10 votes

NYC Tobacco Law: Minimum Age Raised to 21

when is enough enough? This is freaken insane! Young smokers living in New York City are going to have to leave city limits to purchase a pack of cigarettes thanks to the new law Mayor Michael Bloomberg just signed. The law, which goes into effect in May 2014, not only prohibits people under 21 from buying tobacco products in the city, but will also raise the price of a single pack of cigarettes to a minimum of $10.50. This law reportedly makes NYC the only city in America that prohibits tobacco sales to young adults.

Continue Reading: http://www.webpronews.com/nyc-tobacco-law-minimum-age-raised...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Better not get that large soda either btchez

Age is so subjective

What if everything was changed to 21? Driving/military service/alcohol/etc. I don't understand this concept in a libertarian country. Age doesn't necessarily mean maturity, both physically and mentally, but I would say there DOES indeed NEED to be age restrictions on some if these things...idk thoughts?

85% of smokers started before

85% of smokers started before 18, the current legal limit. A good majority of them started simply to fit in. The fact that they are illegal for children only HELPS this "cool" status. Why would anyone imagine that raising or lowering it will have any effect? It's insane and oblivious thinking.

Age limits are bad law, just another thinly veiled attempt to legislate morality. It's a perversion of what a Constitutional Republic should do. The fact that it's subjective should tell you all you need to know. No one has the right to make that call except the individual.

but how does a child know?

but how does a child know? what if children could purchase guns at whatever age. A homeless child or one with bad parents could be walking around with a gun smoking cigarettes. See what I mean? How about driving can a four year old drive?

You still seem to have this

You still seem to have this ridiculous notion that the law is the only thing stopping toddlers from going and buying cigarettes and guns. That is just so ludicrous!

no you seem to have this

no you seem to have this ridiculous notion that every child has loving parents who prevent them from doing these things

No, I never made that

No, I never made that assumption. That is also not a remotely legitimate argument for restricting freedom.

too bad just telling your kids not to smoke does not work. !

My dad took care of it with logic, and he did not even graduate from middle school! He said he wished he could stop them when I was ten years old. He just convinced me I had better things to waste my money on. It had also just come up that cigarettes were linked to the occurrence of lung cancer. I did not even know about emphysema then! So, I was very grateful that my father steered me the right direction. He never, ever, told me I could not smoke!




Smoking just got cool again and I just got a whole pile of young addicted customers willing to pay me $9.00 for knock-offs. I'll be Al Capone in a week. You couldn't write a better law to punish individuals and reward crime.

Anyone awake left in NYC should have their head examined...

Anyone still there is cruising for a bruising. If you must work there, live out of the area. Get some small level of diversification. That place is just plain dangerous. I wouldn't get within 100 miles of it even for a short visit. When this thing blows, you could easily be completely stuck. There is no predicting the timing, so best to be prepared NOW.

That's what they want - to rid NYC of all but progressives,

turn it all into the Upper West Side.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

ecorob's picture

Escape from New York!

It just might be the only way to save your life.


Snake Plisken

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

It's age discrimination.

It's overtly age discrimination. I don't know how they've gotten away with a 21-year old minimum age for buying alcohol.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Mdefarge, I bet you would

Mdefarge, I bet you would agree with the age, If it were done on the local level. I mean you thought it should be illegal for that guy to have a statue on his property.

Buck50, you'd lose the bet

I'm okay with the people in a county voting to prohibit something they felt was not in the best interest of the community. For instance, in Mendocino County, CA, the people voted to ban the planting, production, or distribution of genetically-modified plants or seeds. I'd have voted for that. I'm aware that some Pennsylvania counties are dry counties. That's not something I'd have voted for, but it's not an important issue for me one way or another. BUT... if and when there *was* some local law, then it should apply to everyone. I strongly believe that *citizens* should have the right to discriminate against whomever they wish, for any reason, whether pertaining to their personal lives, their homes, or their businesses. I strongly believe that *governments* do not have that right. It's not a perfect analogy, but (unlike how Obamacare is being administrated) what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Btw, I just read about a case where a woman who works freelance is going to be forced to work for anyone who wishes to hire her (!), even though to do so would violate her beliefs. She photographs weddings and doesn't care to be involved with gay marriage. It's considered an issue of free-speech rights vs. gay rights.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Again, if a law is

Again, if a law is unconstitutional, its not a law! I dont care who voted for it. Do you agree, yes or no?

