That's why I think that they shouldn't cluster all the "Age of consent" stuff around the 18-21 area. Within three years you get sex, smoking voting, drinking, and you're done. For the rest of your life you've pretty much got nothing until 65 when you get cheaper movie tickets and like 1/3 of the money you paid out in Social Security back.
That's why I think that some of the currently forbidden behaviors in our society should be distributed out along the age curve. Like pot. Right now it's hard to be cool when you're 40, but if you could legally score and smoke pot, well then. That'd put those whippersnappers in their place. Plus most of the ailments that cannabis can help assuage start showing up around then, so it's a win win.
The next question is when to start legalizing heroin. You can't end with pot at 40 because then you're back to square one. A lifetime of no milestones. I'd say you could safely give heroin to people 55 or older. They've got a lot of aches and pains, presumably they aren't going to over party with it, and you can't be that old and look heroin chic. I defy you to try.
So then we're left with crack. What is the age-appropriate point to start distributing crack. I gotta say for this one, I'm going to go as high as 75. You don't want to give crack to people who are still working and driving and stuff because it's a menace. But a 75 year old? What else has he got to do? His eyes are failing, his erection is no longer functional, and chances are he's shitting his pants on a fairly regular basis. At least this way he could say "I may be in a nursing home and incontinent, but at least I got my crack. Mmmm. That's some gooooood crack. Where's my teeth?"
So that takes care of the seniors up to that age, but what about the even older people? They say in 50 years people will be expected to survive into their hundreds. We can't just let it stop at 75. Crack is nice, but it's not going to keep you occupied for 25 years. That's why I think we should start lifting the caps on more serious crimes later in life. Say at 80 you can steal whatever you want. People can try to stop you, or fight you off, but if you get away with it it's yours. Then at 90 we can eliminate the ban on assault. If you are a 90 year old who wants to KICK SOME ASS you are free to do so without fear of legal recourse. That'll teach those kids to stay off your lawn. Then at 100 we free up the big-daddy and allow murder. Frankly if you can be killed by a 100 year old YOU DESERVE TO DIE. If he runs you down in his Jazzy YOU DESERVE TO DIE. If he manages to slip you a cup of poison tapioca YOU HAD IT COMING.
Now some may claim that implementing these changes will lead to a world of pot-smoking middle aged people trying to remember where they left their cars before the hordes of ancient murderers descend on them and kill them for their love beads. And I would say to them...so what? Is that really so bad? To those who argue that the older people might pass their drugs to the younger generations I will add that this is a TIME HONORED tradition. High school senior trades cigarettes to a 16 year old for a blow job behind the 7-11. College junior plies a freshman with spirits so he can hump her when she's passed out in the hydrangea. 40 year old Hollywood producer gets starlet addicted to coke so he can titty-fuck her on his desk while staring at revenue projections from the latest Corey Feldman DVD. At least now when a 57 year old Ad-Exec gives a 25 year old morphine so she'll let him screw her in the ass in the utility closet she'll know she's getting clean drugs.
Isn't that progress?