Check out some similar questions!

paraclete · Oct 30, 2015, 06:43 PM

An interesting question and one that has suddenly popped up as an opposition leader with a bad performance in the polls finds a new star to hitch his fortunes too

Bill Shorten calls for voting age to be lowered to 16 - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

But it is an interesting question within all democracies, at what point is a person considered responsible enough to enter into the political life of the nation? 18 seems to be the mean, however, there are a number of nations particularly in Europe where the age is 16 or where the question has been asked over the past decade.

There can be little doubt that physical maturity is arriving earlier, even if emotional maturity isn't. If we go way back a boy was considered a man at 13 in jewish circles long ago and in Islamic circles 15. Should we be aligning these ages of maturity with national responsibilities? What happens if a young person can vote at 16 but cannot buy alcohol or be allowed to do certain other things such as leave school

smoothy · Oct 30, 2015, 06:53 PM

If you ask me... at least 30 and a gainfully employed tax paying citizen.

Would leave out most of the clueless and the non-producers. So you would have a more responsible group of voters on average than you have now.

But I don't get to make the rules.

catonsville · Oct 30, 2015, 07:08 PM

Agree with Smoothy but I would add this. If the rules are to be changed to 16, I also think that the age to be held accountable,as an adult, for a crime should be lowered to 16 also. To damn many punks are getting away with very serious crimes due to age.

paraclete · Oct 30, 2015, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

If you ask me... at least 30 and a gainfully employed tax paying citizen.

Would leave out most of the clueless and the non-producers. So you would have a more responsible group of voters on average than you have now.

But I don't get to make the rules.

There are some nations who agree that for a young person to vote they must be employed, perhaps it should be prerequisite for all voters but then that would disenfranchise many. I'm certainly not in favour of those attending school being able to vote as their political opinions may be easily influenced by their teachers, nor am I in favour of voting to be restricted to some form of elite as it once was, and the system you suggest creates an elite of the fortunate.

Back to the question, what should the qualifications to vote be, universal suffrage at a particular age, special qualifications, should voters be required to undertake a citizenship course so they fully understand the processes.

An interesting side question is who is advantaged by voting at an early age. Those who need access to a social security system? Those who want to influence the cost of education? Those who feel that young people gravitate to a particular political view

smoothy · Oct 30, 2015, 07:16 PM

I also agree with Catonsville on that part he mentioned I left out. If the age to vote is lowered.. so should the age they are considered to be an adult for any and all crimes committed.

The very young to be blunt...are clues idiots brainwashed by their teachers (today more than ever). They also are not contributing members of society. It takes a number of years actually having a real full time job and being able to support themselves before they learn what the real world is actually like. And until they do they should NOT be allowed to vote because they lack the basic knowledge to be able to vote responsibly. (there are already enough clueless adults doing that now)

paraclete · Oct 30, 2015, 07:22 PM

Originally Posted by catonsville

Agree with Smoothy but I would add this. If the rules are to be changed to 16, I also think that the age to be held accountable,as an adult, for a crime should be lowered to 16 also. To damn many punks are getting away with very serious crimes due to age.

Yes, I agree the age for juvanile protection should be aligned with the voting age, but we don't want juvaniles in the adult prison population so it is a very broad question as to how to deal with the emotionally immature. That they are punks is a failure of the education system and society generally. I think the Spartan system was good, one to one mentoring by an older responsible person

catonsville · Oct 30, 2015, 07:26 PM

Para said:
" I'm certainly not in favour of those attending school being able to vote as their political opinions may be easily influenced by their teachers".

This can also be attributed to College where students can be any age from 18 up.

paraclete · Oct 30, 2015, 07:31 PM

Smoothy I had a responsible job at 15 and it didn't take long to know what the real world was like. I acknowledge my political education and knowledge at that time was non existent other than the advice of my father to vote a particular way. For this reason, I possed the question what should the voting age be? I'm sure communications today means the youth are better informed if they can be bothered to get their heads out of a video game or Facebook.

We cannot eliminate ignorance (cluelessness) because there is no excuse for it, there is no excuse for citizens not to be politically aware, politically astute is something else but ifyou give citizen responsibilities to youth at what point do you induct them into the military, all them to drink alcohol, make important decisions, marry. It seems to me there can be no distinctions

catonsville · Oct 30, 2015, 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

Yes, I agree the age for juvanile protection should be aligned with the voting age, but we don't want juvaniles in the adult prison population so it is a very broad question as to how to deal with the emotionally immature. That they are punks is a failure of the education system and society generally. I think the Spartan system was good, one to one mentoring by an older responsible person

Agree with not putting juvenile in with hardened criminals. We seem to have money to waste on government ideas so why not set up separate prisons for them until they reach 18 or 21 and then they finish their time. Don't like that when they are 18 we "spring them". Do the crime, do the time. We are not living in Spartan times and these kid are smart, far smarter than you and I at 14-16.

smoothy · Oct 30, 2015, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

Smoothy I had a responsible job at 15 and it didn't take long to know what the real world was like. I acknowledge my political education and knowledge at that time was non existent other than the advice of my father to vote a particular way. For this reason, I possed the question what should the voting age be? I'm sure communications today means the youth are better informed if they can be bothered to get their heads out of a video game or Facebook.

