[noitpmeder]

Does this logic extend to other things society has deemed vices? Should it be soley on the parents to prevent your kid from accessing drugs? What about cigarettes/weed/alcohol? Or anything that society has put in place age-based or other legal gates.

Now imagine all government restrictions on these are removed, and there is a store within walking distance of your house that is staffed by employees that will willingly, without question, sell these items to your kids and their friends? Is it still all on the parents to prevent access?

What about if this store has advertisements specifically targeted toward children? Or has discounts on cigarettes/alcohol/... aimed at the lower age brackets? "First pack free if you're under 18".

Now put this "store" on the internet, accessible from your kid's cellular device.

There's a spectrum here.

[djrj477dhsnv]

> Does this logic extend to other things society has deemed vices?

Yes. When a child is too young, parents should be directly preventing access to those vices. As their children get older, parents should have instilled enough values into their children that constant surveillance is no longer required.

[AlexandrB]

Do you have children? Were you ever a child? It really doesn't sound like it. It's easy to stop a 4 year old from going to the liquor store. Basically impossible to stop a 14 year old. And 14 year old kids will do all kinds of dumb stuff for approval/attention from friends or (especially) the opposite sex.

[djrj477dhsnv]

Doing dumb stuff and experimenting as a teenager is part of growing up. I don't see anything wrong with that.