Are older people today out of touch politically with younger generations?

You can’t fight for your country James until you are 18, even though you can join the Army earlier.
Lemongrove did use the present tense James, which is true now even if they 'turned a blind eye' in days gone by.

My MiL joined the WAFs when she was 17 in WW2. She always said she convinced her mother to sign a false declaration of her age, but it was only recently that we uncovered that actual document, listing her birthday as 9 months earlier than it actually was and signed by her mother.

An interesting piece of family history,

I agree most of the 250,000 under 18 in WW1 & 80,000 in WW2 lied about their age, but the MoD ignored the lies because it was assumed they were old enough to make a matiure decision to defend and fight for their country. Which is the very point of the comparisons , in war age constraints are ignored. Yet, even in 2018 under 18’s are denied of having a say in the Democratic processes because they are assumed of not be capable of making a constructive decision. That is in my view is quite incomprehensible in our so called matured world. Just a few months ago I watched the Youth Parliament debate and I was proud at the articulate and mature debate. Far more comprehensive and mature than many I heard during the referendum from Senior politicians.

My DF left school and became a wage earner at 14. He was independent and could cook and look after himself. Last summer I followed a couple of students around Sainsburys, newly enrolled at the University of East Anglia. One was trying to show the other how to shop. How to budget. The other had no idea of even how to cook a ready meal. It was fascinating, and worrying. Launched at 18 into the world without any ability to care for himself. I assume, and hope, that he was unusual.

So that sums up all young people now NfkD and your DF (?DF) sums up how all young people used to be?

You haven't even let us know the timespan we are looking at that this sweeping generalisation covers.

James Yes, it was easy to lie about your age a hundred years ago, and a lot of people didn’t have a birth certificate, my own Grandfather did this, enlisting in 1914 when he was sixteen.He always said he got away with it because he was so tall.
However, I was talking of nowadays, when you really do have to be 18 to be in a combat situation.
Because we ( as a society) can’t know who is mature and who really isn’t, it’s better to take 18 as a voting age.

There is a difference between what you can do and what you have experienced.

I had a precocious interest in politics, In hospital for a long time at the age of 6, I chose to have the Children's Newspaper instead of a comic and always read the Parliamentary section.

BUT despite that I was aware at 16, and looking back, I still believe I was right, that neither I nor others my age knew enough about life and politics to make a considered and knowledgeable decision on how to vote, then, before I was 21.

Between 18 and 21 I went away to university in north east England, I met many people with different life experiences to me. Saw the difficulties of life, in a struggling part of the country, dependent on heavy industry. It profoundly affected and has influenced my political allegiances and views ever since.

I think rather than reducing the voting age, we should raise the age of other life decisions, like getting married, to 18

it has always been the law that you can marry without parental consent at 16 ,here in Scotland .So they're married have a child ,a job , a home to keep and they cant VOTE for a government who has the same values they do??? Can we widen the range ,in NI CATHOLICS couldn't vote unless they were householders ..of course they were often denied the lease of a house and lived with family...so no vote .Yet Protestant BUSINESS owners had MULTIPLE votes .Should we go back to that system ..that implies unless you were of a particular faith you couldn't vote and if you had money/business you could have LOTS of votes .Obviously unfair

16year olds are much more aware of life choices nowadays.They have all the information they want or need at their finger tips .I watched 16 year olds walk into the Polling station excited and purposeful and determined their vote would count .Monica you were privileged to be able to go to University....many dont get that choice they learn about life and people on a day to day basis at work or in school and in deprived backgrounds where life in all its harshness teaches lessons young .They KNOW what they want and they can see that no one is LISTENING to them .With all respect I think your privilege has blinkered you somewhat

James

" They were allow to die for their country but denied the right to have a say in the democracy they were defending. "

" I agree most of the 250,000 under 18 in WW1 & 80,000 in WW2 lied about their age, but the MoD ignored the lies because it was assumed they were old enough to make a matiure decision to defend and fight for their country. Which is the very point of the comparisons , in war age constraints are ignored. Yet, even in 2018 under 18’s are denied of having a say in the Democratic processes because they are assumed of not be capable of making a constructive decision. "
---

I don't wish to be disrespectful but I have to take issue with your thought as I find the lowering of the voting age to be muddying the waters some what.

