Legal Marijuana and the Voting Age

The Twenty-sixth Amendment (Amendment XXVI) to the United States Constitution prohibits the states and the federal government from using age as a reason for denying citizens of the United States who are at least eighteen years old the right to vote.

Here in Ohio, voting to legalize recreational marijuana has been a big issue.
With the allegations of fraud brought up against the issue it got me thinking. This is a completely different issue which I don't care to discuss.

"According to the 26th amendment, the legal voting age in the USA is 18. The legal age for the consumption of marijuana in states that have already legalized is 21."

I pondered this for a while and came to the conclusion of "that doesn't make any sense"
Its like a bar holding open voting to anyone 18+ to decide what kind of beer to serve on the weekend, those under the legal drinking age won't reap the benefit either way.

Seriously where is the disconnect here? I'm neither for or against marijuana as I truly don't care, but this just boggles my mind.

The same with the drinking age being 21. You can enlist and die for your country but can't buy a beer.

I think that when the twenty-sixth was passed, people at 18 were more mature than they are today. I mean just 200 years ago people were getting married and having kids at 16. People had to grow up faster and enter the "real world" a lot sooner.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Must admit I find it odd that you have to be 18 to drink.
I once had around 20 USA students come in my pub in London all around 19 asking for a 20 coffees I told em "You can but we only have 2 cups and you are in the UK now beer for all!".
They were over here studying alcoholism lol.
All light weights got drunk after a half lol.

But back to the MJ thing they will be able to partake in a few years so their vote will still count and I just hope you guys get it passed, the more states that pass it means it will be closer for the UK to have the debate.

You have a right to vote you don't have a right to buy legal marijuana that is a privilege. That is why states can set the age for buying it at whatever they want. But I do agree with the op if you are old enough to fight and die for your country then you should be able to buy pot,alcohol and be able to vote.

a reply to: Banquo

They'll be 21 soon enough. 18 y/o can kill and die in combat but still can't can't legally drink in America (but can everywhere else in the world and they will).

It is what it is.

Anyway, go Ohio! Legalize it!

a reply to: Banquo

I've just stumbled upon this article

The main psychoactive ingredient in cannabis - tetrahydrocannabinol - could be used to reduce tumor growth in cancer patients, according to an international research team.

www.medicalnewstoday.com...

Previous studies have suggested that cannabinoids, of which tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is one, have anti-cancer properties. In 2009, researchers at Complutense University in Spain found that THC induced the death of brain cancer cells in a process known as "autophagy."

Apparently it has 34cures for cancer and it is not FDA approved.. The next line in the picture quote is chemotherapy was discovered by poisoning people with mustard gas and is FDA approved.. multi billion dollar industry..

a reply to: GlutenFree

Not a new thing.



Been known for a while maybe thats one of the reasons they don't want us to have it.

a reply to: GlutenFree

I know of a couple (relation) who are treating their infant with small amounts of cannabis oil (or some related form) to combat a tumor. Doctor approved, and thoroughly researched etc. before giving it to the child (in case anyone was wondering). Apparently its been working well.

Voting only takes a little bit of thinking. The kind of thinking that any 18 year old can do.

Joining the military at 18 is the perfect age. The mind is still malleable to the cause.

Drinking screws up an 18 year old brain pretty easy. Imho, 21 is too low a number. I am thinking 24 would be better. The brain and personality should be reasonably fully cooked by then.

But to say that an 18 year old can kill or be killed in war, but cant drink or smoke stateside, is apples and oranges completely different.

A soft brain can be well conditioned in the act of war, to the point of accuracy.

There is no training to be stupid drunk or smoked into a haze. It takes no skill. In fact it takes away skill.

So let the 18, 19, and 20 year olds vote on things that wont effect them immediatly. Maybe by the time they are 21 life will become important to them.

Maybe not.

