[Politics] Votes for 16 year olds

[dippy2449]

6 weeks basic training and around 12 weeks for a seaman, stewards, stores etc. Obviously the more skilled the job, the longer the training.

This was brought home to me quite sharply last weekend when I was in Portsmouth commemorating the sinking of the Hood. All the lost are on a Memorial Board with their ages and home towns.

If this nation sends 16 year-olds into an operational theatre in this day and age I am appalled.

 

[abc]

Not sure what any of that had to do with my response to you but I’ve not made one disparaging mark about older people in this debate so please don’t conflate those that think lowering the age of voting are ‘anti older voters’.

There’s been some pretty negative views expressed about young people too - equally unpleasant.

Sorry, was not having a go at you or trying to make it part of our little debate! I agree with both your points above too. Its a good topic to debate, like so many on here. I'm not a regular poster , more of a regular reader, and one reason for this is the number of times a potentially good debate ends up with abusive or offensive views being expressed.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

By virtue of that argument, the franchise never would have been given to women or the voting age lowered from 21 to 18 in 1969.

Two separate issues - equally valid but shouldn’t be contingent on each other. It is no rational argument to suggest a sector of the population should be denied representation all together because we have a voting system that does not proportionately represent the people that already have a right to vote.

This.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Thresholds are always a problem. We had a ludicrous (in my view) age of gay consent of 21 for years, because homophobes hoped a bit more time would allow 'them' to be 'cured' before 'making a terrible mistake they would regret for ever'.

And yet the wider age of consent in the UK is 16. In America if you 'engage' with a 17 year old, that's statutory rape (which is how we can call a certain prince an alleged rapist - if his 'engagement' had been in the UK he would simply be a dirty old man - assuming the 17 year old had not been 'procured' when aged 15 which would make it a statutory offence in the UK).

All that aside, I don't like thresholds. They are either too high for 'safety' or too low for a different sort of 'safety'. For me lowering the voter age to 16 is 100% justified on the basis that you can get married and join the military at 16 so you should be able to vote. But.....

But there is an issue of competence. You don't suddenly become competent overnight. I would like to see some form of competence assessment before we are given a license to vote. ALL of us. Like we do with driving a car. And perhaps like we ought to do with forming a civil partnership such as marriage.

One could argue that anything which is culturally embedded such as the age of consent should be left alone. We seem to 'know' how to manage it, for example, no half-formed 16 year old is coerced into sex they don't want are they? Oh.....hang on.....

So I am not sure how it would operate but I would argue that nobody should be allowed to vote till deemed competent. They should be made to earn a voter license. And I would be happy for citizens to be eligible to seek to earn the license from age 16.

 

[Zeberdi]

Thresholds are always a problem. We had a ludicrous (in my view) age of gay consent of 21 for years, because homophobes hoped a bit more time would allow 'them' to be 'cured' before 'making a terrible mistake they would regret for ever'.

And yet the wider age of consent in the UK is 16. In America if you 'engage' with a 17 year old, that's statutory rape (which is how we can call a certain prince an alleged rapist - if his 'engagement' had been in the UK he would simply be a dirty old man - assuming the 17 year old had not been 'procured' when aged 15 which would make it a statutory offence in the UK).

All that aside, I don't like thresholds. They are either too high for 'safety' or too low for a different sort of 'safety'. For me lowering the voter age to 16 is 100% justified on the basis that you can get married and join the military at 16 so you should be able to vote. But.....

But there is an issue of competence. You don't suddenly become competent overnight. I would like to see some form of competence assessment before we are given a license to vote. ALL of us. Like we do with driving a car. And perhaps like we ought to do with forming a civil partnership such as marriage.

One could argue that anything which is culturally embedded such as the age of consent should be left alone. We seem to 'know' how to manage it, for example, no half-formed 16 year old is coerced into sex they don't want are they? Oh.....hang on.....

So I am not sure how it would operate but I would argue that nobody should be allowed to vote till deemed competent. They should be made to earn a voter license. And I would be happy for citizens to be eligible to seek to earn the license from age 16.

Education. Education. Education.

What I quoted in my post over the page from the Scottish study “Making sure all young people receive great civic education that includes learning how to discuss political issues well, could help reduce persistent social inequalities in turnout.” Is a good idea for Scotland because in Scotland, citizenship studies are optional.

However - Citizenship is already one of the statutory subjects of the National Curriculum for 11-16 year olds in England - has been since 2002 - most 50-60+ NSCers who are arguing that the voting age shouldn’t be lowered probably don’t realise young people probably have a much better grasp of political issues and responsibilities around voting than they did at that age. Citizenship is also taught in Primary education as a non-statutory subject.

What is Citizenship education?

Citizenship education develops knowledge, skills and understanding that pupils need to play a full part in society as active and responsible citizens.

www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk

Now on a lighter matter, you’ve started a ‘Competence list’ so people can do them responsibly and safely may I add:

1. Marriage
2. having children
3. Owning pets
4. Home improvements
5. Drinking
6. Sex

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Education. Education. Education.

What I quoted in my post over the page from the Scottish study “Making sure all young people receive great civic education that includes learning how to discuss political issues well, could help reduce persistent social inequalities in turnout.” Is a good idea for Scotland because in Scotland, citizenship studies are optional.

