Current Events > Is 21 the right legal age for smoking?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Is 21 too old? Just right?

Smoking should be illegal

Im old enough to smoke and thats all that matters.

Should be older. Kids are dumb lol Not that it would literally change anything anyway >_>

Smoking and drinking should be 18.

either that or raise age to enter military to 21

It's kind of cool in college too (and lots of places where young people work). Less so these days though. By the time you're in the professional workplace maybe, that's when it starts to be a bad look.

But saying you have to be, like, 25 to do something is pretty ridiculous as well.

Irony posted...

Smoking should be illegal

I mean I kind of agree but then there would grounds to ban alcohol too, you might want that but a lot of people don't. unless there is a critical difference

Irony posted...

Smoking should be illegal

on what grounds? i should be allowed to do whatever i want to my own body, the government should not protect me from myself.

IMO, the only thing "illegal" about tobacco is how the tobacco companies lied and mislead consumers about the addictive nature and the health risks.

On one hand, tobacco is the one narcotic I don't get. There is zero advantage to smoking other than it having a calming effect, but even that comes with time as the smoker adjusts to the act of smoking and in metabolizing the narcotic element of tobacco. It's mixed with ammonia and all other sorts of additives, it's proven to contribute towards/outright cause lung cancer, and the tobacco lobby is one of the largest and most evil lobbies in the American political system.

That being said, there are a few factors in play that I would say make 21 either a reasonable enough age to be able to smoke, or even a bit too old. Namely, the ability to serve in the military.

Like let's be clear, when you're considered old enough to sign a legally binding contract by yourself or to go overseas and potentially die for your country - you're an adult. In the eyes of the law, you are considered an adult when you do those things. Those are life-changing acts that, in theory, rely on an individual having an informed enough opinion to understand the potential consequences of those actions.

To be able to do those things, but to turn around and go "oh no you're too young to drink or smoke", seems remarkably pedantic, arbitrary and even condescending. You want to feed a kid into a meat grinder or saddle them with crippling debt before they're even out of high school, sure. But don't smoke or drink the silly juice, you don't have your big boy pants yet.

Granted? I'm influenced by the culture I grew up in. You can drink, smoke and gamble here in Australia as soon as you turn 18, and that's specifically because we decided in the early 20th century that if you're old enough to go to war, you're old enough to drink and smoke. It's a courtesy if nothing else - if you're going to make adult decisions, you're going to be treated like an adult. And it's not always a good thing, but it seems like the right thing to do in those circumstances.

So here's my take:

For health reasons, 21 is fine. But making people wait three more years after they're otherwise considered adults seems arbitrary, and maybe if you're allowing them to fight and die for your country, you can let them partake in these legal narcotics.

Or - the more radical opinion - raise the recruiting age to 21. Make it so that anyone under the age of 21 needs a parent or guardian to sign off on important documents like contracts. Justify the higher age cut-off to smoke.

Smoking is a public health issue, but it's also an issue of personal freedom. I've gone into this a ton in regards to my posts about legalising pot, where I'm pro-legalisation and pro-decriminalization but I'm critical of the potential negative health effects that weedbros say don't exist or aren't important. I regard tobacco in a similar way - there's clearly a public health concern, but over the past hundred years or so, the right to smoke has been a big thing in our culture and that right is tied closely to the legal age of adulthood. We live in an era where younger and younger people are being held to adult standards and being expected to make those informed decisions that are meant to be made by grown, level-headed and mature people. But the ability to drink or smoke hasn't caught up, and while that might be good for the sake of the body's continued development, it still signifies a lack of respect or a sort of hypocrisy in how we treat younger people. Give us blood for oil, but take a sip of bourbon and you're a delinquent.

In summary:

imo, the question is both health-focused and age-focused, and while 21+ is probably the better cut-off point, I'm of the opinion that drinking/smoking age should be tied to military recruitment age. Either lower the drinking/smoking age, or raise the age at which you can consent to join the military.

Should be able to start smoking at 14 imo.