ON AIR: Should 16-year olds be allowed to vote?

This debate came second in this morning’s vote in Glasgow, so we are going to talk about it tonight. Keep posting your comments below…

Bryony from Zimbabwe argued for this. More here.

It’s being suggested here in Scotland and our group of six are divided 4/2 against. Do 16 year olds have the experience to decide who runs your country? Are we missing out on the radical ideas of youth but not including 16 and 17 year olds? How might they change the leaders we have? Is this a brave or a reckless idea?

64 Responses to “ON AIR: Should 16-year olds be allowed to vote?”

  1. 1 jamily5
    June 17, 2008 at 19:54

    I say, No.
    If we change the noting age to 16, we will have to change the military age to 16, the “adult” age to 16 (so 16yo can sign contracts).

  2. 2 steve
    June 17, 2008 at 20:07

    I actually think that for purposes of voting, so long as a minor is paying income taxes, then they should be able to vote. Minors not paying income taxes shouldn’t get the vote until they are 18. How can you justify them paying taxes without any say how they are spent? If minors cannot vote, then they shouldn’t have to pay income tax.

  3. 3 Angela in Washington D.C.
    June 17, 2008 at 20:08

    I don’t believe most 16 years olds have the experience or maturity to vote. I must admit I know some 16 year olds that are very mature and politically active but most are still trying to identify themselves apart from their parents. Plus, along with what jamily5 stated, you would have to change the military age and many other things.

  4. 4 Janet T
    June 17, 2008 at 20:12

    @ Steve- good point- taxation without representation – I had not thought of that-

  5. 5 steve
    June 17, 2008 at 20:23

    @ Angela

    In Maryland, I got a driver’s license when I was 16. I would think driving a 3000 lb vehicle requires more experience and maturity than voting. Again, I seem to recall grownups saying they would vote for Obama becuase he is “cute”..

  6. 6 Edward
    June 17, 2008 at 20:29

    There is talk in the United States about pre-registering people as early as 16 to increase the percentage of registered voters by the age of 18.

    This would be an interesting topic to discuss.

  7. 7 John
    June 17, 2008 at 20:32

    I agree with those who claim that 18 should be the voting age.

  8. 8 Alison
    June 17, 2008 at 20:42

    I’m with Steve on this one. If you have to give up part of your paycheck to the government, you should have a vote in how it is spent and who is spending it. If we are going to say 16 is not old enough to vote, they should not be taxed and not allowed to drive until they are 18.

  9. 9 EM in Cleveland
    June 17, 2008 at 20:43

    If you pay taxes, you should be able to vote. No matter what the age.

    If you do NOT pay taxes, or your only income is federal aid, you should not be able to vote. No matter what the age.

    Why do people who don’t pay into the system get to determine how the money is spent? Absolutely ridiculous.

  10. 10 Anthony
    June 17, 2008 at 20:45

    Not in California. They are way to immature. Then again so are a lot of adults I know. I wish we had I.Q. tests, and only people with average or above I.Q’s were able to vote.

    -Anthony, LA, CA

  11. June 17, 2008 at 20:53

    I think they should raise the voting age to 25, so only reasonable people can vote.

  12. 12 Jessica in NYC
    June 17, 2008 at 21:00

    My biggest concern for lowering the voting age to 16 is that teenagers would become vulnerable to politicians and be the focus of misleading marketing campaigns.

    Interesting points have been made.
    1) Income taxes: Indeed, if they are old enough to work and earn a living then they should have a say. However, we cannot do discriminate on this basis, either they are allowed to vote or not. No taxation with out representation.
    2) Military: I do not think the voting age has to be tied into the military standard age of 18, if voting is lowered to 16.
    3) Maturely, is subjective: I was very mature and knew who candidates where at 16, even volunteered for political campaigns. Fast forward a few years and I know people in their 30s who have no clue what the issues are at any given year. Again we cannot discriminate against young people for being immature since we do not require it of adults. It would be an illegal double standard.

