I think a problem this article doesn't touch on is the assumption that there is a baseline that every person will reach at some point. For example, we say that young people are less mature and should be limited in their privileges. This may be true individually, but it doesn't really speak to the idea that maybe someone who still has time to mature at 16 may be more mature than someone at 30 will ever be.
I'm not quite sure what the proper resolution is here. Because it is too difficult to measure each person individually it may be better to simply guarantee a certain age where someone is an "adult."
I find it very difficult to defend the law that prevents drinking until 21 but allows driving, which is subject to the same pressures and distractions as drinking (with the added consequence that driving can cause harm to others as well).
and drinking doesn't? I think you need to visit an AA meeting and hear those guys explain how much harm they did to others. One may argue the mental scarring alcohol causes is worse than the physical damage cars do, especially considering there are more alcoholics than crash victims.
I'm not quite sure what the proper resolution is here. Because it is too difficult to measure each person individually it may be better to simply guarantee a certain age where someone is an "adult."
I find it very difficult to defend the law that prevents drinking until 21 but allows driving, which is subject to the same pressures and distractions as drinking (with the added consequence that driving can cause harm to others as well).