Should children be allowed to vote?

Explicit · November 21, 2005, 04:08 PM

The argument still remains: Why is it that you can go to war, risk your life, and take another's life, but not be able to consume alcohol at the age of 18? Compare the rights.

Arta · November 21, 2005, 04:11 PM

You shouldn't be able to volunteer for anything dangerous when you're under 18. If you're too young to decide who to vote for, you're obviously too young to decide whether or not to place yourself at risk. After all, being able to judge risk is something adults are supposed to be ok at, and children are generally terrible at.

That said, if people who are under 18 are qualified to decide to join the army, drive, and become firefighters and policemen, then clearly, they are qualified to vote.

Within reason, I don't really care where the age limit is, but it should be consistent.

Explicit · November 21, 2005, 04:16 PM

Quote from: Arta[vL] on November 21, 2005, 04:11 PM
That said, if people who are under 18 are qualified to decide to join the army, drive, and become firefighters and policemen, then clearly, they are qualified to vote.

Agreed.

CrAz3D · November 21, 2005, 04:28 PM

People under 18 aren't qualified to join the military or police or fire & rescue, at least not where I'm from. You can drive @ 16 which is dangerous as well, but I don't think it is as 'high risk' as the military, polic, or fire.

Mephisto · November 21, 2005, 04:55 PM

Quote from: CrAz3D on November 21, 2005, 04:28 PM
People under 18 aren't qualified to join the military or police or fire & rescue, at least not where I'm from. You can drive @ 16 which is dangerous as well, but I don't think it is as 'high risk' as the military, polic, or fire.

I believe you can join the military at 16 w/ parental consent.

dx · November 21, 2005, 04:56 PM

I wouldn't want children to vote...We already have idiots in office, whats next...Friday will be national candy day? I think the age requirement is perfectly fine..however, there are plenty of legal age voters who shouldn't be allowed to vote.

CrAz3D · November 21, 2005, 05:03 PM

Quote from: Mephisto on November 21, 2005, 04:55 PM
Quote from: CrAz3D on November 21, 2005, 04:28 PM
People under 18 aren't qualified to join the military or police or fire & rescue, at least not where I'm from. You can drive @ 16 which is dangerous as well, but I don't think it is as 'high risk' as the military, polic, or fire.

I believe you can join the military at 16 w/ parental consent.

Army site says 17 w/consent. You also have to have a high school diploma/GED to enlist, proving you are at least almost competent.

Rule · November 21, 2005, 05:42 PM

Quote from: Arta[vL] on November 21, 2005, 04:11 PM

That said, if people who are under 18 are qualified to decide to join the army, drive, and become firefighters and policemen, then clearly, they are qualified to vote.

Like I said earlier, I don't think there's a really strong connection between the right to drive and the right to vote or join the military. Driving is a tested skill. Although perhaps not so extreme, what you are saying could be seen as analogous to "everyone who rides a bike should be able to go to war," or "everyone who has driven a motor (or sail) boat should be able to go to war and also to vote." Of course maturity is part of being a good driver (not just having the ability to pass a test), but it is not the same degree of maturity necessary to decide about war or voting (and what "good driving" is, isn't very subjective either). On the other hand, I don't trust teenagers to be mature at all really (kind of like iago), so I wouldn't mind if the driving age (along with other things) were bumped up to 21+.

Also, I really doubt that anyone under 18 in either of our countries could become full-fledged (practicing) firefighters or policemen. Do you have a source for that claim?

CrAz3D · November 21, 2005, 08:46 PM

Driving age of 21+ wouldn't be logical. Many people move out by the time they are 18, therefore would generally be able to drive.

Arta · November 22, 2005, 08:10 AM

You can join the military at 16 here, with parental consent. You can join the police whenever you want. I'm going to assume that the fire and ambulance services have the same, or at least similar, rules.

Perhaps you have a point about driving. I was referring to the maturity rather than ability, though, as you point out, and I'm not sure that the two are as incomparable as you claim. How does one quantify maturity? Why is someone who is mature enough to drive not mature enough to vote?

Incidentally, I don't think anything needs to be witheld until people reach 21. 18 is fine, and in some cases, excessive. 21 is archaic.

Rule · November 22, 2005, 11:00 AM

I skimmed the link to the police website you gave. This is a quote from their
age requirements
"Candidates who have reached the age of 18 years may apply to become a police officer and can take up appointment on reaching the age of 18½. "

re: driving

There is some maturity required to be a responsible driver, perhaps, but there is an element of subjectivity missing that could be dangerous in a voting situation. For example, if a child were to vote, he could easily be brainwashed into thinking that whoever he ends up voting for is the "right," and "good" choice. I think, however, that most people know what good driving is (it is not a matter of subjective choice to the same degree).

Arta · November 22, 2005, 11:52 AM

There's nothing to stop adults being 'brainwashed' in that fasion either. Many (I'm not one of them) consider us all to be brainwashed by the media anyway. I just don't buy the argument that we have developed this subjectiity at 18 but not at 16 or 17.

Re police: oops. All I saw was "There are no age limits.".

CrAz3D · November 22, 2005, 12:32 PM

Children are still, generally, young & impressionable, adults have their mind made up for the most part