No, I don't agree. Well, yes, I do! I mean, in a perfect world

In reality, rights can conflict. It becomes a matter of priority, which is the more important right or, regardless, whose right trumps the other's. Who decides? If our rights conflicted, what would you want to do, have a duel? That's not all that I see as the purpose of govt, but a lot can be parsed down to that. In the interest of keeping the peace, short of resorting to "might makes right," I'm fine with people *voting* to decide what parameters should govern, i.e., deciding democratically. I'm not against govt, just centralized gov't. I'm for the greatest amount of power residing with the individual, then town or county, then state, and least the federal government, as per the limited enumerated powers of the Constitution. But today there is an awful lot that is called "unconstitutional" that is not, actually, prohibited by the Constitution. For instance, there is nothing prohibiting a state from establishing a religion. Indeed, some state constitutions have acknowledged an official religion. I'm talking about state-funded religions and other religion-related laws (e.g., New Hampshire's allowing only Protestants to be members of its legislature). The disestablishment of religion was not completed until the late 1800's. (That NH law ended in 1877.) I hope that answers your question. Btw, although a school district is a fairly small unit to be making policy on its own behalf, the meddling federal govt did also eventually ban prayer in school, but only as recently as the year Roy Orbison had a hit with Dream Baby. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHr38NcFyts

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

So the individual is above

So the individual is above all correct? So it doesnt matter what a town votes on then. If a law is unconstitutional youdont have to follow it. I Bet you would love this http://www.dailypaul.com/306002/california-town-bans-smoking... hey they voted on it. Lmao

The individual is above all, but I didn't say

that meant all power lay in the hands of the individual. I said it was relative. It does matter what the town votes on. (That's because we don't each live on an island but in a society.) As for the CA town's smoking ban, for privately-owned property I think a smoking policy should be left up to individual landlords or condo boards. If smoking is allowed and that's a problem for non-smokers, they can find someplace else to live. But regardless, I wouldn't have voted for the law. As with some others, I don't believe the argument on which it was based is true. Maybe it will yet be overturned.

But assuming the data were true, it's an example of what I said above. IF your cigarette or cigar smoke did come into my home, that represents a conflict of rights - or, anyway, what you'd think would be our respective rights: your right to smoke in your own home, and my right to not have you pollute the air inside mine. Respond if you wish, but I'm done discussing this.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

What is happening to this

What is happening to this world? You know I'm from Brooklyn and now living in California, just recently I saw the movie "Escape from New York", I swear to god, that's a glimpse of what's to come! I bet Jerry Brown will follow soon. We can't escape what's happening, we have to fight it head on guys. I know this is gong to sound weird, but I feel so lucky to be alive in this time, I just feel I have a purpose. I don't know what it is yet, But that's the cool part. Life is a journey.

I agree - life is a journey

Not a destination - Aerosmith :)

What happened that made u move to Cali? Just curious

As much as I dont like

As much as I dont like smoking, it has been shown time and again that making stuff harder to get will make more people want it. There is a reason drinking isnt much of a problem in Europe compared to here etc etc.

Interesting thought though, couldnt this pave the way for overturning this sort of thing? I mean how can you be considered an adult yet be banned from stuff for a couple years?

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.


Maybe, we could look into getting the legal age of a juvenile raised to 21, since 18 year olds are not old enough to make decisions about alcohol and cigarettes. Maybe, no one should be allowed to joined the armed services until the age of 21, as well!

And I suppose there will be a

And I suppose there will be a hefty fine for anyone under 21 who buys a pack.