I believe that people under 16 years old should be banned from social media. This is mostly for a few factors, the obvious first being that they're undeveloped mentally which can lead to poor choices and impact their future. There has been multiple cases of perfectly fine teenagers being radicalized by social media outlets into becoming extremists, for example this case: (https://www.isd.gov.sg/news-and-resources/issuance-of-orders-of-detention-under-the-internal-security-act--isa--against-three-self-radicalised-singaporean-youths/) where teenagers radicalized themselves via social media and eventually went on to take numerous lives within a school shooting. Other things include stuff such as neurological decline within teenagers who use social media as they are so dopamine hot-wired to it that they cannot focus on other things such as school-work, which in turn causes such neurological/processing decline. These are my starting two arguments.

Why not just do the same thing but with older children? Would they not be more equipped and able to handle social interactions and their own choices with their added experience of being in "the real world"? Eg: Bobby is 12, he sees something on social media and instantly assumes it to be true because he knows nothing better, he is just a kid after all. What if bobby was 17? Would he believe the obviously fake headline after he grows up and substantially increases in intelligence?

I don't mean to generalize, however it is fair to say that majority of under 16's act in near the same pattern as other under 16's. It is not a fact, simply just a educated generalization. It's not ALL under 16's, but some that need this type of restriction, and we cannot correctly identify which ones need what, so it would simply be easier and more efficient to broadly ban it.