Return_of_Chippy

I think that's a pretty well reasoned answer. Can't really pick anything out I strongly disagree with. Thanks for the contribution!

All crime, yes. Being in the US I can't say I agree with most of what you're saying. I think moving out at 18/ after HS is expected regardless of gender. Or at least I don't think the negative stigma of staying home into your 20s is any different among the genders. To be fair, I'm 31 and moved out when I was 18. I found roommates off craigslist and did wild shit to pull it off. Even that doesn't seem commonly possible in the current housing/rental market in most places. Do women have more resources at college? Not that I remember. I do remember knowing some that were just going to get their "Mrs. Degree". I think thats more the minority though. I just see a lot of flawed thinking opposite from my experience.

Is there a direct correlation with low IQ and likelihood of criminal activity?

What are some examples of your first point?

It is a hell of a drug

I recognize the whole 13th amendment problem but again this is a blanket thing, not a US thing. I don't understand your fist statement though, are you saying women actually commit more crime but they just don't get caught? I can agree with the final part of your comment.

Can you elaborate on your initial statement instead? Guessing what you think/mean isn't really a good way to understand your stance.

I can't really disagree on a physical level but this universal constant carries to ALL crime not just violent/physical.

When I was younger it was Pandora. I'd listen to Pandora channels and if I heard something new I'd grab the artists discography off limewire. Go through and see what I liked. Sometimes I'd see who opened live for the artists I really liked then listen to them too. Now that I can afford to support artists I try to by buying physical media. I swap it with friends. I have 3 buddies I do this with. Every month or so we trade an album or two.

Didn't really address what I said.

How far would you like to see that ban extend? Would it only include XYZ drug deemed harmful or would it encompass any mind/body altering substance like caffeine/nicotine?

I mean, the word statistically is carrying a lot of weight in 16 year old single day event thats essentially subjective. As well as the fact it ranks tobacco in the low 20s vs alcohol in the high 70s. Not to mention prescription opiates and the context by which they are relevant is not included (couldn't be in a "study" from 2010). Around 3 times more people die from tobacco use annually. But, regardless of that, would you then enact a prohibition on any "harmful" drugs? Or just alcohol?

That all sounds pretty fair.

So, local/national regulation on distribution, seems reasonable.

I can agree with both.

Yeah I'm strongly against any strictly abstinence based education. The judgment part would be impossible to codify but I understand your point.

I can definitely get behind that mentality.