Hawaii has raised the smoking age to 21. It is the first
State to do so in the United States. But is that new restriction going to
do anything?
Age restrictions: This is a lesser form of
prohibition. An age limit will not solve anything at all in fact.
Just like with alcohol being limited to age 21, it will create a market
for young people who want to try it simply because it is being denied to them.
Also, this will not stop young people from smoking as they will ask their
parents, their older friends or even strangers to buy it for them. In
essence, this does nothing to stop people from smoking in the same way it does
nothing to stop people under a certain age from drinking. Also, you are
limiting the activities of an adult. 18 is the recognized age by which
you can vote in the United States and thus the age by law you are considered an
adult. So, what is the point of limiting the age to 21 if the goal is to
reduce the number of kids getting their hands on cigarettes? None is the
answer. You cannot ban cigarettes for you create a black market, and you
can't raise taxes on it indefinitely, so you lengthen the amount of time before
an individual can buy it on their own. If anything, they can limit the
places where it can be sold such as the same places where they are allowed to
sell medical marijuana. That is right, Hawaii is a "Pot" State,
yet they limit cigarettes. Seems silly doesn't.
Conclusion: Sorry Hawaii, this writer, who works in a
pharmacy, is the son of a corrections officer, and has a family filled with
doctors, nurses and even more police and military personnel and has access to all
their knowledge thinks that this will do nothing beneficial for your State.
You are being self-serving if you think that this will save anyone from
smoking a cigarette in any way shape or form. If you really want to
protect people from addiction or abuse, then copy Europe and their drug
policies that legalize everything and switch the war on drugs to a policy of
treating addiction. Cigarettes are a mere casualty in this silly escapade
to protect the health of people, when the only people capable of protecting
one's health are the individual people themselves. I get it, you want to
protect people from firsthand and secondhand smoke. However, I am the son
of a smoker, and I have asthma. And guess what? The asthma I have
does not react to cigarette smoke. It is a sensitivity to particles that
make asthma act up (so if you're not sensitive to that airborne particle, then
you are fine). Also, while I understand the health risks of the
possibilities of cancer, it does not mean that that person will get cancer, and
we even have a new vaccine in testing that can prevent lung cancer too.
So all the arguments are mute. Cut the crap and let people smoke
whatever they want to smoke.
No comments:
Post a Comment