Support NeoGAF

[megalowho]

Yeah, totally. Teenagers should be able to start fucking their shit up and putting a burden on the healthcare system as early as possible! Freedumb!

I think the point is the age cutoffs are arbitrary, there's no "right" age when all people are mature enough to make adult decisions for themselves. These are the kind of arguments I'm in favor of personal liberty over state imposed restrictions. Plus if you're a smoker, your insurance premiums are higher.

 

[WriterGK]

Driving requires a license and at least liability insurance in most states.

True. But for me as an European I think its weird being such a difference in age in USA between driving and drinking.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Raise the age you can join the army next.

 

[Dishwalla]

Thnx for pointing that out. Makes no sense. So you can be 16/17 while driving a car but you can only rent them when you are 25....

The difference is in most places being 25 to rent a car is not a law, it's a guideline that the rental car industry has set up and agreed to. Believe the actual law is you have to be at least 18, but individual states can allow rental agencies to set the age restriction at their discretion.

 

[smokeymicpot]

Cause I think its weird to let kids drive when they are not even adult yet. And 18 is adult but in USA you can only start drinking at 21. Driving a car gives you a responsibility to yourself and others on the road. That and drinking/smoking both ought to be around 18




Thnx for pointing that out. Makes no sense. So you can be 16/17 while driving a car but you can only rent them when you are 25....

25 is mostly because at insurance stand point. The risk pool is way to high for 25 and under. They assume people drive way to crazy under 25.

Letting someone drive is a big step.

Smoking I am fine with it being 21 it sucks but as someone who smoked for years if I had a time machine I would have never picked it up. Let it be 21 makes it harder for kids to get it in high school.

 

[breakfuss]

I hope we can eventually phase out the popularity of alcohol like we have with tobacco.

Yea it worked in the 20s.

 

[Oberon]

True. But for me as an European I think its weird being such a difference in age in USA between driving and drinking.

As someone from Europe I find it weird that you can start drinking before driving over here. That's just asking for trouble.

 

[Dreadnought]

I hope we can eventually phase out the popularity of alcohol like we have with tobacco.

Alcohol has been part of human culture for thousands of years. It's not going away ever

 

[Fuchsdh]

I think the point is the age cutoffs are arbitrary, there's no "right" age when all people are mature enough to make adult decisions for themselves. These are the kind of arguments I'm in favor of personal liberty over state imposed restrictions. Plus if you're a smoker, your insurance premiums are higher.

Unfortunately higher insurance premiums don't actually wipe away the negative externalities caused by you smoking. If I didn't have to pay at all for the costs of healthcare for the obese, them saying to butt out would likewise make a lot more sense, but US taxpayers directly fund more than two-thirds of health care. That makes it yours and my and everyone else's problem.

That's the whole problem with the concept of rugged individualism and personal liberty over everything else. It's fundamentally incompatible with being part of a modern society. The reality is we're all paying to one degree or another for others' bad choices.

I agree that there is no real bright line between childhood and adulthood, immaturity and maturity, but that's something no law will ever be able to legislate. That doesn't mean it's not valuable to have those lines drawn (age of consent, et al.)

I hope we can eventually phase out the popularity of alcohol like we have with tobacco.

Alcohol consumption is not nearly as universal as people (and liquor commercials) make it out to be. Nearly two thirds of Americans either don't drink or drink infrequently. The problem is with rising heavy drinking among a comparatively small portion of the population.

 

[sphagnum]

Christie finally did something good.

 

[gutter_trash]

good, tobacco is bad for you

smoke breath is gross

smoke hair is gross.

smoke skin is gross

 

[firelogic]

Alcohol has been part of human culture for thousands of years. It's not going away ever

So has smoking.

 

[sssstententen]

Man why is anyone defending this. There are literally no good reasons to smoke tobacco. It even gives people AROUND you cancer. I personally think that is the biggest factor. If it didn't affect others around you by just using it, I'd say sure, go smoke as much as you want. If it gave you a high too, I'd understand the whole "government overreach" bull but there are no net benefits for tobacco. None.