    Teenagers as young as 16 can be tried as an adult in a court of law in the USA. They can also drive a car and are trusted to make safe adult decisions as drivers. Sixteen-year-olds can also work, as stated above, or dropout of high school. Seemingly they can make adult decisions, but they cannot have a choice about the future of their country until they’re 18. This does seem like a double standard. I’m not sure if I’d vote for the voting age to be lowered, but I’d like to hear to agreements for and against. I admit there are conflicting standards.

  13. 13 Rashid Patch
    June 17, 2008 at 21:21

    I think that anybody should be given the vote who has taken responsibility for their own life. If someone can work, earn a living, and support themselves – and if they neither expect nor demand that parents, relatives, or society do so – I am ready to treat them as an adult.

    I don’t think that young people are necessarily more or less likely to make bad political decisions than their elders. Age confers experience, but most people ignore experience, so wisdom is rare at any age.

    In the U.S., over half the eligible voters usually do not vote at all. I would like to see voting that was compulsory for all who are eligible. I do sometimes think that the vote should be restricted to those who have voluntarily done service to society – military or non-military. Those who would choose not to do so – I mistrust their vote.

  14. 14 Barry8
    June 17, 2008 at 21:25

    There are double standards everywhere; it is a fact of life. We elect our leaders because of what they promise us; more often than not, they do not ever do anything properly. The reason – making POLICY promises
    is the usual; being quite unable to IMPLEMENT them is
    quite the norm too! Seems the answer is to ensure that would be politicians are required to PROVE THEIR PRACTICAL ABILITY before being allowed to find out all their inasdequate abilities in power. History abounds with evidence of this. Just to complicate matters, some of us never really mature. Even wouldbe presidents and prime ministers. Let’s ponder on this!

  15. 15 Will Rhodes
    June 17, 2008 at 22:05

    I am a yes for this.

    At 16 you can do just about everything else that a person at 18 can do and that includes going to work. You leave school at 16 in the UK currently, that is, I believe, going to be risen to 18. If all pupils have to stay on at school until 18 then the election process should start at 18.

    We would, of course, have to make sure that those who are 16 are not manipulated into an incorrect vote – that would mean bringing politics into school, which many do not like.

  16. 16 Robert
    June 17, 2008 at 22:24

    It’s interesting that this comes from Scotland, the same place that is now suggesting raising the age at which you can get alochol from an off license to 21. If you’re enough and wise enough at 16 to decide who will govern the country then why will you need to wait another year to drive, 2 years to down a pint in a pub and if the legislation goes through another 5 to buy a bottle of wine to drink with dinner at home.

  17. June 17, 2008 at 22:53

    Absolutely not !! 16 year old’s only THINK they know everything, when they clearly do not !!

  18. 18 Neal H
    June 17, 2008 at 22:56

    No, it should not go down to 16, if anything it should go up.

    The dependency society we have fostered and youth-targetted marketing that further infantilizes the younger populace, we hear more and more accounts of people who don’t leave the nest and stay with their parents well into their 20s or early 30s. Contrast that to the last century or so where children went to work to support their family pretty rapidly after puberty. We are increasingly not expected to stand up and support ourselves materially or mentally until an ever increasing age.

    If anything, I’d raise it to 21. 16 year olds in this country (10th grade!) are too swayed by Hannah Montana, Playstation ads and MTV to be making issues based decisions that will affect this nation.

    I’m glad to see the 18+ crowd become more engaged and energized in this election cycle. Even an 18 year old is better equipped than a 16 year old to consider economic policy, judicial philosophy…heck 16 year olds may not yet have taken Civics, American History, or other citizenship-informing subjects in school yet.

    Zimbabwe, that may be an entirely different matter….people have to graduate high school in 11-13 years and are probably more mature for their age, expected to be able to help their families get by, not to be still trying to “find themselves” at age 27.

    I don’t want the youth of today to be skipping their Geometry homework to go vote.

    Better yet, become a taxpayer, then you can start voting. That takes age out and substitutes responsibility level. The slacker at age 25 who’s never worked and is floating around in school or something, no vote for you yet. The industrious 14 year old kid with a paper route? You can vote from now on.

