What Should the Voting Age Be?

[OzzyKP]

Thats the thing about youth, they don't have 40 years of stereotypes and intertia behind their voting decisions. They can look at situations more objectively than someone who has voted straight party line for the last 40 years without thinking about it.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Thats the thing about youth, they don't have 40 years of stereotypes and intertia behind their voting decisions. They can look at situations more objectively than someone who has voted straight party line for the last 40 years without thinking about it.

The flip side is that children haven't experienced the history that their elders have and have less of an appreciation for the consequences of their votes.

gosh, its easy to play these generalization and stereotype games.

[Jonny]

Originally posted by BlackCat
I guess that in a two party system as the US, it doesn't matter that much what the age is - especially when the parties is as similiar as they are.

Very true. Although I claimed that lowering the voting age would help boost participation (which I believe it would), I believe that a true revival of people's interest in democracy can only come about in the US through the ending of our big-business driven political duopoly, where the only apparent reason for each party's existance is to prohibit the other from accomplishing anything.

[Donegeal]

No age... GED/HSED.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by BlackCat

Well, let me say it in this way - 14-16 year old kids with firearms and driving licences scares me seriously.

Our social policy should be determined by what scares people?

[Jonny]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


The flip side is that children haven't experienced the history that their elders have and have less of an appreciation for the consequences of their votes.

gosh, its easy to play these generalization and stereotype games.

One may study history in school, though (and is in fact required to by most school districts, I would hope), and at least gain some understanding of the events which their elders experienced in person. A student is very unlikely to develop a hard party loyalty there, however.

[asleepathewheel]

reading about something is not equivalent to experiencing something firsthand.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Our social policy should be determined by what scares people?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that, but to make my point clear, I simply doesn't consider 14-16 year old persons capable to handle neither guns nor cars in a safe and responsible way.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
reading about something is not equivalent to experiencing something firsthand.

Are people with mental disabilities precluded from voting anywhere?

If they aren't, what is the problem with 14 and 16 year olds?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by BlackCat


I'm not quite sure what you mean by that, but to make my point clear, I simply doesn't consider 14-16 year old persons capable to handle neither guns nor cars in a safe and responsible way.

But many societies do. Thus the argument that 'such and such happens at 18, thus that's a good reason for the vote at that age' isn't very strong.

I think the compelling reason for voting age (and other policies re the vote) should be the good of our political system.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Jonny


Very true. Although I claimed that lowering the voting age would help boost participation (which I believe it would), I believe that a true revival of people's interest in democracy can only come about in the US through the ending of our big-business driven political duopoly, where the only apparent reason for each party's existance is to prohibit the other from accomplishing anything.

I don't see how a higher participation would solve that problem - there would still just be two parties to choose between.

If you really want to rock the boat, then set a limit to what a party/person is allowed to spend on campaigns.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Are people with mental disabilities precluded from voting anywhere?

If they aren't, what is the problem with 14 and 16 year olds?

Its fairly common to have a voting restriction for someone mentally disabled.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20031124/chandleryork

that article is a few years old, so perhaps things have changed a bit since that I am unaware of.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by notyoueither


But many societies do. Thus the argument that 'such and such happens at 18, thus that's a good reason for the vote at that age' isn't very strong.

In some societies you either are grown up at early age or you are dead, but that I don't consider to be a problem in neither us, canada or denmark.

In neither of those three countries your childhood in any way prepares you for carrying guns or driving cars at the age of 16.

I think the compelling reason for voting age (and other policies re the vote) should be the good of our political system.

As I said earlier, I don't think that there are happening anything magical at the age of 18, but that is typically the age where you become a legal body in several ways. If the voting age should be lower, the same should happen to these.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel

Its fairly common to have a voting restriction for someone mentally disabled.

Not here AFAIK.

Even prisoners have recently been enfranchised.

So, apparently there is no one right answer?

14 or 16 as a voting age may be for the better?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by BlackCat


In some societies you either are grown up at early age or you are dead, but that I don't consider to be a problem in neither us, canada or denmark.

In neither of those three countries your childhood in any way prepares you for carrying guns or driving cars at the age of 16.

I disagree with you.

I think the myths of the 50's and 60's have done a lot to infantalise people under the age of 18.