Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Want to campaign for the 16 year old vote? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think 16 and 17 year olds should be given the vote BUT only if they are educated on political matters and how government works in school so that they know what they are voting for, rather than just crossing a random box in elections/referendums.

    But yeah, I definitely think 16 and 17 year olds should be allowed to vote and would be interested.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    On a point of information:

    If your argument works on 14-year-olds as well as 16-year-olds, it's clearly an invalid argument. Unless you're also advocating for 14 year olds to get the vote. In logic, consistency is, of course, the key.


    SS
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    No thanks, I think 18yo vote is just fine.

    With people maintaining "childhood" or childlike outlooks later into life, I'd suggest there would even be some merit in an argument suggesting voting should be pushed forward until 25, when people are graduating uni and entering the 'real world' or non-uni educated youth are finishing up other vocational training/settling into their adult lives firmly.


    As it is I think 18 is reasonable and more than fair.

    16yo vote might have made sense back said 16 year olds were regularly going into the working world and getting married young and even starting families and basically living adult lives, but we don't do that any more.

    A large number of young people now go into uni, otherwise known as "young adult daycare", and the millennials/next generation seem increasingly more tied to home and the insulating bubble they offer.


    That's not entirely all our faults, but healthy democracy is predicated on a critical mass of mature adults making (we hope) informed choices.
    There's plenty of smart and even wise-before-their-years 16 year olds, but they are unfortunately a tiny minority, and they still don;t by and large understand adult concerns.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Platopus)
    I'm 18 and I still don't really feel that most friends of my age (or even me at times) are politically educated enough for such a responsibility.
    people can be politically uneducated in all age groups.
    Some 17 and 18 year olds are in the same year group as school and I don't see what difference mentally there is between them in being able to vote.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tiger Rag)
    I don't think 16 year olds are old enough or indeed mature enough.
    Nor do I - I think that the age at which you are allowed to vote at, should either be 18 or 21. Any older, and there will be complaints from the younger people that they cannot vote, even though they are old enough (in their opinion). Any younger and people who are not mature enough to vote, will vote, which could heavily skew the votes.

    18 or 21 is what I say.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fangirl101)
    I think 16 and 17 year olds should be given the vote BUT only if they are educated on political matters and how government works in school so that they know what they are voting for, rather than just crossing a random box in elections/referendums.

    But yeah, I definitely think 16 and 17 year olds should be allowed to vote and would be interested.
    and how would it be feasible to be able to rate how educated on political matters somebody is?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    i would say anyone who has reached the age of criminal responsibility should be able to vote.
    (Original post by the bear)
    if you are old enough to be punished for your crimes you are old enough to vote. *
    Bear wtf. First you vote remain now you're advocating for babies to vote? What's next, trying to legalise zoophilia from you? Stop disappointing me mate.

    First off that 2nd quote is just :eviltongue:.
    Main point being, small children have been arrested, which you might be implying is wrong so you sarcastically suggest if they can be arrested then they can vote? I get that it's wrong sometimes to lock kids up but your mentality here is a bit juvenile, come on admit it. Instead of petulantly crossing your arms and turning your back on children being locked up and saying that justifies letting anything happen to kids and letting kids do anything they want, maybe start speaking out about children being locked up and leave other social issues alone.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    Bear wtf. First you vote remain now you're advocating for babies to vote? What's next, trying to legalise zoophilia from you?
    babies have not reached the age of criminal responsibility in this country ?

    not sure why you are bringing animal relationships into this... i am sure you have your reasons *
    **
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    This idea that 16/17 are any less politically aware is pretty absurd from my own experience. Having phone banked and canvassed extensively during the local elections and in the referendum most people of all ages have no clue on economics or politics. Majority of people will take a leaflet, ask what your candidate might do about cabs or trains and then close the door. The population as a whole is politically uneducated, 16/17 year olds are no different, so if we are letting those just as uneducated to vote who are older why not them as well, especially when some 16/17 year olds are so much better informed and have strong believes compared to the majority of the population.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Evidently people mature at difference ages, I for one have seen people in their 30s act more immature than 16 year olds (all you have to do is goto a football game once and you'll see) -as such, I don't believe that maturity should be brought up against 16/17 year olds, who have countlessly showed their maturity and intelligence on a global scale, but perhaps political understanding and knowledge should be emphasised? What's not to say, we should have a national test for the right to vote, I understand that most people vote out of emotion and not in the country's best interests - how can a bit of social darwinism hurt our already uncertain futures? The most intellectual voters, as defined by tests should be able to govern our society (the test doesn't has to be hard, just logical or defined by some other standard) - if we stop following sheep and actually use our brains, hopefully our country won't be destroyed by delusional old men voting (on their death beds) for a issue that affected them 70 years ago just to be 'right' one final time?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I won't be able to support this until I see some sort of indication that these 16 and 17 year olds will actually vote. If they don't (which I think is likely based on how few 18-24 year olds generally vote in elections) then I think it's a waste of time, resources and money.