 

[ERotIC]

Really just need a straight national ban on anyone born after X year from buying tobacco or e-cigs. Make selling to and buying for anything born after this year a very serious offense.

Using tobacco is just one of the most disgusting things people can do. Damages their health and everyone they come in contact with.

I hope we can eventually phase out the popularity of alcohol like we have with tobacco.

Oh, fuck off with that bullshit.

 

[BennyBlanco]

I hope we can eventually phase out the popularity of alcohol like we have with tobacco.

Really just need a straight national ban on anyone born after X year from buying tobacco or e-cigs. Make selling to and buying for anything born after this year a very serious offense.


Using tobacco is just one of the most disgusting things people can do. Damages their health and everyone they come in contact with.

We should also phase out fast food/ junk food too. It's very harmful to people who can't eat it in moderation and since people are idiots with no self control it's best to just do away with it entirely.

 

[zethren]

Just legalize pot and illegalize cigarettes. Do it.

 

[TickleMeElbow]

We should also phase out fast food/ junk food too. It's very harmful to people who can't eat it in moderation and since people are idiots with no self control it's best to just do away with it entirely.

Yeah obesity is killing more people than tobacco now.

 

[smokeymicpot]

Just legalize pot and illegalize cigarettes. Do it.

Cigarettes won't be illegal ever. Not for NJ especially since Atlantic City let's you smoke in a casino and legal pot won't happen until Christie leaves.

 

[megalowho]

Unfortunately higher insurance premiums don't actually wipe away the negative externalities caused by you smoking. If I didn't have to pay at all for the costs of healthcare for the obese, them saying to butt out would likewise make a lot more sense, but US taxpayers directly fund more than two-thirds of health care. That makes it yours and my and everyone else's problem.

That's the whole problem with the concept of rugged individualism and personal liberty over everything else. It's fundamentally incompatible with being part of a modern society. The reality is we're all paying to one degree or another for others' bad choices.

I agree that there is no real bright line between childhood and adulthood, immaturity and maturity, but that's something no law will ever be able to legislate. That doesn't mean it's not valuable to have those lines drawn (age of consent, et al.)

The government can't legislate poor decisions or harmful pleasures from the human experience - it's inherent in how we operate, socialize, and cope. The age guidelines you mention are already in place, along with government sponsored education and taxes to promote healthy decisions, both effective tools.

There will always be inefficiency in how our tax dollars are spent. Would you advocate for complete prohibition of fatty foods, tobacco, alcohol, and other vices? State mandated exercise to promote heart health? Doing so through legislation would lift the overall heath and healthcare tax burden on our society. Where do you draw the line there, especially when the state treats its citizens as adults once they reach 18?

 

[Dishwalla]

Cigarettes won't be illegal ever. Not for NJ especially since Atlantic City let's you smoke in a casino and legal pot won't happen until Christie leaves.

Also it's easier to justify smoking cigarettes in the workplace(in designated areas) than pot. The amount of people that still smoke at their jobs is really high.

 

[AlexFlame116]

I'm....actually okay with this.

EDIT: Scratch that. I'm very okay with this.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Seems like it would be better to just raise the vice tax, but I'm basically all for nanny-state stuff like this anyways so I'd support this.

 

[jtb]

Fine by me.

 

[Earthbound64]

Raise the age you can join the army next.

Yes, New Jersey will get right on that.

Raise the age you can join the army next.

Wouldn't that be more of a federal thing, when this is a state by state case?

Seriously, what a mis-thought out first post.

 

[Caddywompus]

Works for me. Cut off the youth as much as possible so they never pick it up.

Except this will probably have the opposite effect on the youth. The longer you keep something away from them the more they are likely to try it.

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if there is some shady alliterative motives we'll learn later that NJ raised the age in hopes to generate more tax revenue from all the new smokers by the age hike.

This sucks for those 18 year olds already addicted, doubt the government does anything to help them, they just created more law breaking adolescents.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

I think the point is the age cutoffs are arbitrary, there's no "right" age when all people are mature enough to make adult decisions for themselves. These are the kind of arguments I'm in favor of personal liberty over state imposed restrictions. Plus if you're a smoker, your insurance premiums are higher.

