Typed by Edwin Bonilla
It should be clear that the Tobacco 21 organization is an organization dedicated to tyranny against young adults aged 18-20 years old. The organization’s insistence that a smoking age of 21 is a good for public health is medical fascism. This organization and its supporters are oblivious to non-oppressive ideas towards reducing tobacco usage among young people.
If advertisement for tobacco and vaping devices on the properties of gas stations were prohibited, then this would result in a reduction of tobacco usage among all age groups. In addition, commercials for vaping devices should be banned on radio stations. These advertisements support a culture of smoking cigarettes and vaping.
Taxes on cigarettes and vaping devices should be increased. This would also be effective. Vaping devices and cigarettes should not be cheap. They should cost the person some money. Cities, towns and counties should be allowed to add taxes on to vaping devices and on to cigarettes.
The vaping device industry should be much better regulated than what it currently is. Companies such as Juul purposely have flavors which appeal to girls and boys in middle and high school. Such flavors that were created to sell to this age group should be banned. Companies should not get away with trying to induce girls and boys with vaping devices.
All of these outlined ideas do not require a tobacco purchasing age or a smoking age of 21. These ideas would be more effective than a 21 smoking age because the roots of the problem are finally addressed. A higher minimum age simply bypasses the reasons why young people still vape in large numbers or fail to reduce smoking by young people. The current culture of smoking and vaping can be better addressed with the ideas outlined here in this article.
As I previously said here, the Tobacco 21 organization sounds more to me like an organization in support of oppression than in any intent of problem solving. This type of mentality is one of tyranny. This is a mindset where problems are not solved but instead, young people are treated as less than trustworthy.
Typed by Edwin Bonilla
There is a staggering amount of age discrimination against young people in this country. From organizations advocating oppression like MADD and Tobacco 21 to people approving of ageist opinions against young people. The laws and rules in this country constrict the lives of young people and it’s not for the better.
The Altria Group now supports a smoking age of 21 where previously it rightfully opposed this policy idea ungrounded in reality. Alcoholic beverage companies enthusiastically support the ageist drinking age of 21 while decades ago, those companies rightfully opposed that oppressive policy idea.
Those companies have succumbed to the concept of corporate responsibility. However, in this case, corporate responsibility means enforcing and supporting oppressive laws against young people. This is not corporate responsibility, it is support of oppression. Corporate responsibility should concern working conditions and employee pay.
I am certain that those companies also feel the enormous flames of ageism against young people in this country. In this country, people support a tolitharian police state against young people, whether the wording is different or not. Young people should join the National Youth Rights Association to effectively fight back. The ageism should be challenged at every turn because it has no right to exist; death to ageism.
In this era of significant technological and social change, young asults must be given the civil rights and civil liberties which pertain to them. They must be acknowledged as young adults or older, regardless of what year they were born.
Typed by Edwin Bonilla
In this time of increasing tolitharianism, it’s good to read that some elected officials still acknowledge the rights of young adults. The Governor of Illinois has fortunately vetoed a bill which would have raised the tobacco purchasing age to 21. He’s a good governor for understanding that youth rights are part of civil rights and civil liberties. Unfortunately, Democrats and organizations which support medical fascism are leading an oppressive movement around the country.
Since the middle of this decade, cities, towns, counties and states have raised the smoking and tobacco purchasing age to 21. These types of laws unquestionably violate the rights of young adults aged 18-20 years old. Democrats and medical fascist organizations do not believe that young adults should have the right to make their own decisions. It’s a shame in what the proponents of those laws say.
Young adults are aware of the harmful effects of using tobacco products. Everyone is always reminded of those effects in countless commercials on TV. Smoking among young adults has declined considerably over the decades.
Young adults are adults and are not children, as some ageist people say. It’s disgraceful that a legislator from Illinois, who introduced the oppressive bill, called young adults, children. She’s a bad legislator who has lost her credibility in legislating.
There is no reason why the smoking or tobacco purchasing age should ever be higher than 19. Using the age of 21 is illogical and oppressive, considering that the age of majority is 18-19 around the country. Young adults should be allowed to do their own personal decision making. They should not be the pawns of public health policies. Government should acknowledge the civil rights and civil liberties of everyone, including of young people.
