When I was young, the drinking age was 21, and many of my friends were being drafted and sent to Vietnam. Young people complained that at 18, you were old enough to die for your country, but not old enough to drink a beer. In response, elected leaders in states across the country lowered the drinking age to 18 or 19. Since then, our leaders realized that 18-, 19- and 20-year-old kids might not be mature enough to handle alcohol and have since raised the drinking age back to 21. Using the same logic, when cannabis was legalized, the age limit to partake was set at 21, just like booze.
On the last day of the legislative session, a bill passed that raises the age to buy and use tobacco from 19 to 21. The bill awaits the governor’s signature. All of these age limits recognize that teenagers, despite their insistence, are not always mature enough to make life-altering decisions. So my question is this: If teens aren’t wise enough to make decisions that mainly affect only them, how is it that our elected representatives believe that 18-year-olds can make good decisions regarding the ownership and use of assault rifles when those decisions can affect so many other people? Does the governor agree? Do you? Just asking.
— John Farleigh
Anchorage
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.