Why stop there? Why not 35, or 50? Or an outright ban?
We say that 18 year olds can die in a war, and be sentenced to death for a crime. But they can’t vape or buy a beer? 21 is the new 18, enjoy making more children out of adults.
We say that 18 year olds can die in a war, and be sentenced to death for a crime. But they can’t vape or buy a beer? 21 is the new 18, enjoy making more children out of adults.
A lot of people have argued for a "age limit" that essentially increases as one generation ages until it is effectively unlawful for future generations (e.g. age 21 in 2020, 22 in 2021, 31 in 2030, 41 in 2040, etc).
So why 21? Why indeed. Tobacco is no less addictive or deadly at 21, I guess the hope is people will be smarter by then and realize the life-long potential impact of STARTING (which the science does support[0]).
[0] http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2015/TobaccoMin...
Consider for a moment how indescribably weird it is for the FDA to have jurisdiction here and not ban tobacco.
The FDA evaluates on the basis of safety and efficacy: how the hell they’re squaring this circle is kind of beyond me.