What do you think are the societal reasons in the US that the age of consent and the age where you can legally consume alcohol is so high compared with for example driving a car? Or that you can go start killing people as a soldier before you are allowed to drink.

Well I can answer the last question: they want you to kill them sober, so you have a better aim and not waste the bullets.

The different ages for different things in different countries are always arbitrary. There are social and historical reasons that cause this, and in the case of driving even geographical.

The average American kid has access to a car easier, in a vast and relatively empty country with wide and relatively empty roads. And above all, you desperately need the car to get around. The same rules apply in Australia. Europe on the other hand is crowded, with many overpopulated cities, narrow winding roads, and failry reliable public transport. Overall, there is an anti-car policy in the EU and a pro-car policy in the US, which means the last thing we want over here is even more drivers in our already crowded streets.

Similarly, American society condones violence a lot more than sex (and the exact opposite happens on this side of the Atlantic). Your dad will show you how to shoot a rifle at 14, but will freak out if he hears you had sex at 16 (especially if you’re a girl).

And similarly, alcohol (which my grandfather forced down my throat when I was 7) is supposed to be a bad thing in America, whereas Europeans are more lineant towards it. Same goes for smoking, which in Europe is theoretically not allowed for under 18s, but I could buy the cigarettes at any shop when I was 11 and nobody ever asked me for ID.

The reason for the aqe restrictions for alcohol is that teenagers’ brains are not completely developed. The last part to develop is the ability to see the consequences of decisions.

Alcohol is a controlled substance, because it has known dangers. Sale is restricted even for adults.

As for the discrepancy between military service and drinking, beyond what jack mentioned, the military is a very structured environment in which young people serve under strict rules of conduct. Often stricter than at home.

@Marina
then why do you let them drive cars where their decisions endanger others?
Or why have the death penalty for minors when they clearly can nut bear full responsibility for their actions?

@ragingloli I agree with Jack’s reasons about the driving. It is pretty necessary in our country. That said, there are clear statistics showing the dangers of teen driving and many states have begun restricting their driving privileges (certain hours, number of passengers, etc.).

As to the death penalty, I said teenagers have not finished developing the complex concepts of measuring potential consequences against potential actions. They certainly know right from wrong when it comes to killing someone else long before.

@Marina
their underdeveloped brain also impedes the sense of “right and wrong”

No, scientific studies clearly demonstrate the age at which children can determine the difference between right and wrong.

“By middle childhood, if all goes well, children begin to seek social approval. This shows up as “I won’t do this because I want people to like me,” and then “I won’t do this because it is against the law.” By 8, children generally understand that retaliation is wrong, and their brain’s so-called judgment circuit, centered in the prefrontal cortex, approaches maturity. In the final stage, one that even many adults fall short of, abstract ideals guide moral reasoning. Ideally, the adolescent recognizes a social contract (“I won’t do it because I am obliged not to”) and something like universal rights (“I won’t do this because it is simply wrong”).”

Source

Understanding the concepts does not imply full control over the execution of these concepts. They may understand and accept such social contracts, but their not fully developed brains will interfere with the assessment of specific situations and the execution. The time of puberty reinforces this situation even more, and there is no clear cut off date on when it ends.

The reasons are cultural/historical, I believe. To whit:
The Puritans who founded America were rather severe Protestants (Calvinists of a sort); as such, they decried intoxicating substances (as well as dancing and fornicating), which they felt distracted the mind from God’s work and led to sin…

The (now defunct) Prohibition Act, and the so-called “blue laws” of Connecticut (which prohibit the sale of alcohol on Sunday, “the Lord’s day”) are remnants of this attitude.

From a more current perspective, I believe maintaining a higher drinking than driving age is meant, in part, to reduce the frighteningly high incidence of teen involvement in car accidents, many of them caused by drunk driving.