system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
cmv: If the age limit for smoking is 21, so should it be for military service and voting

EDIT: based on responses, I just want to make clear that I'm not advocating the age limit be one or another - just that it should be consistent as it relates to accountability. Thanks.

The fact that (in the US) we've deemed that we're not able to make rational decisions at 18 that have long term consequences - such as smoking - and not military service or voting for representatives that create laws we all have to abide by, is a complete double standard and what I would consider an example of ongoing nanny-state legislation.

It only makes sense to me that we would keep a consistent standard when it comes to determining what age we are accountable for our personal actions and decisions as adults.

(As a former smoker, military vet, and smoking military vet - I do not condone smoking or war. I just think an 18yo putting their life on the line in a war zone should be able to smoke a cigarette if he/she wants)
gpt
One big difference between smoking and the military is that we expect young people to give cigarettes to people even younger than them. So 18 year olds give cigarettes to their 16 and 17 year old friends, just like 21 year olds give alcohol to their 19 and 20 year old friends. 

If you want to cut the number of nicotine addicts, you have to keep young people from smoking. By raising the age for smokers, your also raising the age of people who smoke by proximity. 

That doesn't work with the military. Even if we didn't want people to join the military, no one is bringing their 16 and 17 year old friends to war with them. But of course we *do* want people to join the military. We want people voting, too, but again you can't just bring your friend to vote with you if they couldn't otherwise vote.