I live in the UK, and have recently started vaping CBD as I struggle with depression. I was planing on getting some for my mum because she has Parkinson's disease and arthritis. It has the relaxing pain killing properties of marujuana but does not get you high. Her Parkinson's nurse actually gave a lecture about marujuana being a good treatment for Parkinson's, because it stops the shaking. I would like to grow some real weed that we could both use, but I am still worried about the legality even if we can prove its for medicinal use and not for retail. I don't even know if CBD is legal as it is made from hemp, it's a grey area I think.

a reply to: Banquo

More importantly, if at 18 you have all the responsibilities of an adult, why not get all the privileges?

The US constitution make requirements for congress and president by age (25 and 35) but makes no other stipulations by age.

i've said it time and time again, if you can severe in the military at 17 with a parents permission. you should be able to partake in all the legal rights that this country / state has to offer.

old enough to die, old enough to get high!

a reply to: Banquo

I used to complain considerably when I was underage and in the military that you are able to sign up and die for your country, but you still aren't allowed to legally drink that pain away for another 3 years.

The situation is screwed up. I did hear some decent reasoning to have the drinking age be 21 in that a 21 year old would be more likely to buy booze for an 18 year old rather than a 16 year, while an 18 year old would have less compunctions against buying booze for a 16 year old. As far as marijuana, I actually think the smoking age should be the same as cigarettes.

a reply to: olbe66

With that same comparison, then why dont 18 year olds get access to social security?

Drinking isnt a privilege. It is an adult responsibility. And if not responsible, you can lose "privilege".

And myself included, 18 year old drinkers arent very responsible. Stupid is the word I think fitting. It takes maturity to consume intoxicants responsibly. And maturity doesnt seem to be in abundance anymore in young adults.

a reply to: smirkley

18 year olds do have access to social security. The are entitled to survivors claims, disability claims, black-lung claims, etc. You used the wrong analogy – I work for social security.

Drinking isnt a privilege. It is an adult responsibility. And if not responsible, you can lose "privilege".

I think that is a concept created by the state to exert control. There are many like it, and we hear them from birth, so we assume they are true.

When I was growing up (born in 1962), starting at about 12 or so my parents let us drink wine at thanksgiving and Christmas dinners, and might let us have a sip of their beer a a summer cookout. That is illeagl now, and I can't share a beer with my 19 year old son..

The drink age was 18 in my state when I came of age. I didn't get drunk and drive, did not become a raging drunk, and also enlisted in the Army. After I got out and when to college I got my commission, and after the ceremony a bunch of use fresh Lieutenants went to a bar to have a drink to celebrate. About 4 or 5 guys could not get in, because the laws had changed to 21, and they we 20.

Makes no sense to me that those young leaders, some of who I would run into during desert storm leading troops, we given the awesome responsibility over the lives of our troops but deemed not competent to have a beer.

Additionally I fear for my son. Drinking alcohol has become so mystified by our socitey, and made to be such a rite of passege into adulthood, that many young people who have no experience with it will abuse it.

That was my point

And I agree that drinking requires maturity. But that does always come with age. How many 60 year old drunk drivers do you read about in the paper/see on the news.

a reply to: olbe66

Two points...

1. My flawed social security "analogy" was in reference to retirement benefits only.

2. Alot less dui at 60 than 20.

But most importantly, and my takeaway, is that legally being able to drink and the ability to die or kill in war zones, two entirely different animals.

I will never equate the ability to join the military and fight, to the right to drink or consume regulated intoxicants.

And I think my former post outlines quite well why I feel that way.

Hence my intentionally flawed "analogy"

I should add this disclaimer,...

I have lost freinds, family, and associates to alcohol and drug use. Especially while driving. I have almost been killed by a drubk driver a few short years ago.

A reasonable libation now and then I see nothing wrong with.

But I just have lost too many people in my life to stupid crap like drunk stupid idiots thinking they have a right....

Yes, a right. Tell it to my dead freinds. And their families.

People, there is no hurry to drink. If you are under 21 and an active military member, yes I will offer a beer at my house.

But take your time. There are enough years in your life to get stupid drunk and kill someone or yourself.

Just enjoy those three years after 17 as an adult without wasting it, you, or someone else, because you had a need to get plastered.

Yes I am biased.
No I refuse to change.
I have lost too much.