12 ms·
> But teenagers will still be banned from smoking, drinking alcohol and gambling until they are 20. The logic of this escapes me. Although the article does no
by pattusk 8y ago
> But teenagers will still be banned from smoking, drinking alcohol and gambling until they are 20.
The logic of this escapes me.
Although the article does not seem to mention it, it seems probable that the voting age will likely also be lowered to 18.
This means teenagers will be considered old enough to make decisions that will affect the entire country, all the while being considered too immature to make decisions that will really only affect them individually.
- YinglingLight 8y agoSmoking/Drinking/Gambling restrictions are directed to protecting those vulnerable. This is not the same cross-section of civically motivated 18 year olds. Age barriers are the most efficient, + most politically correct tool the government has in regards to demographics.
- jimcsharp 8y agoVote for a lower drinking age.
- ekianjo 8y agoWhat's the benefit though? a larger group of people getting stomach cancer, in the country that has already the top stomach cancer rate in the world?
- devoply 8y agoOther than the allure of forbidden fruit I don't see what you actually lose by not drinking, smoking or gambling for those 2 formative years.
- insertnickname 8y agoWhy not make it a hundred years?
- devoply 8y agoWhy prevent sexually mature humans from engaging in sex?
- tropo 8y agoThis is Japan. Nobody is likely to have sex at all, or to do anything that is banned. If "allure of forbidden fruit" would actually work though, setting the age of consent to 120 might just be what Japan needs.
- krapp 8y ago>This is Japan. >Nobody is likely to have sex at all, or to do anything that is banned. You know you're talking about the country with the love hotels and the yakuza, right?
- THE_PUN_STOPS 8y agoI think that makes sense in the context of a collectivist culture. Well, more sense than in a fiercely individualistic culture like USA.
- ekianjo 8y ago>old enough to make decisions that will affect the entire country, will have no effect in Japan since a large corpus of voters are senior citizens. In practice younger generations have no say in politics.
- veridies 8y agoThat’s no more true than that Asian-Americans have no say in politics. Demographic groups aren’t absolute voting blocks.
- ekianjo 8y agoIf the 18-20 yo population represents 2% of voters (just making it up) and 70% of them don't vote, you will understand their power is absolutely marginal.
- magduf 8y agoYour argument makes no sense, because you're assuming the 18-20yo demographic is voting entirely differently than the 20-25yo demographic, which is obviously a stupid way of thinking when it's stated like that. Those groups are likely going to vote almost exactly the same, so extending the voting age downwards simply gives the younger voting block more power because it gives them more numbers. Also, the idea that 70% of them don't vote is just something you pulled out of your ass, probably based on American voting patterns. Japan isn't America, and assumptions like that are invalid in any argument.
- superbaconman 8y agoThese ages really should be legally aligned. If you're not responsible enough to live your own life, you've no business telling someone else how to live.
- ekianjo 8y agoNothing prevents you in Japan from drinking and smoking before 20. You just can't buy such goods directly, but it's well known that people get it thru other means (via a third party, friends, parents, etc...).
- butisaidsudo 8y agoI lived in Japan when I was 19, and I never once was asked for ID when buying alcohol, neither at a store nor a bar. It seemed to be largely the honor system, since you could buy alcohol from vending machines. Although when one bartender found out my age, he said it wasn't a problem since I wasn't Japanese. Go figure. A big club in Tokyo was the only place I was ever asked, and even there I was waved right through. Apparently, they were just checking for "gang affiliation".
- jgowdy 8y agoWhy not avoid artificially grouping those age restrictions out of an artificial sense of "fairness"? I was one of the previously rabid "if you can be sent to war you should be able to have a drink" back in my teens. The two topics aren't related. I insisted that they were to the ends of the earth before, but they aren't. Alcohol is a dangerous trap. Having the age be 21, even with some sneaking it early, is smart. 18 year olds don't need to try to deal with alcohol when 50 year olds can have a hard time with it. Your time will come. When I was in my teens and 20s, I felt like older people were just rigging the rules for their benefit. As I approach 40, let me tell you younger folks something (even if it's useless), we are all on the same team and we're trying to make things the best we can (for you too). And when you get to this age, you'll do the same and younger people will rail at you the same way.
- Mirioron 8y ago
- glandium 8y agoVoting age was lowered to 18 three years ago. https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/18%E6%AD%B3%E9%81%B8%E6%8C%99%E6%A8%A9 https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/18%E6%AD%B3%E9%81%B8%E6%8C%9...
- pluma 8y ago> decisions that will really only affect them individually This seems to be the mainstream view of addiction in many parts of the West, particularly in the US, but is it so hard to believe it's not universal?
