Do you feel that the legal smoking age in the United States should be 21 instead

1. 77

   jaydawg808posted 9 years ago

   Do you feel that the legal smoking age in the United States should be 21 instead of 18?
   
   Hawaii will become the first U.S. state to raise the legal smoking age to 21. How do you feel about this?
   
   

   replyreport
2. 78

   cathylynn99posted 9 years ago

   brains aren't fully developed until about age 25. before that, we all tend to be impulsive and not make the best decisions. getting the smoking age closer to maturity would allow  some who can't sneak their parents' smokes to be able to make a more informed decision about something that would be likely to affect them financially and healthwise for many years.

   replyreport
3. 90

   lisavollrathposted 9 years ago

   I'm torn. While I know that brains are not fully developed until the mid-twenties, we let people register to vote, and enlist in the various branches of the service, at 18. Doesn't it seem strange that someone can fight and die for their country, yet is not allowed to smoke or drink?
   
   I think we have to decide a definitive age that people become adults, and at that age, they should be allowed to make their own decisions about everything, including when to smoke and drink. Whether that means raising the age of majority, or not changing the smoking laws, I'm not sure.

   replyreport
4. 71

   dashingscorpioposted 9 years ago

   I don't think it will make much difference.
   Teens who want to smoke will continue to smoke.
   The irony in Hawaii is the legal age of consent to have sex is only 1i6.
   Ultimately most "sin laws"  don't prevent people from doing what they want to do. Marijuana laws never stopped anyone from getting pot.

   replyreport
5. 75

   Besarienposted 9 years ago

   First off, Happy New Year! It is interesting that no one has taken up the argument of parental rights. At one time, any discussion of this nature would have involved a substantial group of people who would have believed that they knew their own kids better than the government did and that it should be left up to parents what or what not their kids could do, and at what ages. If there weren't so many terrible parents around, there is logic in this, since different kids develop at different rates. However I'm not a parent's rights advocate. If I can't be a good parent to my son ever, for whatever reason, I WANT the government or somebody to step in and take him away from me, please.
   
   As everyone here is no doubt aware, being an adult doesn't mean making perfect decisions every time. it means making your own mistakes, dealing with the consequences, and hopefully learning those hard lessons the first time, instead of having to repeat them.
   
   Anyhow, I'm with Lisa. Pick an age and call an adult an adult. 18 seems like a good balance between full brain development (which a healthy brain doesn't need to determine right from wrong) and puberty. My son is 16. He has had responsibilities, consequences, and practice in making his own decisions and living with them since he was wee. I feel confident that in two more years he won't be all that much worse at it, than he is right now.

   replyreport
6. 65

   WordCrafter09posted 9 years ago

   From what I've seen, many kids kind of bide their time until they're 18 (that "no-longer-a-minor" age), and once they get to 18 they, to one extent or another, get a little carried away with having passed that 18th birthday.  Of course, kids who didn't give a hoot about what was legal or what their parents allowed don't always worry as much about getting to 18.  I mean the ones who care, for the most part, about what their parents think and/or the law.
   
   It was a long time ago, but when I was between mid-teens and mid-twenties it was common for many young people to smoke, say, when they were out with others who were smoking, or to have the occasional couple/few cigarettes but generally remain non-smokers the rest of the time and forever.  Smoking doesn't become a habit unless someone allows it to be.  Even then, though, it may not become a nicotine addiction unless it goes from easily managed (and "empty") habit/practice to something the person eventually relies on for "mood or stress reasons".  That aside, I'm not sure how many people there are who found their first cigarette a pleasant experience.
   
   In any case, considering what 18-year-olds are allowed/required to do, no, I don't think the age should be moved up.  With the state-of-affairs with regard to what teens do these days; and with the state-of-affairs with regard to the numbers of people using all kinds of stuff that affects their ability to think straight, see straight, and/or operate machinery (including vehicles);  I just think everyone has bigger fish to fry than worrying about who smokes at 17 versus 20 or 22.
   
   Keep in mind that  unless someone sets their house or the woods on fire through careless smoking; or, I suppose if they have a health condition that will immediately and drastically be made worse by smoking in one's teens/early twenties; health problems associated with smoking are nowhere near as immediate and/or life-ruining as some of the other things people decide to do when they're young, "young-at-mind", and/or just generally not very good at making the wisest choices.
   
   Again, our whole culture has bigger, bigger, fish to fry than this particular issue.  Besides, address the other sources of worry, horror, and stress and maybe a lot fewer people will even want/need to smoke in the first place.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      we can address those larger issues AND this. false dichotomy logical fallacy operates in your answer. having ten years taken off your life via an addiction is serious.

      replyreport
   2. 65

      WordCrafter09posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, it's serious; but the question/my answer say nothing about who will/won't quit (for example, at age twenty-five, or even who starts at - whatever - fifteen, for example).  It asks about 21 versus 18.

      replyreport
7. 64

   wmhoward4posted 9 years ago

   Smoking costs this country so much money. When we do recover, the money goes to lawyers and politicals and NOT lung cancer victims. Jack it up to 25 or more. If you are dumb enough to start when you are an adult, so be it. BUT, make it so the rest of us do not have to pay when they get sick from their choice.

   replyreport
8. 51

   bradmasterOCcalposted 9 years ago

   Why should smoking be legal in the first place.
   The health risks are well known, and they have been known for a half a century.

   replyreport