Social Media Age Restrictions
Comments debate imposing age limits or bans on children's access to social media, internet content, or porn, drawing parallels to regulations on alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs for minors.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
It's also illegal to partake in cigarettes in certain areas, even for adults. Cigarette packaging and location is also regulated. It's not like adults have unfettered access to things that harm them. It's illegal to drink and drive. In some places, it's illegal to drink in public, or it's illegal to sell alcohol beyond certain time periods. I'm not saying that these things are right, but that if we're going to compare social media to harmful substances we shou
What kind of question is this? If drugs are sold without limits, then children will also be affected.The right answer is that they would still need to be controlled just like cigarettes and alcohol.
It could be biased, but children (less then 18) probably shouldn't be drinking, smoking or doing drugs anyways.
Cigarettes and alcohol are more strictly regulated for children than for adults, but are regulated for both, because adults are allowed to harm themselves, but there is a general agreement that the law should discourage that. Yet the call for a social media ban on children is (or at least that's my impression) never accompanied with proposed regulation for adults, or a stricter enforcement of already in place but unenforced rules. I totally agree with you on how the "we shouldn't
I'd say: no, they shouldn't be allowed to do that.In the same way kids aren't allowed to drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes or gamble. That shit's addictive, and we as a society don't expect children to be able to properly consider the long term consequences when making the decision to use it. (Of course one could make the same argument about adults, but I digress.)
Probably for the same reason we allow adults to smoke and drink but not children.
> By your logic should we allow kids to buy alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs because it inconveniences adults too much?By your logic, we should allow the government to search our phones, computers, cars, emails, etc before buying alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs because "it might save just one child!".
You mean like we made it illegal to sell cigarettes or pot (where it is legal) to children... whoa, it's almost like we can have laws limit stuff.
Props for saying it.The kids would hate it, but then, they hate laws against selling tobacco & alcohol to minors and letting them into X-rated movies too. Too bad. It's for your own good, Junior."They'd just find ways around it" ?? Then we'll block those, too. We don't need to be 100% effective.
The same way that the law prevents kids drinking their parents’ alcohol - it doesn’t. But having it be illegal sends a signal, even though it’s possible to circumvent it, and also allows prosecution if warranted.