smoking age is 21 now in California

[Csihar]

Originally Posted by Chaboo_Cleric [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I agree

Well, my ego needs no more. Close thread!

Originally Posted by Chaboo_Cleric [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I agree, but I still don't agree with the age 21 dispute on alcohol and cigarettes.

Seriously though, can you elaborate? I ams curious.

If you agree on creating a balance do you have any suggestions how it could be handled better? I don't think we agree to the same degree but I am of the opinion that the law is imperfect to say the least. And I don't like how it impedes the freedom of the small group of people who can handle it.

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by Chaboo_Cleric [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I agree, but I still don't agree with the age 21 dispute on alcohol and cigarettes.

I agree 21 is too high. it should have always been 18. You can go to war, have children,get married, vote, consent to having someone taken from life support but you cant decide if you want to drink or smoke. I always found it ironic that Edward Bernays had devoted the latter part of his life to anti-smoking campaigns seeing as he was instrumental in changing public perceptions of the taboo of female smokers.

Tobacco is really strange. The lobbying only protects the interest of the big tobacco corps that create literally poisonous products. Tobacco in its natural form isnt that bad and has been ascribed to some health benefits but the crap they mass produce is toxic. We recall faulty hand brakes but sell poison to people. I think tobacco should be decommercialized. People should be allowed to grow it or smoke it but I dont think we should allow the sale of it commercially.

Nazi Drs were the first to recognize a link between smoking and lung cancer and anti-tobacco movements were huge in Germany. They were the first ones to enact smoking bans in official buildings and such. Damn those evil Nazis trying to save people from lung cancer.

[Csihar]

And yes:

Originally Posted by Cecily

Also, arguing for freedom and extremely addictive products in the same breath is pretty funny.

If you use this wonderful product as intended you will become addicted. By definition that impedes your freedom.
You can be all short-sighted (and wrong) and simply write it off as "lol just will power it bruv".

[Chaboo_Cleric]

Originally Posted by Csihar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And yes:



If you use this wonderful product as intended you will become addicted. By definition that impedes your freedom.
You can be all short-sighted (and wrong) and simply write it off as "lol just will power it bruv".

Addiction is a normal thing in life. You can tote Hillary Clinton on her position against Vid Games. Just because something is addicting doesn't mean I need the government to make it more difficult to either A: Attain , or B: gouge me with taxes or C: Penalize me. There will be ramifications with the new 21 law to smoke in California. More harassment from Police ( to start) and the list goes on... This new " Underage smoking", in California is a big deal. Indefinitely, the state will make more money with this law, as oppose to just collecting the ginormous tax on cigarettes. Overall, if people want to smoke they are going to anyway. It's the same thing with drinking. I however, don't want the government playing Mommy and Daddy for me or anyone. The more government control and rule making, the less freedom we really have. That is a fact.

[myriverse]

The argument is likely the seeming illogic in the disparity between certain privileges afforded to and certain responsibilities demanded of them. If we're going to consider a person adult enough to serve life/death sentences, serve in the military, make babies and demand they support them, then there's no reason they shouldn't be able to abuse the eff out of their own bodies.

[Csihar]

Originally Posted by myriverse [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The argument is likely the seeming illogic in the disparity between certain privileges afforded to and certain responsibilities demanded of them. If we're going to consider a person adult enough to serve life/death sentences, serve in the military, make babies and demand they support them, then there's no reason they shouldn't be able to abuse the eff out of their own bodies.

That is something I can agree with entirely.

[Chaboo_Cleric]

People want the government to intervene with their problems. What they don't realize is they just stripped away more of their freedom with every involvement. They also line the pockets of these government officials and grow government to a bigger machine than it already is. People need to wake up. Government is not the answer to our problems.

[JurisDictum]

Maybe people shouldn't be put in combat situations until they are 21. The truth is though, they don't want you to do a lot of thinking when you are following orders and fighting. So the young men often work out fine.

[JurisDictum]

Brain doesn't fully develop the frontal lobe until 24-28. So we can pretend that 18 year old is as much of an adult as a 30 year old...but it isn't true.

[Baler]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Brain doesn't fully develop the frontal lobe until 24-28. So we can pretend that 18 year old is as much of an adult as a 30 year old...but it isn't true.

When I was a child people told me drinking coffee would stunt my growth.
I'm 6' 3" and drink coffee to this day.