt laws.  If you were stopped for another traffic infraction, you could also then be cited for a seatbelt violation.  Today, we have come all the way to "click-it-or-ticket" where efforts are made by the nanny state to make sure you have not engaged the illegal act of strapping yourself in to the vehicle.

Drinking alcohol is not a criminal activity.  Three of my five children enjoy sips of dad's beer - some enjoy bigger sips than others.  At Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter and other family gatherings a glass of wine is tipped by anyone who wants one.  Call me a criminal.  Call the authorities.

I consider it my responsibility to educate my children about responsible drinking (don't chill a red) rather than leaving them to learn at college or from friends.  Cheers.