Yeah this is bullshit. An 18 year old in contemporary society is fully aware of the dangers of smoking and is old enough to know the consequences of his actions. I think tobacco is a bad habit and no one should pick it up, I'm saying this as a smoker, but adults should have the freedom to make bad decisions. If theres any argument for this its to maybe relieve the burden on the health system down the road.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hawaii to be first state to raise smoking age to 21
- Thread starter Log4Girlz
- Start date
- Status
CadetMahoney
Member
gotta feed more into the for-profit prison industrial complex/
start off with that 3 strikes thing and make smoking one of those.
start off with that 3 strikes thing and make smoking one of those.
This, my good sir, is an incorrect assumption. Banning things do not suddenly increase the usage of said things. What changes is the consequences (like jail time and increased crime) after a ban, that creates more problems. The best way to do such a ban is not by punishment, but by prevention and rehabilitation (depending on the ban and severity of the offense
I don't agree with a cigarette ban, just to be clear, just saying what you said is incorrect.
Poop!
Member
Right, in most states smoking is a habit of the old or the poor. So raising the prices stops them from smoking as it makes it unaffordable. Cigarettes in New York city are somewhere near $15 a pack now.
DiscoJer
Member
Any interaction with the police can result in death. (I wish that weren't true, but that's just reality)
Adding more reasons for police to stop/arrest people is only going to result in more deaths.
If you want to stop people from smoking, educate them, don't ban it. Promote e-cigarettes, which appear to be harmless (despite the hysteria some spout).
Adding more reasons for police to stop/arrest people is only going to result in more deaths.
If you want to stop people from smoking, educate them, don't ban it. Promote e-cigarettes, which appear to be harmless (despite the hysteria some spout).
shira
Member
They tried that here. People just buy illegal cigarettes, import them from states with cheaper prices, tax-exempt cigarettes etc
Doesn't work
Gray Matter
Member
This is how I feel. We live in a day and age where everyone knows the risks involved with smoking, which surprises me when I see people smoking.
Any interaction with a human being can result in death. Guess I shouldn't go outside. Or drive for that matter... A LOT of people die just driving to work or to say... a gas station. This new law at least makes it so 18-20 year old don't have to drive to buy cigs and on their way die in a car crash.
teruterubozu
Member
You can always suck a volcano if you want some fumes.
Aren't we already doing this? Smoking is banned in most public areas ( depends on the country of course) and it's common knowledge that they're pretty bad for you.
What more can be done?
The decisons here is either pay a lot of money to damadge you own health, or you don't do it. Of course you can say that's the same thing with alcool or unhealthy food, but in this case you can't give the excuse that you like it because of the taste.
Vincent Grayson
Member
I lived in Hawaii for 4 years, and I gotta say, it was kinda fucking awesome how little smoking I saw while I lived there. I'd grown up on the east coast, and people here just smoke wherever and whenever they wanted for the most part.
Hawaii seemed to be a lot more restrictive about where you could smoke, and as such, was a much more pleasant environment over all.
I'm not sure I agree with this particular law, but any further push to make smoking something increasingly rare in public is fine by me. People should do it at home, where they don't subject anyone else to it.
Hawaii seemed to be a lot more restrictive about where you could smoke, and as such, was a much more pleasant environment over all.
I'm not sure I agree with this particular law, but any further push to make smoking something increasingly rare in public is fine by me. People should do it at home, where they don't subject anyone else to it.
Seems rather backwards to do this, no? Banning and punishing those who consume cigarettes really doesn't address those who are already consumers of it, so I only see this as rather foolish, and I don't smoke. Raising the age doesn't really do much; it still shows a parody on what we find acceptable for people to do.
America is really backwards with laws and what one is or isn't allowed to consume, so this really is more of the same. Why is this being raised to the age of alcohol consumption, which itself is put at an oddly higher place than being able to do porn and be in the military?
America is really backwards with laws and what one is or isn't allowed to consume, so this really is more of the same. Why is this being raised to the age of alcohol consumption, which itself is put at an oddly higher place than being able to do porn and be in the military?
teruterubozu
Member
I'm pretty sure there is some pressure from foreign tourists/residents behind this.
Honolulu is basically Tokyo 2.0 and Japan's smoking age is 20. China, another massive source of tourism for Hawaii, is 21. Hawaii is constantly trying to advocate a "clean" image for tourism.
CoffeeJanitor
Member
Heros
exmachina64
Banned
Banning smoking in certain areas is not the same as a nationwide or even a local ban. It is done because it impedes on the rights of others in public areas for safe breathable air. I am okay with how U.S handles smoking already, honestly. U.S have been pushing hard to educate people on smoking and it has been working (U.S is liberalizing), albeit a slow process. This is more preferable to an outright ban in my opinion, not to mention more effective. Good luck pushing a ban against the tobacco lobby.
Statistics show smoking has been decreasing in U.S, though the numbers of deaths due to smoking is still astronomically high (probably the leading cause of death in U.S actually).
Only thing that annoys me, is the ability for smokers to smoke when children are around, just because they are not in public. Many die from second hand smoke. I personally don't get why anyone smokes anything really, exception of other health reasons.
EDIT: U.S is doing good as far as prevention, U.S needs to do better on his rehabilitation programs. This includes making rehab covered by health insurance, which I am not sure if most health insurances on the marketplace cover.
entremet
Member
Drunk driving is the biggest reason.
Tobacco smoke is terrible. I say this as a former smoker. Smoking is just terrible for long term health outcomes.
People make dumb decisions their whole life. I dont blame you with 2nd hand smoke. That shit is more deadly than smoking.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
taxes will never let that happen.
As someone who smoked up to a pack a day for about 15 years, I agree. Probably will never happen, though; too much tax revenue.