- BoorishBears 8y agoIf smoking, alcohol, and gambling had the same affects on all fully grown adults as it did on people with developing minds we probably wouldn’t have them. They’re at a much higher risk for addiction, much higher risk for permanent brain impairment from alcohol, imagine if those risks and effects were instead just the baseline for everyone. For example, somehow even moderate drinking at 30 would permanently damage your brain as much as it can damage a growing brain (it can already be bad enough for the 30 year old brain but it’d be even worse) it’s hard to imagine drinking would be the viewed the same way
- barry-cotter 8y agoOk, let’s ban drinking for under 30s. Alcohol is clearly far more harmful than cannabis and I sincerely doubt it’s more harmful than speed or medicinal heroin, all of which we ban. If we’re going to ban things for adults why 21 and not 30?
- BoorishBears 8y agoI shouldn’t have to write this out but... It’s a sliding scale. Not an on and off switch. “Why allow drinking at all?!” Society has deemed that people at 21 can handle it. The longer you wait the better so it’s not like there’s a detriment. Do you remember the person you were at 21 vs 18? But sure, if you think the drinking age should be 30 go ahead and call your congressperson.
- ghaff 8y agoIn the US at least, the 21 yo drinking age is mostly a wholly pragmatic law [EDIT: laws. It's state by state but there was a big federal stick attached to highway funding.] to reduce teenage drunk driving (which affects more than the individual). Tobacco sales is mostly 18 in the US (although a few states are 21). Casinos also vary although the drinking age restricts <21 yo in a lot of casinos. It's hard to make an intellectual case for disparities between things like voting age, military service (which is why the US voting age was reduced to 18 in the first place), drinking/gambling/smoking, age of consent, etc. but pragmatism still sometimes wins out.
- Tehnix 8y agoI would argue that it actually ends up having the opposite effect. The culture towards drinking that the US has, means that young people either have to hide really hard that they are in fact drinking, or that they never learn control before much later in life, because they go all in when they are 21. This, funnily enough is after they have had their drivers license for some years, and those two mix bad together (lack of experience drinking, and a drivers license). I contrast this to my own country, Denmark, where we are much more lax about drinking. You can buy alcohol lower than 16% at age 16, and you can get your drivers license at 18. Parents accept that people will probably slowly start out drinking before this though, and are therefore more involved with this aspect of young people’s lives. This means they also has a chance to supervisor, guide and help their children manage this new experience of being drunk, and educate them on how it works. At least that’s my armchair take on it :)
- ghaff 8y agoI'd like to agree but the evidence suggests differently, e.g. [1] Arguably, there was an increased awareness in the US of drunk driving as a problem during that period but the effect still seems to be real even correcting for that. Of course, if we assume a completely different culture around alcohol, the results might well be different. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20497803 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20497803
- 8y ago
- laurieg 8y agoI lived in a Japanese university dormitory for a year. Alcohol is absurdly easy for under 20's to purchase. There is essentially no checking of IDs in shops. Most shops have a touch screen point of sale system that will ask "Are you over 20?" if you buy an alcoholic product. Some of those systems only have the "Yes" answer button...
- MiddleEndian 8y agoSounds like a much better system than in the US where they send in cops who pretend to be 18-20 just to say "gotcha!" and fine restaurants.
- pygy_ 8y ago1) The younger you start consuming addictive substances, the more likely you are to become addicted. 2) Analysis and impulse control are not handled by the same parts of the brain, and those mature at a different pace. 3) Given how social ties are stratified in kids due to the education system, providing a buffer of a couple of years protects high school kids from expostion to addictive substances.
- Mirioron 8y ago>3) Given how social ties are stratified in kids due to the education system, providing a buffer of a couple of years protects high school kids from expostion to addictive substances. Is this actually useful though? In some European countries, like Finland, high school kids end up over the age of 18 and are thus legally allowed to drink.
- diffeomorphism 8y agoI would heavily disagree that smoking only affects them individually. Also, someone with a gambling addiction or other addiction will need support from society. That said, I also disagree with the "adult, but not quite" restrictions. Though the US also has its share of weirdness, where you can join the army, get married and have children before being allowed to buy alcohol or visit adult establishments.
- ezoe 8y agoIt's not about the decision and responsibility. The reason is for the health. Alcohol and Tabaco affect the health of young people more than the old people. So the ban.
- 75dvtwin 8y ago> This means teenagers will be considered old enough to make decisions that will affect the entire country, Yes. I also wonder why Voting age and voting identification requirements are different in US, then for purchasing firearms, or military service. Both require adult-level accountability. Both can have dire consequences (at different magnitudes). It seems more logical to have minimum age, criminal record, and identification requirements parity for Voting, Firearms ownership, and military service (there should be special physical disability exceptions, I presume).
- ozim 8y agoI have hard time reading "teenagers will be considered old enough to make decisions that will affect the entire country", how many 18 yo people are there any given elections? I don't say their votes doesn't count, but still in face of facts it is not real argument. There is no way 18 yo is going to be president of any country. To be elected to parliament there is separate rule where you have to be 21 in my country (I assume it is quite the same in other countries). So even though you can vote when you are 18 you are not going to make real decision that can make impact.
- kazinator 8y ago> The logic of this escapes me. It doesn't escape me. Japan has a declining population. Drinking, gambling and smoking don't produce babies (only an environment that is harmful to children). The motivation here is obvious.