However - Citizenship is already one of the statutory subjects of the National Curriculum for 11-16 year olds in England - has been since 2002 - most 50-60+ NSCers who are arguing that the voting age shouldn’t be lowered probably don’t realise young people probably have a much better grasp of political issues and responsibilities around voting than they did at that age. Citizenship is also taught in Primary education as a non-statutory subject.

What is Citizenship education?

Citizenship education develops knowledge, skills and understanding that pupils need to play a full part in society as active and responsible citizens.

www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk

Now on a lighter matter, you’ve started a ‘Competence list’ so people can do them responsibly and safely may I add:

1. Marriage
2. having children
3. Owning pets
4. Home improvements
5. Drinking
6. Sex

Citizenship training at school is great, but you don't have to pass it to be allowed to vote. And of course there are the millions of older people out there, with a vote who think, for example, that homophones should all be locked up.

 

[EliasTaproot]

With this sites general distaste and disdain towards the youth the majority opinion here doesn't really shock me. It does make me laugh though, the idea that any age restriction for the elderly is met with proper anger in response. A bit of self reflection would do a lot of you good. Getting the youth politically engaged early would be excellent, but I understand the older generations have had it all their own way for decades, and any threat to that is very scary indeed.

 

[heathgate]

I remember when I was 16/17 the decision to introduce tuition fees- a decision that will affect mine and younger generations for pretty much their entire working life

and we had absolutely no say in the ma

Exactly.

Really,.. how?.... as only 30% of eligible 18-24 year olds bothered to vote in Brexit Ref... if it was so important to them, why didn't they turn out?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Is there that much difference between 16 and 18?

Be good to teach younger people the importance of voting at a young age, I agree if you are paying tax you should vote.

But this Labour trying to stay in by increasing the number of potential Labour voters, not because they feel 16 year olds should vote for any reason.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

With this sites general distaste and disdain towards the youth the majority opinion here doesn't really shock me. It does make me laugh though, the idea that any age restriction for the elderly is met with proper anger in response. A bit of self reflection would do a lot of you good. Getting the youth politically engaged early would be excellent, but I understand the older generations have had it all their own way for decades, and any threat to that is very scary indeed.

Get off your high horse. If you read my posts you'll see that I have not suggested that fitness to vote tests should cease once you get to 18 or 66 or whatever. I think all of us aged over 16 should take them.

 

[heathgate]

Is there that much difference between 16 and 18?

Be good to teach younger people the importance of voting at a young age, I agree if you are paying tax you should vote.

But this Labour trying to stay in by increasing the number of potential Labour voters, not because they feel 16 year olds should vote for any reason.

Applying that 'logic', there isn't much difference between 14 and 16... or 12 and 14..... see where I am going?

 

[Alwaysblue]

Yes, of course.

Things that didn't happen part 6.

Ffs Why would I make things up?? Like I say grow up

 

[Alwaysblue]

I agree with Thunder Bolt. Discuss current affairs with colleagues and friends all the time. But voting intentions? Never. Not with colleagues, friends or even with relatives.

Again grown-up, people can have different political views and still be friends

 

[Worried Man Blues]

We should make polling stations difficult to find

 

[Triggaaar]

Stupid idea

 

[Zeberdi]

Crap.... most 16 yo won't even know what a manifesto is, let alone it's contents, the attached political party or politicians.

Be good to teach younger people the importance of voting at a young age

Part of the National Curriculum as I said earlier - pretty sure most 16 year olds know what a Party manifesto and the importance of voting unless they’re falling asleep in class

National curriculum in England: citizenship programmes of study for key stages 3 and 4

www.gov.uk

But it is obvious from the NSC contributors here that the debate is divided on party lines - just about everything else is padding. It easy to understand why: 62% of 18-24 year olds voted Labour in the UK’s 2019 general election (compared to 19% for the Conservatives). Ahead of the GE, successive polls have placed the Conservatives at 10% or less among young adults.

The real issue as someone noted above, is getting young people engaged again in MS politics - they have a very high rate of disillusionment with mainstream parties - again, easy to understand why.

 

[Giraffe]

I personally think it's ridiculous. Remembering back to being 16 I wouldn't have had a clue. I was more interested in football, girls and trying to get served in wine rack! Having fun as a 16 year old.
As a parent of 2 children now beyond 16, I wouldn't have seen them being ready to vote.
While there are no doubt children of 16 who get it, I'm confident many won't give a care to politics and don't have the life experience to make an informed choice. I was probably still politically niave into my early 20s.
Absolutely ridiculous policy, I see being in service being mentioned as an argument for dropping voting age, they can't be deployed until they are an adult at 18 years old.

Agreed. I’m not even sure 18 is old enough to be honest. 21+ seems about right. I also think there is some justification for saying cap it off as well.

 

[WATFORD zero]

We should make polling stations difficult to find

Excellent idea

 

[Hugo Rune]

Agreed. I’m not even sure 18 is old enough to be honest. 21+ seems about right. I also think there is some justification for saying cap it off as well.

Yet 15 year olds were allowed to vote in the last contest for our Prime Minster. Perhaps that’s why the Lettuce won?

 

[severnside gull]

The Conservative Party are perfectly okay with 15 year olds voting to choose a PM but not to vote at a general election.
Seems more than a little hypocritical