Case Study
Yet, on July 19 Brookline Town Meeting Members voted to adopt Article 14
"I've supported every anti-tobacco measure to date, but I can't support this"
Massachusetts communities are considering prohibitions the sale of any tobacco product to adults born after January 1, 2000. Some towns have ignored the recommendation of several local health committees to oppose the bylaw and created a separate class of adults who no longer have the same rights as others and created a contradiction with state law. One such community, Brookline, is now being sued due to it's adoption of this policy.
Yet, on July 19 Brookline Town Meeting Members voted to adopt Article 14
Brookline retailers have sued Brookline on the grounds enforcement of the local bylaw requires them to break a state law
Adults born after January 1, 2000 have had a right stripped away and may consider joining the suit against Brookline.
The language of these infinite age restrictions is that they don't address smoking. Marijuana smoking is exempt, thus you can be 21 to smoke weed, but need to be 30 years old to smoke tobacco.
There is not peer-reviewed science on these infinite age restrictions. Public Health policy needs to be driven by peer-reviewed science and the public good.
With the availability of tobacco products a short 3 minute drive away to a neighboring town, these sorts of regulations will do absolutely nothing to stop a 22 year old from smoking, yet it will hurt a town's small business community.
At what point are you an adult?
These regulations are so draconian that at some point even a 55 year old person couldn't buy a cigar for a wedding or special event.
But prohibition is a step too far. Liberal societies tolerate all sorts of evils—look no further than alcohol—on the grounds that the state’s business is to regulate for safety and to minimize harm, not to tell people how to live their lives. Smoking should be no different.
It was clear from the Brookline Select Board, Public Health and Advisory Committee that public officials have great concerns about these regulations.
Yes, Brookline must use taxpayer dollars to defend a suit against this new regulation.
This has nothing to do with youth smoking. This has to do with adults being allowed to smoke - as these regulations are for people aged 21 and older and eventually would prevent even a 65 year old person to purchase tobacco.
In the most recent case in Brookline, the public health director opposed the regulation because it doesn't actually do anything to curb youth smoking.
No. In many cases these regulations are so poorly written that they allow a 21 year old to purchase weed to smoke, cigarette papers to roll, alcohol to drink, but not a cigar.
In Brookline it would still be legal for a 21 year old to buy a gun but not a pack of cigarettes. These regulations make it illegal to buy chewing tobacco but keep it legal to buy alcohol, weed, CBD, rifles and ammunition.