The Faceless Master
Member
they really need to lower the drinking age.
the taboo of drinking in the US has the young culture so twisted about alcohol.
what other countries are so obsessed with it?
the taboo of drinking in the US has the young culture so twisted about alcohol.
what other countries are so obsessed with it?
jamesinclair
Banned
Agreed. Children shouldn't be allowed in the army and teenagers are children
gutter_trash
Banned
teachers and principals should be thrown in jail for letting minors smoke in the school yard
But smoking is far, far more dangerous in the long run. Even casual, "responsible smoking" over decades can lead to death. That's rarely true about smoking.
New York City is 21. New York State as a whole is still 18: https://www.health.ny.gov/prevention/tobacco_control/current_policies.htm
Edit: Oh, and Suffolk County, looks like.
gutter_trash
Banned
yup, smoking is a slow killer but it kills. Not just the smoker but also children of smokers who inhale 2nd hand smoke who develop fuckin asthma and shit.
Scared lungs don't heal back to non-smoker status after a smoker quits smoking. Damaged lungs are damaged lungs.
Manmademan
Member
yep.
not to mention, kids tend to smoke because they're not allowed to. IIRC the average first time smoker starts at about 15. Raising the age to 21 will do nothing to change this. Virtually no one starts AFTER the age of 18 when they can buy as many smokes as they want. (it happens, but is fairly rare).
want to get rid of the appeal of smoking? get rid of the age limit entirely.
not to get nitpicky, but "casual, responsible use" of alcohol can lead to things like cirrhosis of the liver, and alcohol addiction. Nicotine addiction sucks, but trying to go cold turkey when you're an alcoholic will literally kill you. People drastically underestimate just how nasty alcohol actually is.
The military age should be raised to 21 immediately. Our armed forces capitalizes on the ignorance and malleability of teenagers. It's a much milder version of the use of boy soldiers by African rebel leaders.
You're just talking out of your ass, right? That's an interesting point that I've been considering about marijuana for some time, but not one that I've ever heard about cigarettes. If you have any studies to show that rebelliousness is the main cause of smoking, post them, by all means. But I think that the majority of people smoke because people around them smoke. If your father, uncle, or friend is a cigarette smoker, you're far likelier to develop the habit yourself.
We've seen from the model of alcohol that, when a drug is available to high-schoolers, it's proliferated greatly among their younger peers. Keeping smoking at 18 means that high school seniors can and will buy cigarettes for their friends, at the age when they're most vulnerable to develop the habit. Removing smoking from the high-school setting entirely would do a lot of good to prevent addiction.
Personally, I think the drinking and smoking age both ought to be 19. But changing so many laws to this new age would be difficult.
These are really ignorant and naive statements, also very incorrect. It is not because something is "banned" or restricted to certain groups/people that it is used. I don't know why people think this is the case, when it isn't. The main cause of tobacco usage is mainly due to those around them using such (family, friends, etc.), that it becomes more likely that such people start using it as well.
gutter_trash
Banned
recruiters should be banned from school grounds,
I always found it disgusting that armed forces recruiters were allowed on school grounds to manipulate youngsters into signing up
Cow Mengde
Banned
Good, now ban them entirely.
-bakalhau-
Member
Is there any real point to this? Honest question. If teens want to smoke they'll find a way to smoke no...?
Legal age in my country is 18 and I spent Easter in a small town where everyone smokes with 16 already... And started at 13 lol.
Edit: So for example nothing would change there if our government changed it to 21.
Legal age in my country is 18 and I spent Easter in a small town where everyone smokes with 16 already... And started at 13 lol.
Edit: So for example nothing would change there if our government changed it to 21.
Yes and then it can go underground and the gov't gets no money to offset health costs.
If people can't smoke until they are 21, they shouldn't be able to serve in the military either. Or be expected to go to college for that matter - if a 20 year old can't make decisions about what substances they put into their bodies then how can they decide what they are going to do with the rest of their lives, or make the choice to potentially die for their country?
Idk,smoking is freaking terrible but young people that want to smoke are going to find ways to do it. This is just going to end up punishing 18-20 year olds needlessly. What about the 18 year olds that have already been smoking and have an addiction? Stopping cold turkey is a really tough thing to do so now their previously LEGAL habit can land them in trouble with the cops.
Surely there's a better solution.
Idk,smoking is freaking terrible but young people that want to smoke are going to find ways to do it. This is just going to end up punishing 18-20 year olds needlessly. What about the 18 year olds that have already been smoking and have an addiction? Stopping cold turkey is a really tough thing to do so now their previously LEGAL habit can land them in trouble with the cops.
Surely there's a better solution.
Coffee Dog
Banned
Prohibition will work for this substance. This substance is different.
Chezzymann
Member
Wouldn't that create an incentive for more organized crime though? I mean the war on drugs isn't going very well.
Scott32020
Member
Governments rarely consider fully the negative externalities and lack of enforceability of their actions when making these decisions.
But I'm not talking about alcoholism. I'm talking about casual, non-habitual drinking. As far as I believe, there's no equivalent for smoking. A glass of wine three times a week is less dangerous than three packs a week.
Agreed.
terrisus
Member
I do not see why you have an issue with this. I mean, in the past you would have a point, but not now. The U.S military provides a lot of bonuses for those that enlist and majority will never see actual combat. Of course, that is statistically speaking.
Sure it is risky, but that is also true for many other professions and daily living (driving).
There is only one issue I can think of and that is the way some recruiters do it, rather than trying to enlist students itself.
This isn't true... Multitude of factors, but restriction is a minor reason for use of such substances. I don't know why everyone thinks and say this all the time.
- Status