Voting Age

[Barn]

The US drinking age of 21 is, I think, actually on public safety grounds due to a real problem they had with youth drink driving when the age was 18.

 

[scotsman]

But why not 21 as in the US?

21 is considered the age of maturity in the US, as it used to be here. The voting age here was once 21, too

 

[Zoe]

21 is considered the age of maturity in the US, as it used to be here.

I'm not sure about that. I can't think of many things other than drink alcohol that you can't do at 18 in the US. You can vote, smoke at 18 in most states, you can legally enter a credit agreement at 18. I have also read that there are concerns that drinking alcohol when under 21 could affect brain development. A quick search online shows tha the age of majority in the US is matter for each state but for most it is 18. The age for alcohol though is federally set at 21.

 

[GB]

It's not maturity, just health concerns

Do the health issues suddenly reduce when you reach 18 or 21?

With cigarettes, I believe one of the main reasons for upping the age to 18 was to reduce the amount of school children taking it up by reducing the amount of cigarettes doing the rounds in the school playground. It was all too easy for 16 year olds to bring them in and then sell them on...whether the new age limit has helped I don't know.

 

[Zoe]

With cigarettes, I believe one of the main reasons for upping the age to 18 was to reduce the amount of school children taking it up by reducing the amount of cigarettes doing the rounds in the school playground. It was all too easy for 16 year olds to bring them in and then sell them on...whether the new age limit has helped I don't know.

It does seem a bit silly that the law only bans buying them when under 18, actually smoking them is not illegal. It seems the age for posession at least in England was not increased from 16 to 18 when the age for purchase was increased.

 

[scotsman]

It does seem a bit silly that the law only bans buying them when under 18, actually smoking them is not illegal.

It's an offence in Scotland to purchase them underage, purchase them for someone underage, or have them. Didn't stop someone in my class using a fake ID to buy them on a school trip to London a while back.

Do the health issues suddenly reduce when you reach 18 or 21?

I think it was just a generally accepted point at which professionals agreed that the body had developed sufficiently to "cope" with them

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Do the health issues suddenly reduce when you reach 18 or 21?

Not suddenly, but around that age is when development stops.

 

[Eagle]

The voting age here was once 21, too

And it was only at the 2010 election that the minimum age to stand in an election was lowered from 21 to 18.

 

[Cable Car]

Having read this entire thread i've came to the conclusion 16 year olds would need to be drunk to vote for Alex Salmond.
Correct.

 

[user15681]

As a 17 year old, if there was an election tomorrow, I would want to vote.
It's been mentioned already, but why should we have taxation without representation? I want to have a say in what will affect me. With a term lasting five years, I would want to vote on tuition fees especially, which will affect me in the future. Whilst I agree that up until the age of 18 most people are too immature, there are some people who are mature and informed enough to be able to make political decisions.
Admittedly, I only know a handful of people who would want to vote, but maybe if voting age was lowered to 16 it would encourage and enthuse younger people to take an interest in politics, through responsibility.
It is a tough subject, I'll admit that, one with pros and cons, but I strongly believe the opportunity to vote should be there for those that want it.

Ironically I have a debate coming up soon that focuses on voting eligibility. It's mainly centred on prisoners having the vote (that's a whole new topic for another day), but many of your points you've all made are of interest, thank you.

 

[Eagle]

It's been mentioned already, but why should we have taxation without representation?

But you're not a taxpayer. (Neither am I, for the record, due to being a student.)

 

[Bayum]

The great majority of teachers tend to be left wing and they'll obviously be very keen to influence children to vote accordingly.

I take it you're not familiar with the fact that teachers aren't supposed to bring politics or political views into the classroom, and that this is actually seen as a massive thing in the profession?

Bringing political views into the classroom can result in you being reprimanded.

 

[Butts]

But why not 21 as in the US?

Or why not 16 as in a lot of European Countries?

 

[SS4]

Bring the voting age down to sixteen and make it compulsory to learn about citizenship and the politics of this country and abroad (I wonder how many people here know about Belgium's recent difficulties in electing a government)

Time in the curriculum can easily be spared from relatively unimportant lessons (especially RE)

 

[Temple Meads]

But you're not a taxpayer.

So? Neither are people on benefits, and they get to vote.

 

[Eagle]

So? Neither are people on benefits, and they get to vote.

Neither am I (as I said), and I get to vote. That's why I was pointing out that the "taxation without representation" argument is fallacious.

 

[Bayum]

Bring the voting age down to sixteen and make it compulsory to learn about citizenship and the politics of this country and abroad (I wonder how many people here know about Belgium's recent difficulties in electing a government)

Time in the curriculum can easily be spared from relatively unimportant lessons (especially RE)

When do you propose we do this?

Primary school were R.E. plays an integral part of the curriculum, and where it is also used a standing point to look at various arguments from a mutual viewpoint, as well as increasing debating and social skills?


Or would you even say years 7-9 in secondary school where it is currently compulsory, at which time we risk isolating and hiding religion and religious ideas, faiths and ethics from the curriculum?

 

[Barn]

It's not fallacious, it just doesn't work for every individual. No rules do, and nobody is suggesting that people should qualify for the franchise at different ages.

Two important things happen at 16: full time compulsory education ends and a person can leave home and establish themselves alone. That marks the point at which adult, taxpaying life may begin. I might feel differently about this if/when the law changes to require compulsory education to 18.

Small amounts of tax paid by children and periods of minimal taxpaying as adults are distractions.

 

[Oswyntail]

....Time in the curriculum can easily be spared from relatively unimportant lessons (especially RE)

So which is likely to affect future citizens more - lack of understanding of Belgian politics, or lack of understanding of Islam? The mechanics of politics are essentially trivial, and have little or no bearing on the outcomes in the real world. What matters is how and why people think and react to events, so it is much more important to teach about ideas than things. And this, IMHO, is why a curriculum that is weighted so heavily towards Science and Vocational subjects at the expense of Humanities is dangerously wrong.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Neither am I (as I said), and I get to vote. That's why I was pointing out that the "taxation without representation" argument is fallacious.

That would be more valid if we were discussing "representation without taxation".

 

[user15681]

But you're not a taxpayer. (Neither am I, for the record, due to being a student.)

I know, and I appreciate that, but it very well could affect me. By 2015, I could have dropped out of studying and be paying tax.