3 ms·

This is true. Weed is ok when you are older, you tend to partake infrequently. But if you take it young it becomes a habit. I’d like to see legal age of use

This is true. Weed is ok when you are older, you tend to partake infrequently. But if you take it young it becomes a habit. I’d like to see legal age of use go up to 26. It seems like a good balance. Legalize, yes, but you have to be mature about it. It’s time to realize that 16 to 25 you are still pretty immature.

seattle_spring 7y ago
Hey, as long as you're consistent and agree that kids shouldn't be able to get loans or join the military until 26 either. Edit (since you edited your number down from 30): And vote.
- pseudolus 7y ago
  Why should one particular age (18) be regarded as a bright line for a range of activities? Wouldn't it be better to overcome the rigidity of present conventions in favour of a more rational system that correlates certain rights/obligations as a function of neurological development?
  - meddlepal 7y ago
    Because other systems lead to abuse where people are deemed "not X" for a variety of reasons including race, religion, gender, sexuality, politics, thoughts, and many other reasons.
    - pseudolus 7y ago
      >>other systems lead to abuse All systems lead to abuse, including the existing system that artificially selects one age for a variety of rights/obligations with the notable exception being alcohol consumption. The rational approach would be to find a system that creates the minimal level of abuse. If that's the current system then so be it, but an effort should be made.
      - meddlepal 7y ago
        Please explain how an absolute system based on age to adulthood leads to abuse, because I'm not seeing it. Edit: it's a binary system. You either are or are not.
        pseudolus 7y ago
        The original article refers to one instance with potentially negative consequences where the age of majority (18) is the basis for access. Why not, in line with the authors' suggestion, increase the age to 25?
  - sjy 7y ago
    Simplicity. Neurological development takes place at different rates for different people, but it's an invidious thing to measure, so it's best not to try, at least until neuroscience gets better.
lwansbrough 7y ago
You edited your answer down from 30 to 26. Which shows me you really haven’t thought about your statement at all. Aside from it being totally asinine to make a relatively harmless drug illegal for a 21 year old to use, there’s about a 0.0% chance you’d be able to enforce that. And why would you want to? If I can vote I should be able to do everything else, too. Sincerely, a 25 year old who voted so he can legally smoke weed in Canada.
taneq 7y ago
I used to think 18 was a good age of majority, until I got a bit older and realised most 21-year-olds are pretty immature. Then I thought 25 was a good age of majority, but as I got older I realised even 30-year-olds can act pretty immature. Now I think 35 is a good age of majority... but then again even some of my peers can make some pretty poor decisions, so maybe 45? Or we could just admit that this is what mature humans look like. We're still making dumb decisions and still learning from them, right up til we die.
- xkcd-sucks 7y ago
  Yeah thankfully older people vote more than younger people or we'd really be in a bad situation
meddlepal 7y ago
Because increasing the age is going to stop people from smoking weed or drinking? Haven't we learned this is a pointless strategy yet? Also let's not continue the dated system of two tier "adulthood" in the US. If you can vote then you can consent to the usage of "vice" products. Do not cite cigarette purchase age limits as the cause of their decline. A combination of price and social rejection of cigs as disgusting has caused the decline in cigarette usage among youth.

seattle_spring 7y ago

Hey, as long as you're consistent and agree that kids shouldn't be able to get loans or join the military until 26 either. Edit (since you edited your number down from 30): And vote.

pseudolus 7y ago
Why should one particular age (18) be regarded as a bright line for a range of activities? Wouldn't it be better to overcome the rigidity of present conventions in favour of a more rational system that correlates certain rights/obligations as a function of neurological development?
- meddlepal 7y ago
  Because other systems lead to abuse where people are deemed "not X" for a variety of reasons including race, religion, gender, sexuality, politics, thoughts, and many other reasons.
  - pseudolus 7y ago
    >>other systems lead to abuse All systems lead to abuse, including the existing system that artificially selects one age for a variety of rights/obligations with the notable exception being alcohol consumption. The rational approach would be to find a system that creates the minimal level of abuse. If that's the current system then so be it, but an effort should be made.
    - meddlepal 7y ago
      Please explain how an absolute system based on age to adulthood leads to abuse, because I'm not seeing it. Edit: it's a binary system. You either are or are not.
      - pseudolus 7y ago
        The original article refers to one instance with potentially negative consequences where the age of majority (18) is the basis for access. Why not, in line with the authors' suggestion, increase the age to 25?
- sjy 7y ago
  Simplicity. Neurological development takes place at different rates for different people, but it's an invidious thing to measure, so it's best not to try, at least until neuroscience gets better.

lwansbrough 7y ago

You edited your answer down from 30 to 26. Which shows me you really haven’t thought about your statement at all. Aside from it being totally asinine to make a relatively harmless drug illegal for a 21 year old to use, there’s about a 0.0% chance you’d be able to enforce that. And why would you want to? If I can vote I should be able to do everything else, too. Sincerely, a 25 year old who voted so he can legally smoke weed in Canada.

taneq 7y ago

I used to think 18 was a good age of majority, until I got a bit older and realised most 21-year-olds are pretty immature. Then I thought 25 was a good age of majority, but as I got older I realised even 30-year-olds can act pretty immature. Now I think 35 is a good age of majority... but then again even some of my peers can make some pretty poor decisions, so maybe 45? Or we could just admit that this is what mature humans look like. We're still making dumb decisions and still learning from them, right up til we die.

xkcd-sucks 7y ago
Yeah thankfully older people vote more than younger people or we'd really be in a bad situation

meddlepal 7y ago

Because increasing the age is going to stop people from smoking weed or drinking? Haven't we learned this is a pointless strategy yet? Also let's not continue the dated system of two tier "adulthood" in the US. If you can vote then you can consent to the usage of "vice" products. Do not cite cigarette purchase age limits as the cause of their decline. A combination of price and social rejection of cigs as disgusting has caused the decline in cigarette usage among youth.