    Perhaps before we even discuss whether or not the age limit should be reduced, let's discuss fully incorporating Politics and Economics into our education system. Encourage people to be more politically aware from a young age.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    babies have not reached the age of criminal responsibility in this country ?

    not sure why you are bringing animal relationships into this... i am sure you have your reasons *
    **
    A vapid copout of a response.

    Let me help you along, sir:
    I bring in zoophilia because your liberalism is becoming more and more extreme and logically baseless. Unless you also are willing to advocate for that....which wouldn't surprise me at this point.

    Anyway the babies thing was sarcasm for people being so young to be arrested in your brain being old enough to vote...and you know it but you only nitpicking the satire in my posts to respond to and not give a useful, thoughtful response to anything else also doesn't surprise me. If you're using petulance, again, as a defense method in debate, I'll just add you to the ol' iggy list "".
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marshall Taylor)
    Evidently people mature at difference ages, I for one have seen people in their 30s act more immature than 16 year olds (all you have to do is goto a football game once and you'll see) -as such, I don't believe that maturity should be brought up against 16/17 year olds, who have countlessly showed their maturity and intelligence on a global scale, but perhaps political understanding and knowledge should be emphasised? What's not to say, we should have a national test for the right to vote, I understand that most people vote out of emotion and not in the country's best interests - how can a bit of social darwinism hurt our already uncertain futures? The most intellectual voters, as defined by tests should be able to govern our society (the test doesn't has to be hard, just logical or defined by some other standard) - if we stop following sheep and actually use our brains, hopefully our country won't be destroyed by delusional old men voting (on their death beds) for a issue that affected them 70 years ago just to be 'right' one final time?
    What sort of test are you talking about? Who's to say the test won't be manipulated in favour of a certain demographic so a small group have a larger say?

    What if someone has, say, autism and struggles with tests but is far more aware than the person who revised for the test even though they don't care about politics?

    Intellect cannot be measured. As many people as possible should be able to have a say, irrespective of whether or not you deem them to be intellectual enough. That's democracy...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Legendary Quest)
    I won't be able to support this until I see some sort of indication that these 16 and 17 year olds will actually vote. If they don't (which I think is likely based on how few 18-24 year olds generally vote in elections) then I think it's a waste of time, resources and money.

    Perhaps before we even discuss whether or not the age limit should be reduced, let's discuss fully incorporating Politics and Economics into our education system. Encourage people to be more politically aware from a young age.
    A potential problem with adding something to the curriculum is having it taught by a sandal and sock combo wearing Liberal leftie. That would not be in the best interests of UK plc imho.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Legendary Quest)
    What sort of test are you talking about? Who's to say the test won't be manipulated in favour of a certain demographic so a small group have a larger say?

    What if someone has, say, autism and struggles with tests but is far more aware than the person who revised for the test even though they don't care about politics?

    Intellect cannot be measured. As many people as possible should be able to have a say, irrespective of whether or not you deem them to be intellectual enough. That's democracy...
    The test doesn't necessarily have to be on intelligence, it can be on practicality or skills. The test can be created by people of different intelligences, to make sure that the test is fair. Another way could be from Bands, band 1 - university doctorate, etc... Autistic people can have tests designed for them specially, so that they understand the basic principals and reasoning behind their votes. The same can go for any disabled or disadvantaged voter, who is keen on participating in the vote.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viffer)
    A potential problem with adding something to the curriculum is having it taught by a sandal and sock combo wearing Liberal leftie. That would not be in the best interests of UK plc imho.
    True, that is definitely a concern. But I think they could just teach the basics - how the British political system works, a brief history of British politics, etc.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    i would say anyone who has reached the age of criminal responsibility should be able to vote.
    Out of interest, do you believe criminals have the right to vote?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Legendary Quest)
    True, that is definitely a concern. But I think they could just teach the basics - how the British political system works, a brief history of British politics, etc.
    They would find a way to slip in (pun intended) pig s******g, Eton and Bullingdon to corrupt impressionable young minds
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I think a lot of people in the age range of 20-40 who do not have much idea what they vote about do go on to vote... I've heard with my ears that someone voted Leave so that muslims can be kicked out of the country. Someone around 40. How is that mature? First of all, I think politics should be compulsory at GCSE or people should pass some sort of general knowledge test about the debate before voting... irrespective of their age.
    I do support that 16-18 year olds should have the right to vote, but with the conditions I've mentioned above
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marshall Taylor)
    The test doesn't necessarily have to be on intelligence, it can be on practicality or skills. The test can be created by people of different intelligences, to make sure that the test is fair. Another way could be from Bands, band 1 - university doctorate, etc... Autistic people can have tests designed for them specially, so that they understand the basic principals and reasoning behind their votes. The same can go for any disabled or disadvantaged voter, who is keen on participating in the vote.
    That does sound better but I highly doubt the electorate would ever tolerate it. To many, voting is considered to be a fundamental right that all adults should have. :erm:

    (Original post by viffer)
    They would find a way to slip in (pun intended) pig s******g, Eton and Bullingdon to corrupt impressionable young minds
    But that's life, isn't it? It's impossible to be completely neutral. But I still do believe it's important we encourage people to think for themselves and to be aware of what's going on around them.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.