  19. 19 Dennis
    June 18, 2008 at 00:01

    i think that voting at 16, should be done on a trial basis….

    onondaga community college
    syracuse, new york
    united states of america

  20. June 18, 2008 at 02:24

    I think to be able to vote, everyone should have to answer simple questions about the government.

    1) Name the three branches of government. Explain each of their functions.

    2) Which types of bills do presidents vote on?

    3) How many votes does it take from each legislative body to override a presidential veto.

    4) how long is the term of a Supreme Court Judge.

    5) Is the United States a Democracy, Republic, or Federation.

    6) How many nuclear weapons were eventually found in Iraq.

    Every question must be answered right to vote. Each demonstrates a Key component of understanding of the government. It doesn’t matter at what age you take the test. As long as you understand the concepts you can vote.

    WE in the US assign arbitrary ages to things that are not age related. I know people who are in their 50’s that are still not old enough to drive. I also know people who are in high school that have a better sense of responsibility and intellect then most adults I know.

  21. 21 Brett
    June 18, 2008 at 02:26

    I actually think that for purposes of voting, so long as a minor is paying income taxes, then they should be able to vote. Minors not paying income taxes shouldn’t get the vote until they are 18.


  22. 22 steve
    June 18, 2008 at 02:32

    @ Dwight

    That’s a little USA-centric, don’t you think? The question was posed for the world, not just us, and especially our hosts are British, and they don’t have three branches of governenment., presidents, a separate supreme court……

    I kind of find it funny people are suggesting knowledge tests to allow the right to vote, when that was the same requirement southern states used to try to deprive blacks the vote.

  23. 23 Brett
    June 18, 2008 at 02:44

    6) How many nuclear weapons were eventually found in Iraq.

    Hahaha, if ever there were a voting intelligence test… That would most definitely need to be on there!
    You made my night with that haha.

  24. 24 Bob in Queensland
    June 18, 2008 at 03:19

    I can only answer this from the point of view of the countries I’ve lived in (Canada, UK and Australia with a short stint in Cyprus) but my answer has to be “no”. As a parent, I can state pretty firmly that there is a huge maturity gulf between the age of 16 and he age of 18. Obviously there are variations from person to person but, if it’s necessary to set a “one size fits all” age, most 18 year olds have the maturity to make an informed choice–but very few 16 year olds are ready, whatever they may think.

    However, I qualified this by country and am interested to note that the person posing this question is from Zimbabwe. Turmoil, violence and hardship can force a young person to grow up very quickly (almost certainly too quickly) and I’ll be interested to hear Bryony’s point of view. For Zimbabwe, perhaps she’s right.

  25. 25 Mark
    June 18, 2008 at 03:39

    NO! They aren’t at all qualified to make decisions affecting the rest of us. It’s a dangerous idea. BBC has been obsessed with this kind of nonsense for around a year or two now. The don’t seem to understand the difference between an adolescent and and adult. Otherwise, why would this keep coming up?

  26. June 18, 2008 at 04:33

    I don’t know what 16 year olds are like in other countries. The format should be the same. you should know a little about what you are participating in if you are going to do it.

    Knowledge test of the past 1) asked questions unrelated to ones ability to vote comprehensively. 2) Didn’t take in to account that many of the people were not given a chance to be educated. The tests were set up specifically so a certain demographic would fail. With such a policy, people aught to be give the opportunity to take a basic government class if those questions are too hard for them.

    Look, my family doctor is a very smart guy. He is a great doctor and knows a lot about the human body, but I wouldn’t ask him to change my timing belt. Before somebody works on fixing my automotive system, they should demonstrate a knowledge of that system.

    If people are going to participate in the governing system, they should at least demonstrate a knowledge of the basics of how it works. Knowing that a presidential candidate can make promises out the ass about what he will do but they are empty because he doesn’t write, vote on, or even schedule bills. He can only sign what makes it to his desk. If you don’t understand that, I would rather you work on my car.

