New York City, the largest municipality in America, has recently voted to increase the legal age of tobacco consumption from 18 to 21. The city’s council vote, which passed overwhelmingly, is expected to be signed into law by Mayor Michael Bloomberg in the coming days. In addition to the new age restriction, packs of cigarettes will face a minimum price of $10.50 within the city.

These developments have upset not only the tobacco industry but have also irked others who view such legislation as unfair. To be sure, the notion that young adults are able to become full members of our society at the age of 18, yet must be protected for three more years from the dangers of tobacco has led to more than a little head-scratching.

Like the 21-year-old limit on purchasing alcohol, the increased age for tobacco was passed largely on health concerns. The dangers alcohol poses to developing bodies and brains (which, in general, are not fully formed at the age of 18) has long been understood, but the reasons given for tobacco to join in such restrictions are somewhat different.

It has been repeatedly proven that tobacco use can be extremely addictive. It can also be very difficult, as millions of Americans know, to quit smoking once you have started. An entire industry has been created to cater to those attempting to quit via nicotine patches, gum and smokeless e-cigarettes.

With that difficulty in mind, the idea behind disallowing those under 21 from smoking is that those three years give young adults extra time to assess their choices in life, potentially stopping them from ever putting a cigarette to their lips. After all, few would argue that the average 18-year-old makes better decisions than they would three years later.

More than just stopping youngsters from starting a nasty habit, a valid argument could be raised that keeping some potential smokers from lighting up will prevent their early deaths. New York City Councilman James Gennaro was quoted as saying of the new measure: “This will literally save many, many lives.”

Indeed, the Center for Disease Control lists tobacco use as the most common cause of preventable death in the United States. With more than 400,000 Americans succumbing to tobacco-related fatalities each year, it can be hard to argue against measures that limit tobacco use in any form.

The problem of second-hand smoke adds even further to the frustrations our society has regarding tobacco use. For when someone chooses to smoke, they are potentially endangering the health of others around them, even with restrictions on where smoking is and is not allowed.

Despite all of these facts, we should have reservations about raising tobacco use age limits beyond 18. The oft-invoked comparison of being able to “join the military” or “die for your country” before you can drink (or in this case, smoke) is a powerful one. Along with such patriotic invocations, the logic goes that 18 is still, in fact, the legal age of majority in the United States.

Does it really make sense to claim that individuals who in almost all other areas of life are treated as full and complete adults are not able to make well-informed decisions? What would be the reaction if a regular 20-year-old committed a crime, yet was tried as a minor on grounds that he or she was not able to make choices as a full adult?

Undoubtedly, such special treatment would not stand.

While it is easy to claim the need for further restrictions on smoking, doing so through an increase in the legal age of consumption beyond that required for adulthood is the wrong solution.

If we expect those 18 and over to behave as adult members of our society, we must treat them as such.