Thoughts on adults enjoying marijuana? How about pot-brownies? Alcohol? Flavored liquors?
If something is legal for adults and illegal for children, then why is it okay to restrict the methods of enjoyment of that item in ways that do not impact other people (e.g. driving while drunk impacts other people).
Your whole argument seems to be built around protecting children, so let’s protect them by disallowing advertisement of the product, especially explicit or advertisement that can be reasonably expected to be viewed by minors, and by carding people that buy the products.
Let’s make all vaping, nicotine, thc or otherwise illegal for minors.
Please don’t come after my apple vodka. I like those flavors, too.
Okay, so advocate for repealing laws that age-restrict sales of alcohol, tobacco, etc. I don't think you'll find much support for your position, and until you do the company has a duty to do basic due diligence to not break the law.
So a liquor store should not be responsible for age restrictions and sell alcohol to minors? I think there is always a sliding point between where the government or companies police the rules. It's an interesting conversation where that point should be.
Sure. But that's ultimately because the government has defined that facilitating beer sales to people under 21 is illegal.
If the government decided to stay out of drug regulation entirely, would it be reasonable for companies like Reddit to decide on their own that people under some age should not be able to purchase beer online, set that age, etc.? (Presumably, because there is not overwhelming public support to repeal those laws, society at large believes that young people should be prevented, passive voice, from buying beer - if we move enforcement of that social problem to the people, how should that get implemented?)
I'm saying that regulatory requirements should be less strict, so that retailers are not turned into an extension of the government. Many developed countries establish a minimum age for alcohol purchase but don't build unwieldy infrastructures around it, relying instead on the aggregate judgement of their populace.
You seem to have missed the part where I do not want to ask permission of the government for every little thing. I'm well into middle age and do not appreciate having to seek governmental approval for what I consume. I am fine with some products like alcohol being subjected to taxes to balance out negative externalities. I am not fine with the idea of showing my papers on demand.
Because people are awfully good at getting around laws preventing the purchase of things, particularly when those things are legally purchasable by adults -- c.f., cigarettes, alcohol. It's not crazy to think that a multi-pronged approach would be more effective: Try to reduce sales both sales _and appeal_ to underage people. We do this with alcohol, for example, particularly high-alcohol malt liquor [1]. We ban or restrict advertising when it's likely to reach children. [2]
In my opinion, setting the alcohol/nicotine age to 21 isn't so much to prevent 18 year olds from accessing it, its to prevent 14-16 year olds from access. Every high school has some 18 year olds - products legally available to them will trickle down to younger kids much easier than those that require purchasers to be 21.
This actually makes sense. It is also morally bad to sell cigarettes and alcohol to minors because it is proven to be bad for their health and the society has determined that before the age of 18 people are unable to choose what's good for them.
> Alcohol and tobacco, at least in the US, are not controlled to "protect the children". Because a 20 year old man can't get alcohol either.
Furthermore, in many (if not most) places, it is even worse than that. A 40 year old man cannot buy alcohol depending on the day of the week or time of day. In some states they can only purchase certain kinds of alcohol from the state itself (if they don't feel like paying for it at a bar). In others, wide swaths of alcohol are simply unavailable.
Are we really to believe that the unavailability of beer over 4abv in Utah is to protect the children? No. That law, like nearly every alcohol law, is a puritanical attempt to regulate the morality of adults. These laws have no place in a civilized society, and neither do the "corresponding" porn laws.
It's also illegal to partake in cigarettes in certain areas, even for adults. Cigarette packaging and location is also regulated. It's not like adults have unfettered access to things that harm them. It's illegal to drink and drive. In some places, it's illegal to drink in public, or it's illegal to sell alcohol beyond certain time periods. I'm not saying that these things are right, but that if we're going to compare social media to harmful substances we shouldn't misrepresent the access to harmful substances adults actually have.
reply