  27. 27 viola anderson
    June 18, 2008 at 05:31

    No. If it actually is on the table, then find some other way than age to gauge fitness to vote. That’s something that’s needed looking at for a long time. Maybe require everyone who wants to vote to take a course that educates them in how to make informed, meaningful, intelligent choices when voting.

  28. 28 Robert
    June 18, 2008 at 08:08

    How can you use work as a measure of maturity. Surely the 17 year old going through 6th form college to become a doctor is more mature than the 17 year old who dropped out of school and is doing a minimum wage job because they have to rather than they want to. The potential doctor is making a sacrifice for the state just like the tax payer by delaying when they start earning so shouldn’t they get a say.

    What about the house wife/husband who does charity work part time, its not taxed so by extension they should not have a vote.

    Ultimately the only fiar and pratical way of controlling this is to set a minimum age regardless of your situation.

  29. 29 Katharina in Ghent
    June 18, 2008 at 08:15

    No, and income should not play a role here. We used to have in several different countries the system that the weight of your vote depended on your income, this way the 100 super-rich can always choose the next government (guess who they’ll favor) and the millions and millions of poor people will get run over completely. What actually should happen, not just in the US but nearly everywhere, where voter-turnouts are going down, is to educate the masses about the importance to vote.

  30. 30 Iddi Musyemi
    June 18, 2008 at 08:38

    I think very soon this suggestion may come into effect in Kenya. But then whats the purpose of having 16 year olds voting? Is it to make them more responsible people or are the politician widening the area within which they play with societies’ minds for their own political intersts/purposes?
    I would be very sceptical having a 16year old voting!

  31. 31 Ahmad Hammad
    June 18, 2008 at 10:32

    Why not? Of course, you can give rights to even a 10-years old child of voting if s/he gets through an exam.

    Yes, there should be a test conducted by the election commission. The questionnaire should be intented to evaluate the candidate’s knowledge about Democracy and the geo-historical background of the vicinity s/he is living in…

    And, if someone aged 80 could not get through the exam, s/he shouldn’t be allowed to vote!

  32. 32 Mohammed Ali
    June 18, 2008 at 11:47

    Why shouldn’t it be. Here in Liberia 16 year olds are sexually active and bearing even more than the older ones. At that age they were very active in the civil war. Most 16 year olds are the bread winners for their families. These are sufficient reasons why they should be allowed to vote.

  33. 33 Mohammed Ali
    June 18, 2008 at 11:50

    Why shouldn’t it be. Here in Liberia 16 year olds are sexually active and bearing children even more than the older ones. At that age they were very active in the civil war. Most 16 year olds are the bread winners for their families. These are sufficient reasons why they should be allowed to vote.

  34. 34 Pete from Massachusetts
    June 18, 2008 at 12:18

    I believe 16 year olds should be able to vote. When I was 16 I was political active and definitely had an informed opinion. Civic responsibility should be taught at early ages and why not start by having them actively participate in democracy.

  35. 35 Mohammed Ali
    June 18, 2008 at 12:37

    What a good suggestion about asking these:
    1) Name the three branches of government. Explain each of their functions.

    2) Which types of bills do presidents vote on?

    3) How many votes does it take from each legislative body to override a presidential veto.

    4) how long is the term of a Supreme Court Judge.

    5) Is the United States a Democracy, Republic, or Federation.

    6) How many nuclear weapons were eventually found in Iraq.

    I bet more than 50% of your adult population will not answer these question. If that is to be the creterion for voting, you will have almost no one voting beside the politicians.

  36. 36 Ogola Benard
    June 18, 2008 at 15:41

    Government does’nt act or are not in place for only 18 and above. Even a new born should actually vote provided him or her understands the reason for that vote.
    All put togather will affect the 16 year old given that the age of listening, writing, reading and speaking does’nt tell who takes what vote that should
    not be caste by a 10 year old.
    What is the macurity age for example and when does a parrent adivce a 16 year old about being careful?