Absolutely personal liberty should come first in most cases but we're talking about something that literally has no social benefit. Smoking rates have decreased dramatically in the U.S. and you have to believe these kinds of efforts have helped.

21 is not completely arbitrary; there is some scientific basis, though as you said people mature differently.

As for higher insurance premiums: those don't actually relieve any burden on the healthcare system.

 

[Ri'Orius]

Cigarettes are gross but I'm not a fan, especially for e-cigs. And when NJ finally legalizes weed and this applies.

Don't legal states already use 21 as the weed age? I know Washington does.

I mean, it's more comparable to alcohol than tobacco, so it makes sense to tie it to the booze age.

 

[SecretMoblin]

Don't legal states already use 21 as the weed age? I know Washington does.

I mean, it's more comparable to alcohol than tobacco, so it makes sense to tie it to the booze age.

Yeah, 21 is the age for possession/use/cultivation. I'm in favor of setting the bar for all three (cannabis, tobacco, and alcohol) at 18.

 

[smokeymicpot]

Also it's easier to justify smoking cigarettes in the workplace(in designated areas) than pot. The amount of people that still smoke at their jobs is really high.

That too. Cigarettes aren't going anywhere yet.

 

[Ashby]

Should honestly just raise the age of adulthood in general at this point. People are children into their early 20s nowadays.

 

[WriterGK]

As someone from Europe I find it weird that you can start drinking before driving over here. That's just asking for trouble.

I am 30 and still don't have driving license. But I can understand why its more dire to get one the United stats with all those thousand of miles between states and such.

 

[grandjedi6]

Smoking tobacco is stupid but this law's not going to stop kids from smoking anymore than it stops them from drinking or smoking pot. Especially since the biggest driving force of cigarettes these days is poverty, not youth.

 

[Marmaladefire]

Should honestly just raise the age of adulthood in general at this point. People are children into their early 20s nowadays.

Can't push 18 year olds into signing onto predatory student loans if you do that.

Making the driving age higher would also never work because it would fuck up the lives of every teenager in the suburbs/rural areas of the country. This is fine though, as long as we aren't giving them petty charges or whatever for being caught with tobacco at 19

 

[Seth Enosh]

Really just need a straight national ban on anyone born after X year from buying tobacco or e-cigs. Make selling to and buying for anything born after this year a very serious offense.


Using tobacco is just one of the most disgusting things people can do. Damages their health and everyone they come in contact with.

E-cigs are massively different. Is there any scientific research showing that e-cigs users "damage everyone they come in contact with"?

Banning smoking tobacco just as the nation finally is getting around to legalizing smoking marijuana doesn't really make much sense anyway, they are both smoking.

 

[Fuchsdh]

The government can't legislate poor decisions or harmful pleasures from the human experience - it's inherent in how we operate, socialize, and cope. The age guidelines you mention are already in place, along with government sponsored education and taxes to promote healthy decisions, both effective tools.

There will always be inefficiency in how our tax dollars are spent. Would you advocate for complete prohibition of fatty foods, tobacco, alcohol, and other vices? State mandated exercise to promote heart health? Doing so through legislation would lift the overall heath and healthcare tax burden on our society. Where do you draw the line there, especially when the state treats its citizens as adults once they reach 18?

It's a thorny issue. But cigarettes have no actual nutritional or health value, so it's a lot easier to argue for prohibition or increased intervention.

There's also the question of how much actual harm we're talking about. Increased sugar consumption is linked to something like a 2-5x increase in things like heart disease or diabetes. That increase simply can't compare to how much smoking gooses your chance for cancer.

Finally, controlled substances are generally legislated based on the ubiquity of the product, its potential harm and capacity for abuse, and the negative externalities associated with it. There's certainly arguments that sugar itself meets these requirements and should be controlled, but it's nowhere near as plain as the problems with hard drugs or smoking. The point is, you can be against a nanny state while still thinking we should crack down on smoking, because we're talking about two entirely different case situations here.

(And here's where I also posit that sugar itself has been unfairly demonized for single-handedly causing the obesity epidemic, despite the fact it's still continuing unabated even as the US's sugar intake has decreased. It's clearly not the only factor; ironically some researchers have suggested one fact as increased drug use with weight gain side effects alongside lower smoking rates which tends to cause weight loss.)

