Democracy for all??

[MrPresident]

There have been recent discussions in Parliament (Britain's Parliament) about the possible lowering of the voting age to 16. What do you think about it? Some people have suggested that it will improve voter turnout from younger people and allowed such people to have a say if how they are governed? Other people have responded by saying that voting should be restricted to adults because of the complex issues and the responsibilites involved. Have your say on the topic now.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

It should certainly not be lowered to 16.
It is bad enough giving immature 18 year olds the vote.
It may not be the case for all, but we should err on the side of caution.
21 would be a good and proper age.

 

[dannyevilcat]

At 18, people are out of the school system, ready to contribute to a productive society, it seems a fair time to let them vote.

Maturity is gained through experience, and if we deny them the voting experience, then they won't mature politically. Not that many do, anyway...

 

[ainwood]

... If the UK government believe that people can vote at a younger age, then this implies that they believe that they are responsible for their actions at a younger age.

Ie - the voting age should also set the age at which people are treated as adults in the criminal justice system - no more "banning orders", they can actually have effective deterents for young(er) delinquents.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade
It should certainly not be lowered to 16.
It is bad enough giving immature 18 year olds the vote.
It may not be the case for all, but we should err on the side of caution.
21 would be a good and proper age.

Let me guess: You're 21?

Anyway, I don't care much if it's 16, 18 or 21. Most people never reach enough political awareness to be 'mature enough to vote'. So lower it to 16 if you want, or leave it...

 

[Greadius]

Only the informed young will vote; the rest well remain apathetic.

I see that now in my age group. The 10 of us who vote are overflowing political information.

 

[ComradeDavo]

I think people should have the vote at 16, but then again i'm biased.

 

[TubaGuy]

I'm 16 and I honestly think 18 is a good age. I think they originaly chose it because if you were able to be drafted when your 18 it's only fair to be able to vote, but at least in the US it was originaly 21.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

Like dannyevilcat said, at 18 you're out of the public school system. That's the last step of academic and social learning that is universal across the country, and so after that I think you should be able to vote.

As for being mature enough to make wise decisions, I think that's more than we can possibly hope for at any age, given the current state of world affairs.

 

[Pellaken]

I feel that a number of adults are too stupid to know who to vote for, so I dont care what the voitng age is.

 

[MrPresident]

Like dannyevilcat said, at 18 you're out of the public school system.

You can leave our school system at the age of 16. Also you can die for your country in combat at the age of 16. Both of these lend me to believe that people are more than ready for the political world at the age of 16.

 

[knowltok2]

I ma in favor of one legal age of majority. If it is to be 16 than miltary service, adult prosecution, alchohol, driving and everything else should be at that age.

If in Britain 16 is the age for other responsibility factors, than I would be fine with lowing the voting age to it. But that only applies if the other factors are at 16 as well.

In the US I think it should be 18, and all other age requirements should conform to 18.

 

[napoleon526]

Personaly, I think that there are too many idiots in the world already and its bad enough that they can vote. The only form of govt that really works is the "Enlightened Despot". Perhaps we should give people tests to make sure that they're capable of forming complete sentences. Although, they did used to have these in the south to prevent less educated black people form voting. Hmm.

 

[ainwood]

Originally posted by MrPresident

You can leave our school system at the age of 16. Also you can die for your country in combat at the age of 16. Both of these lend me to believe that people are more than ready for the political world at the age of 16.

Not sure that I agree with the "I'f I'm old enough to die for my country, I'm old enough to vote" argument.

In a voter, do you want people who are enlightened about, and understand the issues, or people who care about their country?

If you die for your country, that isn't necessarily evidence of either.

 

[knowltok2]

Originally posted by ainwood


Not sure that I agree with the "I'f I'm old enough to die for my country, I'm old enough to vote" argument.

In a voter, do you want people who are enlightened about, and understand the issues, or people who care about their country?

If you die for your country, that isn't necessarily evidence of either.

I would want rights and responsibilities to be tied together. Voting is mainly a right (yes, it is a responsibility too), and serving your country in war is largely a responsibility. It is because they should be tied together that they should be at the same age.

A right without responsibilty will not be appreciated, and a responsibilty without rights is downright unfair.

Personally I think 16 is too young for both voting and military service, but if a country wants to have one at 16, they should have the other there as well.

 

[Sixchan]

Surely having a child is a bigger responsibility than voting, though. So why are we allowed kids at 16, but can't vote until we're 18?

In a voter, do you want people who are enlightened about, and understand the issues, or people who care about their country?

Why can't a 16 year old be enlightened about issues? what does two extra years make?

 

[knowltok2]

Originally posted by Sixchan
Surely having a child is a bigger responsibility than voting, though. So why are we allowed kids at 16, but can't vote until we're 18?



Why can't a 16 year old be enlightened about issues? what does two extra years make?

Having a child is not to my mind part of the social contract. perhaps in a welfare state it should be, but that isn't my cup of tea, or area of expertise.

A 16 year-old can be enlightened, and plenty an 18, 35, and 70 year old are not. My main reason against 16 is that I think it is too young to require military service from. Since I think the two should go hand in hand, I say 18.

 

[Ozz]

Just as soon as they pay their first penny in tax.

NO TAXATION with out REPRESENTATION

I wouldn't can anyone i couldn't vote for
my repersentative.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by Ozz
Just as soon as they pay their first penny in tax.

NO TAXATION with out REPRESENTATION

I wouldn't can anyone i couldn't vote for
my repersentative.

good point, but I'd rather have the income of 16 year olds be tax free than to have 16 year olds voting. As others have said, countries should determine an age of majority at which people can vote, serve in the military, pay taxes, etc. I'm undecided about whether the drinking and driving ages should be at that age though. Many high school aged teens in less urban areas need to drive themselves to school, work, etc, and I think the drinking age should be low enough so that kids learn to drink responsibly before going to college. Although I sure did enjoy my irresponsible drinking in high school and college.

 

[Ozz]

Originally posted by Ozz
Just as soon as they pay their first penny in tax.

NO TAXATION with out REPRESENTATION

I wouldn't call anyone i couldn't vote for
my representative.

This includes SALES TAX, but not property (land) tax.