  37. 37 Nnamdi, Nigeria
    June 18, 2008 at 16:26

    If you allow 16 year olds to vote then they should also be held liable for offences they commit. As far as I am concerned, this question should not arise because at that age, they are still developing physically, mentally and otherwise. In Nigeria, if you enguage a 16 year old in a discussion you will immidiately discover that his reasoning is still very low. In fact they can easily be manipulated to enguaging in electoral violence.

  38. 38 Bin Ali Gaber
    June 18, 2008 at 17:10

    in this year the boy still has no ripeness maturity and for this reason they can not understand what is thier duties and what is the good things for them so difficult to give them this chance . also some people will exploit them in thier affiers so to be far from the vote is the best thing .but however we can give them duties for voting in some matters that what i think about this matter …

  39. 39 Catalina
    June 18, 2008 at 17:21

    @ Hiam – good job at being extremely ignorant. As many of the previous posts stated, there are adults that have no idea what the issues are while many teenagers know more about politics than a 60 year old person. Don’t judge someone based on their age. Hope you never have to make any decisions for any government because you’ll screw everyone over considering that the voting age in the US is 18 and not 25.

    @ Barry- 16 year olds don’t know everything but you sure do right?

    The double standard and age discrimination against teenagers is just ridiculous. There are plenty of 16 year olds that are conscious of the political issues in their country simply because they are being bombarded with e-mails, ads, and news of the current status of the government. Not only that, but many high schools have entire weeks dedicated to the election season, current candidates and their stance on all the issues, including their platform. For example, I’m 18, and when i was in high school I took a speech class in which we analyzed speeches and researched all of the presidential candidates of 2008. I now know what the smallest gesture from Obama can mean, or what he really is trying to say in his speeches.

    However, it might be wise to first educate our youth about politics and the government before giving them the right to vote.

    PS. A definite disadvantage, at least in the US, is that if we do lower the voting age, it’s still no guarantee that the majority will vote. The youth in the US is already overlooked because a lot of people under the age of 30 do not vote. If we could somehow get the young people to have a voice and get them to make themselves heard, then maybe politicans will switch gears and focus on the youth instead of the 70 year olds that ALWAYS vote.

  40. 40 Jens
    June 18, 2008 at 18:09

    to be the devils advocate, what about an intelligence test, not only for the voters but also for the ones we vote for. 😉

    i mean age is relative and you can be relativly stupid even at a high age.

  41. 41 george
    June 18, 2008 at 18:39

    Of course 16 year-olds shoud vote. The fact of this demographic will force politicians to respond to more of the population – a wider democracy. And anyway, could 16 year olds cause more harm than us 50 year-olds already have?

  42. June 18, 2008 at 19:11

    @Jens –

    Excellent! That would certainly reduce the number of professional politicians and provide the opportunity for new voices to be heard in Washington and elsewhere!
    (Additionally, had your suggestion been enacted several years ago, we would not be suffering this present White House administration!) Kudos to your progressive idea!

  43. 43 Jens
    June 18, 2008 at 19:18


    i though it might catch on ;), especially the requierment for the politicians…..

  44. 44 nicholas kariuki nairobi/kenya
    June 18, 2008 at 19:30

    definetely not! at 16 one is just a kid.voting is no a joke.here in kenya one is still in school .all what teenagers thinks abt is sex.

  45. 45 Chantal Noelle
    June 18, 2008 at 19:32

    @ Catalina

    I do agree with you that in the US there is no guarantee that they will vote because it is true many under the age of 30 do not vote. But at the same time I still believe that only a few 16 year olds are up to date with the current issues. I think that we must begin with our younger generation right now and help pave a gateway for them so that being up to date with the current issues is necessary in their education. Although in the future it will be helpfu at this point in time I believe it will not make an impact at all.

  46. 46 Philippe Frowd
    June 18, 2008 at 19:49

    The disparities between voting, drinking, driving and working ages need to be resolved in some form. If one can pay taxes, drive, drop out of school and work full time at 16 in many countries, why add the vote to that list?

