There is not a single reason for any human to get access to alcohol to drink.
Edit 1:
Just to add the people who say that banning does not work is like saying banning guns does not work because people is going to find a way to get them or like saying we should not have speed limits because it does not prevent people from speeding. (Their opinions does not make sense to me)
There needs to be some means for people who cannot-otherwise reach, to experience/release, emotion, to do-so.
Multiple times in my life it is the only method that has worked to reach some emotion ( pain, recently grief ), that is too locked-out for me to experience otherwise.
It, itself, isn’t inherently-bad or inherently-good, it is inherently costly, in-that it wears-down a person’s health, and it enables ( due to the way it’s culturally-identified/used ) much harm, but anybody who’s read about the difference between binge-culture ( some anglo-Celt cultures, just look for a bar with the word “Arms” in its name ) vs the French-style have-a-glass-with-our-meal style, and the difference in assaults, etc, it becomes stinkingly obvious that it’s a cultural-thing, not just alcohol-itself that is the problem.
There is research on criminality as an outlet, a means of blowing-off-steam.
1 item in that research was on prison-culture, and how you had to allow the inmates to have some slack, XOR your “tightening-the-screws” on them forced them, predictably as clockwork, into rioting.
I hadn’t understood that.
The problem is human-nature.
Human-nature requires the ability to “break the rules”, to some degree, so therefore responsible government’s obligation becomes … making it so that the breaking-the-rules causes as little harm as possible.
I’d outright criminalize alcohol & marijuana before age 21, because of the road-slaughter than under-21 drivers do while having alcohol in 'em, and because of the amplification-of-psychosis that marijuana does to any forming-brain, and the hell-cost of the amplified schizophrenia resultant from that.
However, I’d have SacredHelper, aka Peyote, legal, if treated with care.
Not as a street drug, but as a means of asking another-dimension-of-mind for a lesson in one’s growing-up.
So, it is both the objective-harm/cost and it is the relationship/process that matters, to me, based on the evidence.
Just an opinion, tho.