Democrats and those medical fascist organizations will always choose tolitharianism over overall freedom.
Laws which violate the rights of young adults should always be challenged and of its proponents, as well.
By Edwin Bonilla
Supporters of the discriminatory drinking age of 21 say that the law is for the good of young people. However, the law is an act of tyranny. Instead of instilling responsible decision making among young people, the drinking age of 21 has created a tolitharianism police state against young people.
In May in New Jersey, a young woman of 20 was physically abused by police officers because of the discriminatory drinking age of 21. She should have been allowed to have alcoholic beverages but a tolitharian police state must enforce oppressive laws. She was at the beach with a beer can on her side. There’s nothing wrong with an 18-20 year old person drinking alcoholic beverages. The ageist law and its supporters are the exception to this opinion. Unfortunately, she was charged with “under age drinking”. It is tolitharianism. In our country, people and elected officials only pay lip service to liberty; the rest of the time they are either supporting or implementing oppressive laws.
The young woman at the center of the incident in New Jersey is a good person. She was fighting the tolitharianism that young people live in this country. The mainstream media refuses to side with her because most people in this country would rather support the oppression of young people than see the rights of young people acknowledged. It is with much shame that the U.S. has turned it’s back on liberty.
Typed by Edwin Bonilla
Some commercials for alcoholic beverages promote binge drinking. Those commercials call it pre-gaming. Last year, a commercial from Bud-Light appeared on YouTube promoting pre-gaming. This year, a radio station host in Washington, DC encouraged its listeners to pre-game. It’s wrong for companies, radio stations and other media to promote binge drinking. In the case of Bud Light, the company was using pre-gaming to sell its alcoholic beverages. In the case of the radio station host, he was encouraging people to pre-game to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day.
There should be a federal law which would ban companies and all forms of media from promoting irresponsible behavior regarding alcoholic beverages. This should include binge drinking of any name.
Those commercials reflect this country’s irresponsible culture regarding alcoholic beverages. Banning those irresponsible commercials should be a first step. People in the alcoholic beverage industry would say that those commercials are for people of the drinking age of 21. It doesn’t matter because people shouldn’t be encouraged to binge drink. The oppressive drinking age of 21 has not and will not improve this country’s drinking culture. The culture regarding alcoholic beverages will need to be changed itself.
Alcoholic beverage companies should encourage alcohol responsibility. Those companies shouldn’t contradict their message of drinking responsibly. If those companies were to only say that drinking under the drinking age is wrong, then those companies have failed because they have ignored everything else.
Typed by Edwin Bonilla
The wrong solutions are being persued to stop mass shootings. The pursuit of those wrong solutions is intentional. Stores such as Dick’s Sporting Goods, Kroger and Walmart have decided to discriminate against young adults rather than to help solve the problem of mass shootings. Those stores have raised the minimum age for buying guns to 21. Raising the minimum to buy guns from 18 to 21 will do nothing to prevent mass shootings. This is a feel-good policy that will not yield any results. It is simply discrimination on top of discrimination.
Young people aged 18-20 years old are the most discriminated group in this country. They are discriminated against when it comes to alcoholic beverages, cigarettes, gambling, getting a hotel room and getting a credit card. They are unduely discriminated since it is older people who display more problems with those rights. Raising the minimum age for buying guns to 21 is an extension of those violations to the rights of people aged 18-20 years old. Stores have decided to scapegoat young adults which is why those stores shouldn’t be applauded for their false heroism.
Real solutions to stopping mass shootings should be persued. For example, automatic and semi-automatic guns should be banned for everyone of every age. There’s no reason why those guns should be held by civilians. Permitted guns should only be guns which fire no more than one bullet per round. The minimum age to buy these guns should be 18. The mass shooter in Parkland, Florida is very far away from an typical young adult. This is why raising the minimum age for buying guns to 21 is discriminatory and unproductive. It is not a solution in stopping mass shootings in this country or in any country.
