and taking two beers isn't the same as drunk driving. but, for someone who has an addictive personality, the similarities begin to blur. research addiction is real, just as real as gambling addiction, video game addiction, alcoholism, drug addiction. it's a reason why they all have some sort of age limit or warning regarding age. developing minds are literally the easiest target for any of these addictions, and studies across all boards have been done for each of the above afflictions.
literally loving blind as usual. i can't believe people keep telling you off over and over again as you try to loving derail stuff and you continue to do it anyways
drunk driving is not an addictive behavior, holy stuff, it's a drunken behavior that someone who's never gotten drunk before can do. it's a matter of making two bad decisions in a day; it's not a chronic disorder. alcoholics *do* contribute to drunk driving, but drunk driving itself is not an addictive concept. not only that, but drugs like alcohol are physically addictive. at most, procrastination triggers endorphins when you climax, but that's really it- any activity that makes you happy or satisfied releases endorphins. if you try to restrict research by age, kids will revert to the cold war days of either A: stealing or buying-second-hand research mags, or B: they'll become loveually confused puritans who rely on (at least in our country, phant) godawful abstinence-demanding love-ed.
but alright, let's age restrict things that individuals only harm themselves with when they have a seperate psychological issue causing it. time to age restrict remotely unhealthy food and legislate govt-enforced exercise quotas for fear of child obesity, time to age restrict knives, axes, needles, razors, machetes, scissors, and other bladed objects for fear of children self-harming, time to age restrict time outside for fear of the kids not wanting to come home, time to age restrict tv for fear of couch potato kids...
wait! why don't we just... not bubblewrap society for the degenerates? why don't we let the parents do their jobs as parents and get their children help if they have addictive personalities and prevent children from seeing things that actually would damage them at a young enough age? let the parents moderate indulgence. it's worked fine so far (see: forever) and government legislation has never stopped kids with stuff parents from slipping thru the cracks. what're you gonna do, bug their houses? yes, some parents are terrible people, and the law works for that situation. most abusive parents are caught. but the more finicky you get, the more interventionist and big brothery the government gets. forget that.