    With the proportion of the population under 30 in many Middle Eastern and African countries being very high, perhaps a change in voting age in these countries would channel youth discontent much more effectively than many of the unsavoury alternatives on offer. In Western countries, the proportion of 18 to 24s who actually vote is at rather dismal levels, and there are doubts in my mind as to whether this would practically enhance the democracies of these countries.

  47. 47 Catalina
    June 18, 2008 at 21:08

    @ Chantal

    I completely agree. That’s why educating our teenagers should be the first step. Most 16 year olds either don’t understand politics or they just don’t really care. I definitely agree that at this point in time i doubt that it would make much difference, but I also don’t agree with the misconception that just because someone is 16 they have no clue what’s going on in the world. Some really don’t and that’s because the politicians know that the majority of the voters are older, so their focus is on that generation, and not on my generation. Which is also why it takes some time even for me to understand what’s going on with the issues, or what the issues actually are. Unless you actually put the time and effort and research the candidates, most 16 year olds won’t be up to date on what is going on around them.

    @ nicholas

    i think you’re jumping the gun in thinking that all 16 year olds think about is sex. That kind of backward thinking is what makes most teens say ” f adults*. You probably don’t understand that there is tremendous peer pressure placed on high schoolers. Also, there are plenty of 16 year olds out there that are virgins. You should refrain from making such general comments.

  48. June 18, 2008 at 21:17

    If it were up to me, The candidates would have to go through a series of activities. They would include a jeopardy type quiz show, a singing contest, and deal or no deal, a beer pong tournament, and a no holds bared UFC style fight tournament in mud. Each event would be scored and the highest point value wins the highest position in all the land.

  49. 49 Tom
    June 19, 2008 at 03:47

    Voting in Australia is compulsory with fines imposed on absent eligible voters. The idea that democracy is forcefully imposed seem ironic and oxymoronic to me.

    Given this, I would say NO to voting for 16 year olds. At most, compulsory voting should not apply to them.

    It’s hard enough for senior high-schoolers to cope with the pressure of homework and exams. They should not be burdened further with the task of deciding their own leaders.

    This pressure should be left to their parents. If the parents vote with the interest of their children in mind then whether their children vote at 16 or 18 should not matter.

  50. 50 John in Germany
    June 19, 2008 at 11:11

    Reading about pre and after election surveys it is easy to see that a lot of adults are voting to punish, how stupid can one be, to put revenge before common-sense.?.
    If the vote at 16 was introduced it would mean for instance here in Germany the right wing parties would get a lot more votes. The youth are being recruited at a very early age to follow this type of hate politics, which is not even controllable by the parents.

    16 year old youths are still completing thier education, and although sexually active, are still not emotionally stable. If allowed to vote they could change the political picture in areas where majorities are narrow. Although probably more mature today than us oldies were at 16, they are not mature enough to understand politics.

    Note- How can they even the politicians don’t understand, look how they vote sometimes.

    So all of you political lobbyists leave our youth alone, 18 is the good age, if one pays taxes or not. . Ex pats in Europe cannot vote for the Government, only for land, and local government, and they have paid taxes for all of thier working life. So honestly why should the vote be granted to a 16 year old, when others that have contributed to the success of a country, cannot.(the answer cannot be discussed here)

    No i am not bitter, just full of dislike for our European politics that cant put that right.

    John in Germany

  51. June 19, 2008 at 11:47

    if kindergarten kids can sing their countries national anthem and say its loyalty pledge,then 16 year olds are legible to vote….i would like 70 year olds and above to be banned from voting.

  52. 52 John in Germany
    June 19, 2008 at 14:12

    @David Lulasa.

    Wow! am i glad that i’m not anywhere near 70, if i was maybe i could understand your logic. The working age limit is going to be set at 65, and will increase as the health care gets better, even you can agree to that.

    There are not many countries in the west where the children have a flag parade in the morning, not even prayers. You can teach a parrot to speak, and make children sing to order. which is the case in many countries. They may know the song, but certainly not the political effort behind it..

    You have the right to insult the geriatrics’s here, you will probably suggest next that they take a test to see if they are fit to vote. Or if the Parkinsons allows them to use a pen. If you are not already 70, i wish you a healthy and happy time till you are.