 

[Dirca]

I hope we can eventually phase out the popularity of alcohol like we have with tobacco.

Lol right.

 

[Seth Enosh]

It's a thorny issue. But cigarettes have no actual nutritional or health value, so it's a lot easier to argue for prohibition or increased intervention.

There's also the question of how much actual harm we're talking about. Increased sugar consumption is linked to something like a 2-5x increase in things like heart disease or diabetes. That increase simply can't compare to how much smoking gooses your chance for cancer.

Finally, controlled substances are generally legislated based on the ubiquity of the product, its potential harm and capacity for abuse, and the negative externalities associated with it. There's certainly arguments that sugar itself meets these requirements and should be controlled, but it's nowhere near as plain as the problems with hard drugs or smoking. The point is, you can be against a nanny state while still thinking we should crack down on smoking, because we're talking about two entirely different case situations here.

(And here's where I also posit that sugar itself has been unfairly demonized for single-handedly causing the obesity epidemic, despite the fact it's still continuing unabated even as the US's sugar intake has decreased. It's clearly not the only factor; ironically some researchers have suggested one fact as increased drug use with weight gain side effects alongside lower smoking rates which tends to cause weight loss.)

Nicotine (cigarettes) is an appetite suppressant so it probably has some health value by stopping people from getting obese. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3195407/ which actually states "In conclusion, across the population, nicotine has undoubtedly been the most effective long-term weight control drug in use over the past century. Unfortunately, nicotine is delivered to most people via cigarette smoke, which is extraordinarily toxic, resulting in the premature death of half of those who are lifelong smokers."

 

[SecretMoblin]

Smoking tobacco is stupid but this law's not going to stop kids from smoking anymore than it stops them from drinking or smoking pot. Especially since the biggest driving force of cigarettes these days is poverty, not youth.

Yes. And it's much easier to have puritanical regulations and taxes on vices than to work on addressing the two major issues that associate most strongly with poor health choices: poverty and a lack of quality education.

 

[sangreal]

When they made it 19 it made sense since it would help get cigarettes out of schools (as many seniors are 18), but I don't see any point to making it 21. I guess it might make it slightly harder for 15 year olds to buy, but the places selling to them don't care anyway

 

[nabe_shogun]

The difference is in most places being 25 to rent a car is not a law, it's a guideline that the rental car industry has set up and agreed to. Believe the actual law is you have to be at least 18, but individual states can allow rental agencies to set the age restriction at their discretion.

This. I rented a car in Washington when I was 24. Though because I was under 25 I had to pay extra.


I also have no problem with this smoking age increase. Smoking is dumb anyway.

 

[Regiruler]

I hope we can eventually phase out the popularity of alcohol like we have with tobacco.

That'll be really, really hard. It'll take 50 years at the minimum.

 

[Peltz]

Eh whatever. I'm actually fine with this.

 

[WriterGK]

In hindsight I think I might be wrong. 16/17 and 21(drinking) is okay. But doesn't matter the age restriction people will always be doing it.

 

[Geno Breaker]

name 1 benefit of cigarettes

You look cool. B^)

Spoiler

jk

 

[SallyIsNow]

I hate that it raises the limit on all smoking paraphernalia. Can't even buy papers or lighters at my nearest convenience store.

 

[SaviourMK2]

This is a very strange feeling for me.

It's funny because Chris Christie essentially has anyone under 21 and over 18 out for his blood, but at the same time, it's funny because it's not like he'll suffer political repercussions for this. At the SAME time I despise smoking.

I guess I'm just simply laughing at all parties in this.

 

[sangreal]

This is a very strange feeling for me.

It's funny because Chris Christie essentially has anyone under 21 and over 18 out for his blood, but at the same time, it's funny because it's not like he'll suffer political repercussions for this. At the SAME time I despise smoking.

I guess I'm just simply laughing at all parties in this.

The smoking age was already 19 in NJ, not 18 FYI. So the only people affected by this are 19 and 20 year olds