Voting age may be reduced to 16 apparently. Good idea?

[Nanny0gg]

As it says in the title. Labour still seems keen on this idea. Personally I think it's bonkers - I look at my DGC and they are just not old enough yet.

AIBU?

But these kids are 18, not 14.
Some 18 year olds may still feel lost but a lot won't be. They'll be at uni or working or both, not hanging out on street corners.

I'm intrigued to know what sort of right of passage Sunak could offer my eldest
kid that's more valuable than how he spent his time. It's such a load of sweaty bollocks.

Women had fully formed brains, children dont. So no - not a valid argument. As for those with dementia - unlikely to be able to find the polling station and vote or remember to post a vote.

Likely to be taken to the polling station and shown where to put their X.

I know I’m being picky but only one person at a time can use each voting booth. The people cross checking names keep an eye on things like that and coercion is not allowed.

Someone with poor mobility or sight is unable to go into the polling booth alone. No polling clerk is going to be accused of not allowing a disabled person to vote.

Of course not but coercion is the issue.
People are to be left alone to vote and anyone that has poor eyesight has assistance available to them.

Postal votes is an issue though.

People with all sorts of mental incapacity are perfectly permitted to vote as is their right. That argument doesn’t hold.

It's not for everyone, admittedly, but many years ago, I started a technique of completely ignoring what people say, and instead observing what they do.

It may seem rude in the room, but it does make it hard to be lied to or ending up looking like a complete twit.

In case you missed it (I did at first!) - you can't get married younger than 18 in the UK anymore: New law raises minimum marriage age to 18 in England and Wales - BBC News

You can still get married at 16 in Scotland - which was part of the UK the last time I looked.

You can't realistically deny that many young people of 16 and 17 know as much or more than many over 18s. It's self-evident.

I heard yesterday that apparently Gordon Brown was planning on introducing something very similar, until he was unceremoniously dumped for, among other things, insulting working class people who were concerned about unlimited EU immigration and the impact on wages, housing and local services.

So if it is indeed true that the Tories believe (even if they didn't explicitly say) young people are unfit for purpose and need to be forced into the military, then I suppose the previous Labour incumbent must have believed that too.

Yet 16 is not "basically considered a child" in lots of contexts. You can join the military, you can leave full time education, you can marry in Scotland, you can have sex, if you have SEN you have the right to take decisions about your future provision and the right to appeal in your own name. It's not even true to say "We don't allow them to leave education" because the relevant law has no sanctions built in. The logic of allowing the vote at 16 is that we do recognise a difference between 15 and 16 year olds, and they are voting for their future.

You’ll need to explain that logic because it defeats me. Brown called that horrible woman a bigot and he was on the money, by the way.

People with mental illness or reduced intellectual ability have only been allowed to vote since 2006. The problem is, of course, where you draw the line and the problem of defending that in court. If you allow a 16 year old to vote why not 14 - or 4?

Don’t know, tbh. Our nearly 4 year old grandchild has a bloody sight more sense than some adults we know.

There isn't really much of a check on this, either. I could very easily have got a postal vote for my mother over the last 10 years of her life when she was slipping further into dementia, there didn't seem to be anything to stop me even though she increasingly struggled to remember who any of the government or opposition were.

Depends - I'd want education about our political system delivered and to ensure it is unbiased. We should all know more about those who are supposedly in post to govern, whether local or national. I'd think 18 was better, but in reality, I had no idea of who to vote for at that age and honestly they are all as bad as each other. I am beginning to see our politicians, of all parties, like the Child Catcher, in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, using any enticement they can imagine up to attract voters and that's why I'd want education first, voting next!

To be honest, our young people have given up so much over the past few years that the least they deserve is a vote on what happens next.

And I can't believe the "they need to be educated in politics first." posters! What, you mean like the rest of the population?

I had my first vote at 20 I think, and it was for Blair. I had no idea, just voted Labour cos that’s what my parents did.

16 will be the same. They / most of them will just vote as their parents do. If they vote at all.

It’s a big ‘whatever as you were, but why don’t you spend the money on education / Nhs instead of this ’ from me.

why don’t you spend the money on education / Nhs instead of this

What would it cost to extend the franchise?

No idea but if cost £20 it’s better spent elsewhere.