Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by madviking, May 19, 2010.
Yea but the USA hasn't tried it, and the USA doesn't fail.
Doesn't change the fact I still could put my life on the line for my country, but not be able to control who's in charge.
Unless it would be okay for me to vote with my parent's permission as well?
My father did say I'm not allowed to vote under his roof if I don't support the Republicans.
Driving without supervision of a full license holder should not be permitted for anyone under the age of 18.
Drinking should be legal for those 16+.
Here is a hint. Your single vote isnt going to do that.
Not how that works.
An un-enforceable rule if I ever heard one.
I laugh at the "both should be equal" option; the way I see it, they will start both at the same time, and therefore do both simultaneously more frequently than the current US system.
But. Combined with the votes of countless more people in the same situation...
Why bother voting at all if one vote doesn't matter, then?
I know. I'm just making the joking proposal that maybe voting should be fine at the same age, with parental permission.
It's un-enforceable only if the child is a good liar and can deceive their parents about who they voted for.
I am not a good one. (I wouldn't do well in politics obviously; I also have a fetish for reducing waste, making it a double whammy)
It's easy to see why I therefore am powerless to oppose my father politically so long as I live within his home.
...never mind the whole he seems to be moderately anti-gay and I happen to have a little problem...
One justification of the 21 rule in the states I've heard based on the idea that 18-21 year olds are more vulnerable to negative health effects of alcohol. How much of that is hogwash?
I would guess all of it.
A question asked by many.
Well, since voting is a right, your parents cant deny you from doing it and since its a privacy issue, you dont have to tell them who you voted for.
And if you dad goes through to kick you out of the house for not voting the way he wants you to he is an ass. And I say that as a registered republican.
Its more likely that you two have more important things to work out than simply just politics.
You guessing means little to me.
Every vote counts.
I would like to say that there is a thought behind the European and American systems, but I think both ages were just 'chosen' without considering the other issue.
In the end, I would argue that the European system allows young people to experience the effects of alcohol and only after they know that they are starting auto school. That makes more sense to me than the other way around.
Unfortunately there are still lots of accidents involving intoxicated young people and research in the last decade has proven more and more that the consumption of alcohol on a not yet fully grown brain is very damaging for a person's development. For health reasons, it would therefore be better to not have drinking age at 16, but at 18 or even at American standards.
For driving, without taking into consideration drinking, I would not increase the age. The European norm of 18 is fine. The age of 16 may be a bit too early for some... then again, how many persons of 16 actually have/get a car? I don't know anyone who got a brand new 10k car from their parents and I doubt that the Hollywood-image of American young people always getting one is true (someone shine a light on that please).
Taking all of the above into account, I would argue to put both on 18. Even beer drinking, which in NL is at 16 at the moment.
Its probably true to some degree. Negligable or not.
Should that matter though? I mean an adult should be able to choose whether they want to take those risks.
21 works well because you are almost always getting a load of responsibilities at 18. I think either the German method or the American method are better, because it's a bad idea to allow young men and women to start drinking and start driving at the same time.
Are you joking?
I actually kinda like the U.S. setup now that I am getting a wee bit older into my late 20's. They SHOULD NOT ever be equal however, young adults need to learn responsibility one at a time. I'd say they need to learn how to responsibly drive a vehicle for at least a few years before legal drinking comes into play.
As much as I drank in high school (illegally mind you), I don't think alcohol should be any part of a high schoolers life, legally at least. Teachers and students have enough trouble on their hands as is and don't need this adding to it. Obviously plenty of kids like myself gain access to alcohol during their teen years, but it's a far cry from if it was legal.
21 does seem a bit late however to allow legal alcohol purchase/consumption, it really blows to still be barred from booze during msot of your college years when everyone around you can do it out in the open. Perhaps drop it to 19 in the U.S. Driving is fine at 16 however, most people are responsible and intelligent enough to handle that responsibility at that age.
Wait, at 16 people are responsible and intelligent enough to drive, which if done wrong has consequences for yourself and other road users, but they aren't responsible and intelligent enough to drink responsibly, which if done wrong only has consequences for yourself?
Absolutely, but how many elections are won by a single vote?
The one in Fermanagh/Tyrone on May 6th was won by 4.
So, in answer to my question the tally remains zero then, eh?
Separate names with a comma.