At last, sanity: John McCardell, the president emeritus of Middlebury College, argues that the drinking age of 21 actually fosters irresponsible drinking, and says that the drinking age should be lowered to 18.

Well…yes.

I remember all too well when that ostensible practitioner of limited government, Ronald Reagan, started forcing states to raise their drinking age or lose federal highway monies. I’ve never quite been able to reconcile the idea that you can send 18-year-olds off to war to kill people but they can’t have a beer. And I’ve always thought that if you teach kids how to drink moderately—as, say, the French do—you can actually cut down on alcohol abuse and stupid drunken accidents.

McCardell thinks that, on campuses, a drinking age of 21 infantilizes students, encouraging immature behavior with alcohol and disrespect for law generally. Furthermore, an “enforcement only” policy makes school administrations adversaries of students and interferes with their attempts to acquaint students with pertinent information, such as the neurological effects of alcohol on young brains. He notes that 18-year-olds have a right to marry, adopt children, serve as legal guardians for minors and purchase firearms from authorized dealers, and are trusted with the vote and military responsibilities. So, he says, it is not unreasonable to think that they can, with proper preparation, be trusted to drink.

Just to repeat:

McCardell thinks that, on campuses, a drinking age of 21 infantilizes students….

Judging from the item below, he’s either right, or that’s just the way students like it….