    John in Germany.

  53. June 19, 2008 at 19:05

    I think 16 year old should definetly vote provided they are educated about what they vote about. I think 16yo, are a little more mature in the developing world than in western countries.

    Moreover, for the reasons John from Germany provided above, I think it is unfair to limit voting rights to only those who are more than 18, regardless of their level of mental or intellectual involvment in the political context they are part of.

    There are 16yo who are very involved in the political process. There are also 16 yo who are more interested in JLo’s make-up than in the future of the country.

  54. 54 John Butt
    June 20, 2008 at 10:04

    Raise the voting age to 21 and you would have to be a resident paying tax for at least 10 years or be born in the UK. Vote at 16 rubbish. Its a fact that a 16 year old has no experiance of the country has a whole. The politicians want a vote at 16 because they are all so rubbish the need to con a new generation of voters or lose their job. from their point of veiw the younger they are the eaiser it will be to con the.

  55. June 20, 2008 at 11:36

    Seems a little stupid when they are not seen as adult enough to go to an off license and purchase alcohol,Where does this stupid line of thinking come from.

  56. 56 John in Germany
    June 20, 2008 at 13:12


    Come on now man, or woman, some sort of control level is needed. Ok that still doesn’t stop adults buying for them, but it is regulations that are needed to give the police a margin in which to work in,its called law. The purchase of Alcohol , what an indicator for the maturity of a person to vote.

    Because you have an opinion it does not mean that other opinions are stupid,.Democracy, that is what allows you to make the statement, and me to disagree.,or visa-verse.

    JOhn in Germany


  57. June 21, 2008 at 12:12

    JOhn in germany,your perfectly welcome to disagree,but would appreciate you following the law that is trying to be passed in scotland,by raising the legal age limit of 18 yrs of which you can purchase alcohol in off licenses,which is our adult age in Britain,to the age of 21 yrs,if we wish to lower the age of the voter to 16,we should first respect they are adults at 18 yrs of age and not take these rights away from them,whatever the age of the young who wishes to spoil themselves with drinking they will find a way of obtaining these drinks by hook or by crook,it is up to the laws already in place to be used, and yes i am a man and a father of 3 grown up adults who are telling me what to say.I have no problem with a 16 yr old voting so long as they have the intelligence to know exactly what there vote means.As far as democracy goes,We are refused a promise by labour on The EU to vote,I would not call this democracy?But thought i’d get the stupid in before we lose all rights to vote.

  58. 58 Sooyeon Lee
    July 15, 2008 at 11:47

    I think that is stupid for teenagers to vote.

    Teenagers might be able to work and have jobs, but voting is not the same. Voting is a bery responsible act that requires more than a year or two of adult experience of life and politics.

  59. July 15, 2008 at 11:53

    I also think that because teenagers are immature, they should not vote. Adults have valid social experiences while teenagers to not.

    Sooyeon from South Korea

  60. 60 BUGZ
    October 31, 2008 at 00:13

    With all do respect I think a 16 year old person can be more mature than a 20 year old or even older, people nowadays are not as immature as they used to be i mean there is a good share of immaturity but look at the 16 and 17 year olds they act somewhat more mature then their teachers in their schools now explain that, so i think if they have a problem with 16 yr olds then they need to check out every other immature person in theses G*dD**n united states

  61. 61 BUGZ
    October 31, 2008 at 00:15



  62. February 13, 2009 at 19:27

    yes you should be able to vote if you are 16 because if you are out busting your butt to get a paycheck and then give some to the government then you should be able to vote.

  63. February 19, 2009 at 18:02

    no it should not be lowered

  64. 64 Jocelyn
    March 10, 2009 at 01:16

    It’s rediculous to let 16 or 17 year olds to be able to vote because most 16 and 17 year olds are 2 imature 2 understand what they are voting about.Most people think that if 16 or 17 year olds can drive than they can vote but think about how many crashes they have had.I just think they r not ready to be able 2 vote yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: