• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Oregon raises smoking age to 21

EMNofSeattle said:
The problem there is, people politically supportive of smoking bans and high taxes love to claim the entire bill for treating those conditions across society as the costs of smoking even though many people who do not smoke will develop heart disease and lung cancer and the majority of costs are born by private insurance and not the public. So the reality is, tobacco taxes for a state legislature are free money. Just like the lottery, the Feds are covering the welfare benefits while the benificiaries are spending their disposable income on lottery tickets
Click to expand...

Only 1 in 19 cases of lung cancer are in non-smokers. Smoking increases your risk of heart disease by 3 fold. Smoking & Cardiovascular Disease (Heart Disease)

I agree that funds from sin taxes are often used for initiatives that have nothing to do with the sin, but you can't downplay the health costs of smoking, its extremely high.
 
Henrin said:
They still have to sign up for the draft.
Click to expand...

Even in the event of a draft (which, today, would only happen if our existence as a nation was threatened), 99.9% will never see combat.

People need to spare us the "sent to war" line. For 999 out of 1000 enlistees, that's a stateside or REMF job.
 
radcen said:
That sets a dangerous precedent, IMO. It's already bad enough that sin taxes are always foisted upon the politically weak. Who's next? Will it be something that you or I do*? I hate sin taxes as a general concept, but they would be easier for me to accept if the proceeds stayed wholly with the "sin". To me, additional insurance costs probably has more legitimate merit, but it's still a form of sin tax.

*- I do not smoke, never have, but I do believe that we treat smokers unnecessarily shabbily and with a great deal of inequality.
Click to expand...

When we will pay for their oxygen tanks and 30k to 50k a month for lung cancer treatments, I find it hard to believe that on balance smokers are treated shabbily.
 
I don't see why the government hasn't figured out that age restriction laws on goods and services don't work. Raise your hand if you drank alcohol before you were 21.
 
ecofarm said:
Even in the event of a draft (which, today, would only happen if our existence as a nation was threatened), 99.9% will never see combat.

People need to spare us the "sent to war" line. For 999 out of 1000 enlistees, that's a stateside or REMF job.
Click to expand...

Being drafted is being drafted.
 
Henrin said:
I don't see why the government hasn't figured out that age restriction laws on goods and services don't work. Raise your hand if you drank alcohol before you were 21.
Click to expand...

We don't want kids in the bar. Maybe you do, but we don't.
 
ecofarm said:
We don't want kids in the bar. Maybe you do, but we don't.
Click to expand...

They will just drink elsewhere. Age restriction laws on alcohol have never worked.
 
Henrin said:
They will just drink elsewhere. Age restriction laws on alcohol have never worked.
Click to expand...

What part of "we don't want kids in the bar" did you not understand?
 
Henrin said:
I don't see why the government hasn't figured out that age restriction laws on goods and services don't work. Raise your hand if you drank alcohol before you were 21.
Click to expand...

Of course I did, but I didn't drink nearly as much as I would have if I had been able to just walk in a liquor store and by it myself.
 
ecofarm said:
What part of "we don't want kids in the bar" did you not understand?
Click to expand...

So you just don't want drinking in the bar, but you're not bothered by them drinking other places?
 
Henrin said:
So you just don't want drinking in the bar, but you're not bothered by them drinking other places?
Click to expand...

Did you manage to lose the context established by your claim? I can understand dropping other people's context, but your own made seconds ago? What the hell. They're gonna drink other places. There's no stopping that. But let's at least keep them out of adult drinking establishments.
 
Henrin said:
In almost all states the age of majority is eighteen.
Click to expand...

Anyone over 25 that doesn't see an 18 year old as a kid has something very wrong with them.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
When we will pay for their oxygen tanks and 30k to 50k a month for lung cancer treatments, I find it hard to believe that on balance smokers are treated shabbily.
Click to expand...
Sounds like an argument for prohibition. The cost is too high.

At some point freedom isn't free. Where's the line?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Oregon Senate approves raising legal tobacco age to 21

Just stupid, why should legal adults not be permitted to purchase a legal product? Why not just ban the retail sale of tobacco period if smoking is so bad?
Click to expand...
If they're 18, they can vote. If they don't like the law, they can advocate against it, before or after it is passed.

Tobacco should be outlawed; it's an addictive carcinogen, after all. However, there are still too many smokers in the US for that to happen. It's better to chip away at it. Death by a thousand cuts.
 
Visbek said:
If they're 18, they can vote. If they don't like the law, they can advocate against it, before or after it is passed.

Tobacco should be outlawed; it's an addictive carcinogen, after all. However, there are still too many smokers in the US for that to happen. It's better to chip away at it. Death by a thousand cuts.
Click to expand...

Or the state can just leave people alone and let them do with their body as they please. :shrug:
 
Visbek said:
If they're 18, they can vote. If they don't like the law, they can advocate against it, before or after it is passed.

Tobacco should be outlawed; it's an addictive carcinogen, after all. However, there are still too many smokers in the US for that to happen. It's better to chip away at it. Death by a thousand cuts.
Click to expand...

Artificial sweeteners are also addictive carcinogens.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Oregon Senate approves raising legal tobacco age to 21

Just stupid, why should legal adults not be permitted to purchase a legal product? Why not just ban the retail sale of tobacco period if smoking is so bad?
Click to expand...

In the 1950's and 60's you had to be 21 to buy tobacco, beer, whiskey, even to vote. Now 16 would get you a drivers licence. One could be drafted into the military at 18, but for most things the legal age was 21. Under 21 you even had to get your parents permission to marry. Now this varied some from state to state. Not all states were the same nor did they have to be. Several states did allow those below the age of 21 to vote. Georgia was one of them where an 18 year old could vote. The drinking age was also 18 in Georgia where most states had it at 21.

I have no problem with Oregon, that state is authorized to do as it wishes.
 
ecofarm said:
Did you manage to lose the context established by your claim? I can understand dropping other people's context, but your own made seconds ago? What the hell. They're gonna drink other places. There's no stopping that. But let's at least keep them out of adult drinking establishments.
Click to expand...
You mean at least you're keeping them out of regulated establishments where it is illegal to overserve where there's cameras and security measures and there's people who can summon emergency services for someone who's had too much?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
You mean at least you're keeping them out of regulated establishments where it is illegal to overserve where there's cameras and security measures and there's people who can summon emergency services for someone who's had too much?
Click to expand...

Bars, yes. Because we don't need kids in bars. Most of us don't wanna hang out drinking with kids. And there are plenty of deplorables that would take advantage of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom