Should everyone of legal age be allowed to vote?

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I think the difference between working 16-year-olds and working 18-year-olds is that the 16 yr-olds are usually still in school and being supported by their parents, so they don't have as important a need to vote. I think 18 is a reasonable age - we have to make some type of standard that is practical, and this seems a reasonable one.

Just because they are living at home doesn't mean they don't have an important need to vote. That's too arbitrary of a line to draw anyway; my boyfriend lived on his own when he was 17, should he have been able to vote then? I'm living at home for a month, can I not vote until I've moved back to Vancouver?

Besides, if a 16 year old votes for someone, that person will be in power until they are at least 20. Voting isn't just for the short term. I'm 21 and I still haven't voted in a provincial or federal election, which, needless to say, pisses me off to no end.

[HOBBIT]

You can also get a job at 14, 13, 12 and under. There are certain restrictions of course - like working hours, can't be left in charge of something until a certain age (16 I think), cant handle cash til certain age.

I don't believe that there is any law that says you have to be a certain age to work at all - and if there is, it probably varies state-by-state.


But you could get many jobs at those ages - like a paper boy, work in family business, ETC. Certainly many stores won't want to hire you until you are a certain age like 15, 16, or 17 - but you could always get a job somewhere at 14 and under.


Let 13 and 14 year olds vote? Anyone with a job pays taxes. 12 year olds?!!?


That is just ridiculous and then why say "16 is a good age" (talking USA here) - because you can work much earlier.

It makes no sense. Regardless of whether you have a job or not, when you hit 18 you can vote.

[Nurvingiel]

It's not that I think you must have a job to vote, but if you are allowed to have a job (at 12, 16, or whatever), then you should also be allowed to vote.

And if that means 12 year olds can vote, then what's wrong with that? If a 12 year old doesn't care, then they won't excercise their right (though it's more like a priviledge I guess) to vote. Just likea 45 year old who doesn't care won't bother voting. Or in my case, someone who never lives at their permanent address.

[HOBBIT]

Anyone can vote if they have a job regardless of age and then everyone at 18+ ? That makes no sense.

[Tessar]

Hobbit, I'm not sure what you mean about kids not being allowed to handle money untill a certain age--I've had my own bank account since I was six, and I have a friend who had a checking account at seven.

[Insidious Rex]

You need a work permit to work if you are under 16 in most states. Under 15 in others. The reason you need this is so that the state knows your parents or guardians are ok with the fact that you are working because they are supposed to be allowing you to balance your schooling succesfully with any employment. In this way no unscrupulous employers can screw you over work wise at the expense of your education. The other reason is because the vast majority of jobs taken by minors (like the ones you named) generally dont allow you to reach an income total that would require you to permenantly give up any wages in the form of taxes. You get it all back if you make under a certain minimum. Therefore the issue of taxation without representation doesnt apply to these teens. So yes 16/15 still makes sense if you take these factors into account.

[HOBBIT]

Originally Posted by Tessar

Hobbit, I'm not sure what you mean about kids not being allowed to handle money untill a certain age--I've had my own bank account since I was six, and I have a friend who had a checking account at seven.

No no, I meant at a job :P Like the cashier, etc.

At 6, your bank account was in trust for you (if i have the correct term). You yourself could not put money in it or take money out - your parents had to do that :P.

Not exactly sure at what age you can fully operate your bank account. *shrug* probably 17 or 18.


------------------

IR, what you brought up doesn't help your position. Most teens that work don't make enough to pay taxes. Probably a small minority of teens under 18 that work that much. So what is the point?

[Tessar]

Originally Posted by HOBBIT

No no, I meant at a job :P Like the cashier, etc.

Oh. Heh. THAT I do agree with.

However, while a parent does have to be co-signed on the account untill the child's 18, they don't have to put the money in and take it out for the child.

At least I've always been able to remove and put money in by myself.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

This is a great argument for keeping voting ages the same! If the younger crowd thinks they can change things, they're obviously irrational!

As far as teens working at 16 - as Hobbit pointed out, they can work at 15, also, so why not change the voting age to 15? I think the difference between working 16-year-olds and working 18-year-olds is that the 16 yr-olds are usually still in school and being supported by their parents, so they don't have as important a need to vote. I think 18 is a reasonable age - we have to make some type of standard that is practical, and this seems a reasonable one.

once again, people read some part of what i say, but not the rest...
IN THE UK you are a legal adult at 16 years of age. FULL STOP. therefore, the legal age for voting IN THE UK should be placed at 16

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by HOBBIT

At 6, your bank account was in trust for you (if i have the correct term). You yourself could not put money in it or take money out - your parents had to do that

i had an account when i was 10, and i certainly put money in and took money out myself

[HOBBIT]

LCoU - yes, you are talking about the UK - but we are talking about the USA :P

[EarthBound]

Originally Posted by HOBBIT

LCoU - yes, you are talking about the UK - but we are talking about the USA :P

I had an account at the federal Credit union where I could deposite....but not withdraw unitl I was 18. Always more than happy to take our money, eh!

I had a work permit @ 14y but I was in no way prepared to vote, I didn't know enough about anything outside of guitars/music/puberty to contribute anything meaningful (that might be beside the point...)

I think 16 is a better age, a sort of compromise between 18 (plenty old enough) & 14 (too young).....at 16 you should be able to voice your opionion concerning the world you live in since you can legally live and work on your own (Oregon, USA).

[sun-star]

Prisoner wins landmark vote case

The government is reconsidering its ban on prisoners voting after a landmark human rights case brought by an inmate.

John Hirst, serving life in Rye Hill Prison, Warwickshire, for manslaughter, went to court when his application to register to vote was turned down.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled British laws that bar inmates from voting breach human rights.

The Department for Constitutional Affairs is "considering the judgement before deciding its next step".

A statement from the department said: "We have always argued that prisoners should lose the right to vote while in detention because if you commit a crime that is serious, you should lose the right to have a say in how you are governed.

"This judgement questions that position."

The 1983 Representation of the People Act does not allow convicts to vote.

The 53-year-old brought a case in the High Court claiming Section 3 of the act is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, to which Britain is a signatory.

His case was rejected and he turned to the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg, guardians of the Human Rights Convention.

Lawyers for Mr Hirst said he should have the right to vote under the Convention's guarantee to the "right to free elections", the "right to free expression" and "prohibition of discrimination".

The judges delivered a unanimous verdict that denying a prisoner a vote does breach the "right to free elections" set out in the Convention.

There was no need therefore, they said, to pass judgment on the issues of free expression and discrimination.

Hirst pleaded guilty on 11 February 1980 to a charge of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

He was sentenced to "discretionary life imprisonment" and the tariff part of his term - the part relating to retribution and deterrence - expired on June 25 1994.

Hirst remains in jail, because the Parole Board says he could still present a risk of serious harm to the public.

He was awarded £8,000 in costs and expenses by the court on Tuesday.

www.bbc.co.uk

This is interesting. If nothing else, it will make prison conditions an important electoral issue.

[sun-star]

Double post.

[The Gaffer]

Latest on this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...586644,00.html

Seems that if your story has been in the papers then you don't get to keep your vote.

I wonder which constituency they will vote in? Could prompt some panicked gerrymandering.

[Spock]

I feel all 'citizens' of this country have a right to vote unless you've committed a felony against our laws, then you lose that right.(which is law in most places) More importantly citizens have an 'obligation' to vote or forever cease to b**** about politicians, IMO