Typed by Edwin Bonilla
Young people are people. Unfortunately, legislators continue to pass bills that criminalize the lives of young people. Bills to raise the smoking age to 21 keep getting passed. Legislators refuse to set a Cannabis smoking age of 18. Since the 1980s, the drinking age has been 21. This is why young people have become a criminalized group. Young people are a group in which government and in which society refuse to recognize their rights.
On top of age discriminatory laws are ageist attitudes that are prevalalent in this society. These are the types of attitudes that treat young people as pests. Many malls have curfews which ban people under 18 from entering in evening and nights. Despite the fact that few young people were involved in fights at malls, every young person was to be treated the same, as a pest. It is this demographic distancing which treats young people as inferior as to the reason for the passage of discriminatory rules. It is a disgrace. People who who admire civil rights and civil liberties but are ageist, are hypocrites.
Young people, in particular young adults, don’t deserve to live under those discriminatory laws and rules. Young people are people, civil rights and civil liberties must apply to them. This means that the drinking age, smoking age and Cannabis smoking age should be 18-19. Bills raising the smoking age to 21 are unjustified. There is no justification in eroding the rights of young adults to fulfill a public health outcome. Instead, those types of bills criminalize young people. Young adults must be allowed to make decisions that they want to make. For government to force its decisions upon them, is totalitarianism. Young people must be treated as people and they must have their rights respected and recognized.
Typed by Edwin Bonilla
Young people are the most oppressed group in this country. The rights of young people are eroded every year. More municipalities raise the smoking age to 21, more states increase unnecessary burdens for obtaining a driver’s license or learner’s permit and every year, penalties against “underage” drinking increase. Young people in this country unfortunately live in a totalitarian state. Supporters of adultist laws say that those laws exist to protect young people but those laws are not meant to protect young people. A young adult who is 18 years old is not more harmed by drinking alcoholic beverages responsibly than a young adult who is 21 years old. The front of those adultist laws should be exposed for what those laws really are; laws that are meant to oppress young people.
Young people should have guaranteed rights. There should not be tyranny by the majority against young people in this country. This is why young people live in a totalitarian state. Moral panics and ageist attitudes have brought about this oppressive state. There should not be a minimum age for when young people receive their rights. A girl or boy who is 13 years old has the right to not share information on their smartphone with her or his parents. A girl or boy who is 16 years old should be allowed to obtain a learner’s permit driving. A young adult who is 18 should be allowed to drink alcoholic beverages. Young people, regardless of age, should have guaranteed rights.
It would be bigotry to justify that young people should not have guaranteed rights. Groups of people have guaranteed rights, such as LGBT people. Young people need guaranteed rights, too. The views of young people in this country need to improve. Young people cannot be thought of as a nuisance, a pest or as a subhuman. Young people are people and to think them as less than people is dehumanization. Young people in this country should be assertive in supporting the rights they should have. Ageist should be viewed with contempt. Ageists may hide behind junk science and with paternalism but inside, they justify adultist laws because they are bigoted against young people. In many comment threads, I have unmasked the core of why adultist laws are supported.
Typed by Edwin Bonilla
The rights of young people should be unconditional. Unfortunately, young people are the group that is most oppressed in this country. Malls have also joined in the decades long movement to oppress young people. Malls around the country have created curfews against young people. Those mall curfews say that either young people be banned from the mall or that they be accompanied by their parents. That is oppression against young people. It is a civil rights violation that should be challenged.
Management of malls don’t discriminate against race, ethnicity or sexual orientation. However, when it comes to age, management thinks it’s justified to discriminate against young people. Mall management has said that those curfews were created to prevent fights. The truth is that most young people don’t want to start physical violence at malls. Videos of young people fighting at malls is not the usual situation. Young people at large should not have to pay for the crimes of a young people.
The real reason why those mall curfews were created is because of societal intolerance against young people. American culture views young people as a nuisance or as a group of people that is to be tolerated but not accepted. Since management of malls is composed of people from this society, they take their ageist attitudes with them and put them in the form of rules that they want implemented. It is important that young people be put into a protected class so that their rights are protected.