California Raises Age to buy Tobacco

Well so much for free choice.

California, nanny state extraordinaire, has raised the age for buying tobacco from 18 to 21. Why? Safety of minors of course. More laws will fix things! It's already against the law to give/sell tobacco to a person under 18.

This strikes me as even more profound coming on the heels of the discussion last week of including females in the draft. 18 is an adult ... sometimes.

I could never live in Cali, but if I did and I was 18-21 I'd find a way to not pay taxes. I'd be damned if I'd fund a system that didn't represent me. And, no, telling me I am too stupid to make a rational choice, is not representing me.

Link

EDIT - I should add, this law specifically doesn't effect military personnel. Perhaps its a last ditch effort to get some West Coast blood into the ranks. Sign up today and smoke tomorrow! could be the new Army motto.

a reply to: 200Plus

I believe if you are considered a legal adult at the age of 18, you should be given the same choices as an adult. If Uncle Sam can draft you to go get shot at, you should be able to buy a shot in a bar. If the drinking age is 21, because most are not considered mature enough till then to show good judgment, then they should be treated as minors in every other aspect. If they want to up the age to buy cigarettes, fine, they should not be eligible for the draft or be prosecuted as adults till they're 21.
Throw that in and see how fast the age limit comes down.

If you're considered old enough to die for your country you're old enough to do everything.

a reply to: DAVID64

I gave you a star but we've been saying that about drinking for decades and no one listened......

but you are allowed to drive at 15 or 16 right?
kids that want to smoke will smoke, just like those that want to drink booze will drink booze.
i'm not advocating for kids smoking of course, but all this does is risk kids getting into big trouble for just being kids.

a reply to: IShotMyLastMuse


I'm by no means promoting smoking at any age, especially minors.


That being said, we charge 16+ taxes when they work. We charge them with crimes when they commit them. We have 18 years as the standard for majority (voting, property rights), and 21 for drinking (now vaping and tobacco in Cali). When are people going to say enough?


The older generation is not wiser and better to decide my fate simply because they've been here longer. Not that I am still 18-21, but you get my point I hope.

Cigarettes do nothing but cause heart disease and cancer.

It ought to be a rolling age law, every year it goes up one year.

The industry needs to be killed.

Or at least make meth and crack legal, if the desire is to have the right to put anything in your body.

The can join the military crap, is a crap excuse.

Anyone here lose someone to lung cancer? It isnt pretty, fun, or fast.

a reply to: 200Plus

aparenty you dont know cali

we do whatever we want when we want unless we are too stupid to so.

i have lived in cali my lifetime and i only get in trouble when i am too drunk to care.

it is the wild west

the politicians have to deal with us

a reply to: smirkley

smokes are harmful i agree there, but they also are enjoyable

a reply to: smirkley

and by the way crack and smokes are not even close so ur logic is flawed

a reply to: smirkley

As a smoker I will not quit until I die because it calms me down when I'm stressed out and I like it. I see all the outrage at smokers what about the obesity epidemic? Some fatass can still go into McDonalds and order a Big Mac, obesity kills more people then smoking does with heart disease, obesity etc. Stop dictating others lives and improve your own.

Safety of minors? I'll echo others. What about the safety of those minors when they are shipped off to war? Why are they only concerned with the safety of minors when it's not "their cause" getting them killed?

Full disclosure - I've been cig free for almost 3 years. Big tobacco has no champion in me. Just the irony... it hurts.

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
Safety of minors? I'll echo others. What about the safety of those minors when they are shipped off to war? Why are they only concerned with the safety of minors when it's not "their cause" getting them killed?

Full disclosure - I've been cig free for almost 3 years. Big tobacco has no champion in me. Just the irony... it hurts.

Haven't had a draft since Vietnam.
People volunteer to be shot at for ridiculous reasons and crappy pay. Just like people volunteer to smoke. It's not mandatory.

a reply to: the owlbear

Not having a draft and one not being possible are two different things. Do males of the age of 18 legally have to sign up to be drafted "just in case"?

They aren't signing up for the draft when they are 21. The age is still currently set at 18 last I checked.

a reply to: 200Plus

If they aren't old enough to know about smoking at 18, 19, 20, then they shouldn't be able to vote either.

Sounds like a States' Rights issue to me. I thought people wanted States to be able to do this?

Yes nicotine is a bad habit.

Driving with loud music is a bad habit too, maybe Cali should have a law that only those over 21 can have a radio in their car.

My argument is we can be taxed at 18 but we cannot think for ourselves until 21. Why is there a three year gap of taxation without a voice?

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Does that fall under the state right "provide for public safety"? If so, why an age limit and not a nicotine ban?

Should each state have an "age of Majority" just as many have varying "age of consent" or should the Federal Government dictate a National Age of Majority?

Hypocrisy of lawmakers.

Age 13, you are old enough to determine if you need birth control and can have sex.
Age 18, you are old enough to determine the leader of the country. You can enlist, get drafted, die for your country. You can get trained to fire a weapon but you can't legally own one until you're. . .
. . . Age 21? Finally old enough to buy a beer and a pack of cigarettes. And maybe a firearm, if you pass a background check and get permission from the government.

originally posted by: 200Plus
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Does that fall under the state right "provide for public safety"? If so, why an age limit and not a nicotine ban?

Should each state have an "age of Majority" just as many have varying "age of consent" or should the Federal Government dictate a National Age of Majority?

I'm not a States' Rights advocate, so you're probably asking the wrong person those questions. I just find the double standards amusing from people who claim they want States' Rights, then complain when States exercise them.