The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4511267.stm[/URL]
What was your goal when you were 16? If you were anything like me, it was to get drunk, laid, stoned, play football, watch porn, and all the other things I never did. Having the chance to help sway a general election never crossed my mind. Obviously it's important for people of that age to be aware of how important politics is, but 16 is far too young to have enough of a grasp on the economical and social implications of an electoral system.
What's more, society has gone rapidly downhill in the last few years. I think the town I live in is the perfect place to see where things have gone wrong. Eight years ago I would have been 16, and I was polite to people. All my mates were (and mostly still are) polite people, and everyone I knew was capable of being decent in some way, even if it was never all sunshine and lollipops. This includes all years above and below me at the scum-bucket school I went to.
On the bus the other day I saw a group of 'young adults' playing with a dead rat on a stick. It made me laugh at the time, but when you think about it, that's not funny. Someone, somewhere, wants to give people like them the right to vote. I argue they should be impaled on sticks instead, then eaten by rats. Of course, they could grow up to be worthwhile members of the Human race, but that's my point - when they grow up. How would you like to find yourself standing in the queue to vote, next to the Hooded Ratpack?
What was your goal when you were 16? If you were anything like me, it was to get drunk, laid, stoned, play football, watch porn, and all the other things I never did. Having the chance to help sway a general election never crossed my mind. Obviously it's important for people of that age to be aware of how important politics is, but 16 is far too young to have enough of a grasp on the economical and social implications of an electoral system.
What's more, society has gone rapidly downhill in the last few years. I think the town I live in is the perfect place to see where things have gone wrong. Eight years ago I would have been 16, and I was polite to people. All my mates were (and mostly still are) polite people, and everyone I knew was capable of being decent in some way, even if it was never all sunshine and lollipops. This includes all years above and below me at the scum-bucket school I went to.
On the bus the other day I saw a group of 'young adults' playing with a dead rat on a stick. It made me laugh at the time, but when you think about it, that's not funny. Someone, somewhere, wants to give people like them the right to vote. I argue they should be impaled on sticks instead, then eaten by rats. Of course, they could grow up to be worthwhile members of the Human race, but that's my point - when they grow up. How would you like to find yourself standing in the queue to vote, next to the Hooded Ratpack?
Page:
"The UK's 1.5m 16 and 17-year-olds would become further alienated from the democratic process if they continued to be excluded from voting, claimed the Votes at 16 coalition."
Well they won't continue to be excluded - because by the next election all the current 16 year olds will be 20, and able to vote. And how can they be "further alienated"? They're as alienated at 16 as they were at 15,14,13 etc.
Well they won't continue to be excluded - because by the next election all the current 16 year olds will be 20, and able to vote. And how can they be "further alienated"? They're as alienated at 16 as they were at 15,14,13 etc.
Haha!
The guy that Gerrid quoted is clearly some politically-correct faced muppet who's learnt how to copy and past bits from anti-discrimination speeches without actually understanding them! :-D
I think that there are a fair few points though.
Seeing as people are basically liable to be treated like adults from 16 (for instance, they're supposed to pay taxes, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to start voting. Idiots are idiots, be they 16+ or 18+.
And yeah, most won't care and will likely not even bother voting, but it'll give them the chance if they want to.
Why not?
The guy that Gerrid quoted is clearly some politically-correct faced muppet who's learnt how to copy and past bits from anti-discrimination speeches without actually understanding them! :-D
I think that there are a fair few points though.
Seeing as people are basically liable to be treated like adults from 16 (for instance, they're supposed to pay taxes, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to start voting. Idiots are idiots, be they 16+ or 18+.
And yeah, most won't care and will likely not even bother voting, but it'll give them the chance if they want to.
Why not?
That's what I was saying, about how long will it be before they feel it's only right for children to wrote.
The argument for increasing the electorate is silly. Purely because hardly anyone votes anyway and to allow people who are young and relatively uncultured to swing the vote is desperate. I haven't been political minded for much over a year, when I was 16 I couldn't have cared less. It won't come in mind, the Lords will never pass such a volatile bill.
I see what you're saying, there's not a really good reason to specifically include them, but there's NO reason not to.
And CDouch, 16 is a much bigger stepping stone than 18 is.
At 16, people work and pay tax, some are living in their own place.
They are effectively "young adults".
Saying that letting them vote will lead on to younger votes isn't very thought through, is it? :-)
And CDouch, 16 is a much bigger stepping stone than 18 is.
At 16, people work and pay tax, some are living in their own place.
They are effectively "young adults".
Saying that letting them vote will lead on to younger votes isn't very thought through, is it? :-)
How long before the "KiDz" party is bloody established, offering cookies and happy rainbow kitten farts and a ban on "nasty people".
Stop defending it you ham-handed moron.
Stop defending it you ham-handed moron.
Paradox: wrote:
> Stop defending it you ham-handed moron.
Sorry, but I think Strafio has a good point there.
> Stop defending it you ham-handed moron.
Sorry, but I think Strafio has a good point there.
Don't appoligise to me you lunatic. This is the Internet, you're meant to insult me and threaten me with violence if you dislike my opinion.
Paradox: wrote:
> Don't appoligise to me you lunatic. This is the Internet, you're meant
> to insult me and threaten me with violence if you dislike my opinion.
Pointless on both counts. Try to annoy people by text on a screen insults or with meaningless threats of cyber violence? Nah, better things to do.
> Don't appoligise to me you lunatic. This is the Internet, you're meant
> to insult me and threaten me with violence if you dislike my opinion.
Pointless on both counts. Try to annoy people by text on a screen insults or with meaningless threats of cyber violence? Nah, better things to do.
I was parodying the web, it washed over you obviously.
Page: