Well, not exactly. Kate Frey, vice president of advocacy at New Futures, and Dr. Daniel Philbin, Northern New England Chapter of American College of Cardiology, are members of the New Hampshire-Tobacco 21 Coalition and just wrote an Op-Ed about the dangers of smoking and vaping.
They have the usual litany of reasons of why smoking, and now vaping, are bad for people and therefore, the State should raise the “tobacco sales age” to 21. I’ve bulleted their talking points:
- With vaping illnesses surging (they neglect to say it’s among those using THC infused inserts but hey, they’re on a roll).
- dramatic increases in youth tobacco use (no citation given)
- part of a comprehensive tobacco control strategy to save thousands of lives each year by preventing youth from accessing tobacco products (how they’d be prevented, other than adding 3 years to legal purchase age, isn’t mentioned).
- Raising the age to 19, recently enacted by the Legislature, is not enough to keep tobacco products out of the hands of our youth. (no reason given for this “failure”)
- The New Hampshire-Tobacco 21 Coalition which consists of the N.H. Medical Society… recognizes 21 as the evidence-based age proven to support prevention, healthy development, and long-term health and safety.
- In 1991, when all states increased their legal drinking age from 18 to 21, total drinking by high school seniors dropped by 38% and binge drinking fell by similar amounts. Daily drinking fell by half and today’s 30-year-old adults drink significantly less than those who grew up with a lower drinking age.
And of course, they blame only one thing emphasis mine):
For the health and future of the Granite State, it is now as important as ever to protect our youth from vape industry tactics and greed.
It’s never, 18 and older, are perfectly fine adults (at least legally – go with me here). These people, and many others, believe that they are mere children and cannot think for themselves nor resist temptations. Thus, Frey and Philbin and others of their ilk, MUST save these people FROM THEMSELVES. Oh, and blame capitalists. “We’re not busybodies – we CARE too much!”. Funny, last time I knew, 18 years old is the age of majority. At that point, they are LEGALLY ADULTS – not “youths” (the word they use throughout their piece). Both of these busybodies, regardless of their credentials, their connections, and their connections to “the right Societies”
But a few things stick out:
1. We cannot let another generation get addicted.
Nitwits or cowards – I can’t figure out which they are if not both. If they REALLY believe that statement, they’d be calling for a complete eradication of tobacco products altogether here in NH. And everywhere else. Note that they aren’t doing that. If tobacco is such a danger, why are they dillydallying around the fringe of age? Just make it all illegal, wash your hands, and be done with it. If they were sufficiently courageous to actually push for the ultimate solution (leaving aside the nascent black market they’d be creating) of making ALL tobacco use illegal.
2. They make the case that 18 is too young and 21 is JUST getting to the brain development.
Why aren’t they then pushing for uplifting the voting age at the same time? If they are all about the “youths” at 18, 19, and 20 years old, why not just change the age of majority and make their arbitrary “cut-up” to 21 really mean something? Otherwise, they’re just playing word salad – adults, youths, adults maybe, youths always.
3. I keep thinking of Obamacare – you’re a youth until age 26 and can be carried under Mommy and Daddy’s health insurance. After all, they’re too young to fend for themselves, so the Democrat reasoning. Hey, at THAT time, the experts tell us, the human brain is pretty much developed.
Would these Liberals and the Dems in the Legislature go for that? If they are that serious – that our youth are too young to be drinking, smoking, vaping, drugging, carousing – shouldn’t the Dems protect our youth and raise the voting age to 26?
After all, the Democrats keep saying that they are the Party of Science, right? And if the Science is saying 24-26, and THEY said that youth finally stops at age 26, this should be an INSTANT issue to run on!
(H/T: Concord Monitor)