We cannot eliminate ignorance (cluelessness) because there is no excuse for it, there is no excuse for citizens not to be politically aware, politically astute is something else but ifyou give citizen responsibilities to youth at what point do you induct them into the military, all them to drink alcohol, make important decisions, marry. It seems to me there can be no distinctions

I would disagree... I've seen enough arguments on enough different forums (including this one) by high school age youth that have demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge... meaning they are far from informed.

You and I both grew up in a time where teachers believed their jobs were actually to teach students with what they need to know. These days that has taken a distant second to indoctrinating them into a particular political parties dogma that happen to control the current education system. (At least in the USA that is true).

That is far from informed... and actually the opposite of it because they are taught to ignore facts and reality and blindly follow what they are told to believe.

And informed person has to be capable of listening to everything without bias and forming their own decisions.

In High school and College today if you don't follow precisely that of the teachers (nearly always near socialist in leaning) you will suffer lower grades... be ridiculed publicly and even failed. Been too many examples and actual recordings and video taped of teachers ranting politics instead of doing what they were paid to do.

Fr_Chuck · Oct 31, 2015, 12:47 AM

You should be at least 21, be able to read and write, and pass a simple government knowledge test.

paraclete · Oct 31, 2015, 04:01 AM

Well smoothy there should be an inspectorate that seeks out political bias and ensures it is not part of the education system. It seems we cannot keep certain sorts of bias out of the education system and to do that you have to start with the types of people who are attracted to the system

smoothy · Oct 31, 2015, 05:04 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

Well smoothy there should be an inspectorate that seeks out political bias and ensures it is not part of the education system. It seems we cannot keep certain sorts of bias out of the education system and to do that you have to start with the types of people who are attracted to the system

I completely agree. Like most of the media as well... you get a few people in at high enough levels and they all but make certain anybody that doesn't think as they do will neither get hired, and if they do, they never get Tenure. (Something else that should be done away with).

The problem is systemic and has gotten so bad the quality of education has suffered dramatically.

tomder55 · Oct 31, 2015, 06:23 AM

leave it to the libs ! They recruit voters from the grave .Now they want voters fresh out of diapers.

Here in the US the voting group with the lowest turnout is the youth vote. The only time they vote in significant numbers is when they are jacked up by a populist demagogue . Local and midterm elections they virtually disappear.

The move to 18 was questionable ,and illogically based on the age of being eligible to serve in the military. We also once had an eligibility to drink at 18 . But that has been moved up to 21 where the populations thinks people are more responsible . What you want from a soldier is unquestioned obedience. That is exactly the opposite from what you want from a voter . What you want from a voter is informed and reasoned decision making . I think lowering the voting age to 16 would be a disaster for the nation.

excon · Oct 31, 2015, 06:40 AM

Hello P:

I don't mean to interrupt your right wing love fest, but I have a few FACTS to interject.

First off, we DO send children to ADULT PRISON. Many are there for LIFE without parole.. Who doesn't KNOW that??

Secondly, your talk of being responsible, and knowing stuff before you can vote, reminds me of poll taxes and literacy tests. Those ideas are RACIST, RACIST, and even more RACIST than that.. Who doesn't know THAT??

Third, I'm fine with leaving the voting age at 18.

excon

PS> On second thought. If you had to know stuff BEFORE you vote, it would eliminate most Republicans. That doesn't sound half bad to me..

What??? You didn't know we send kids to PRISON, and have been for YEARS!!

smoothy · Oct 31, 2015, 07:15 AM

What percentage of minors are ever tried as adults for any crime they commit? It's a pretty low percentage. The ones that are and are in jail for life ,deserve to be there. Most of them should have gotten the death penalty and probably would have if they committed their murders at 18 or more. In fact it had to be a pretty bad crime before they could be.

Its not automatic... and that's a key fact you omitted.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Juvenile defendants

The people that think children should vote are also the same people that are against any form of ID being required at the polls who also think Illegals have a right to vote as well as dead people and people in nursing homes unable to even feed themselves or recognize family members. And think they have the right to vote as many times in an election as they can find time to pull off. As a number of Democrat party officials have been caught doing in recent years.

talaniman · Oct 31, 2015, 07:56 AM

Back to the question without the BS mumbo jumbo. If the law deems you are of age to defend your country, then you deserve a beer and a vote. It's 18 in the US. Doubt if it goes lower than that!

cdad · Oct 31, 2015, 08:45 AM

I think the age should be 21. The only exception for that would be 18 if participating in the military. In todays day and age with the coddeling of youth going on they have no concept of reality. At 18 they are still at the point of being under their parents wing rather then being on their own. Without a reality check they cant possibly think in a critical manner enough to be involved in the voting process. Atleast if they are on their own for alittle 18-21 they can see what it is like to be responsible and what it is like in the real world away from the parents shelter.

excon · Oct 31, 2015, 09:30 AM

Hello again,

Don't stupid people deserve representation? If you want it to be the smartest, the left will RULE... Who doesn't know that?

excon

tomder55 · Oct 31, 2015, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by talaniman

Back to the question without the BS mumbo jumbo. If the law deems you are of age to defend your country, then you deserve a beer and a vote. It's 18 in the US. Doubt if it goes lower than that!

most state have the legal drinking age at 21 ,not that I agree with that . Most 16 years olds don't bother to vote in their school student council elections ,and the students that win it are the ones that promise the most bs and are most popular .....it's like voting for Bernie Sanders ,or the businessman from NY .