Your argument on one hand is saying you believe that at 16 you should get the vote because you can fight and die for your country, a blind eye was turned . This is not the case in 2018 and if there were God forbid another war nobody knows if you or I will be correct. The facts , not retrospect knowledge however must be how we evaluate the voting age in 2018.

You say - "but the MoD ignored the lies because it was assumed they were old enough to make a matiure decision to defend and fight for their country".

I'm confused because on one hand you are saying at 16 you should get the right to vote because you could during a war enlist and fight , albeit not legally but because the MOD during wartime turned a blind eye even though the enlistment age even during WW1 was 18 .

On the other hand you appear to be saying that going to war at 16 is totally wrong, irresponsible and should never have happened because of their age the were not mature enough for battle when you say " it was assumed they were old enough to make a matiure decision".

The point I am making is I have read and heard so many arguments giving reasons why there should be a reduction in the voting age to 16. Yours is a classic , if you can die for your country then you should have the right to vote scenario. My argument to that is if that is a reason and the voting age was reduced to 16 , the age where some believe we are mature enough to make such decisions then let's not be hypocritical about it. If the age of 16 it is accepted as being mature then where does it start and end?

Maturity at 16 is not as I am sure most would agree guaranteed, it depends on the individual, in fact maturity at any age is debatable when it comes to the individual . When defining the age of maturity into our Laws and Regulations however the State is making a clear assumption of what it believes the age will be . Once that decision is made then the parameter is set. If the age of maturity /adulthood is classed as 16 then there is no legal reason why an individual should not be able to enlist in the armed forces as an adult, drive a car, drink alcohol , leave educatioin etc. etc. The age of maturity is classified as 16.

Unless hypocrisy creeps in , which I guarantee it will, there's no good anyone shouting well no they are not old enough to be combat ready, drink alcohol the country will have made it's decision . I think you can guess I find 18 perfectly acceptable and to be honest I see the lowering of the voting age as political gerrymandering, manipulation for votes, others of course will argue that point.

I agree with you having watched the Youth Parliament debates in the HOC (11 - 18 year olds) there are some excellent young minds but let's not kid ourselves they are representative of the wider population.

There are certainly some inconsistencies in the age at which young people are allowed to do certain things. Personally, I feel that 18 is the right voting age - especially as now we seem to have rules and regulations which enable Social Services could become involved if a young person is failing to attend school at 17.
It seems illogical when I know of people who were married at 16 and a parent by 17.

'to become involved'

GGMK2. How exact a time scale do you need. My father left school at 14 in July 1928 as soon as he legally could. I followed the two students around Sainsburys September 2017. Sorry I don’t know the days.

I was trying to illustrate that, although he still didn’t have the vote until he was 21, my father was considered to be grown up and responsible at 14 while one of those students was incapable of caring for himself at 18. Children mature at different speeds depending on background, mental ability, schooling, etc. And these days children are generally much more sheltered, protected and insulated from the world than they were 100 years ago.

I think 16 is too young for most children to be able to vote. 17 perhaps.

Perhaps there should be a maturity test like the driving test.

Drinking alcohol is not illegal at any age, POGS.

Purchasing it is illegal, as is drinking it in pubs & restaurants (and I know there are exceptions, before anyone jumps on me)

Just saying...

Actually it is illegal to give a child under the age of 5 any alcohol I believe.

What does the law say?

Alcohol consumption in the UK is governed by strict laws.
It is against the law1 2:
To sell alcohol to someone under 18 anywhere.
For an adult to buy or attempt to buy alcohol on behalf of someone under 18. (Retailers can reserve the right to refuse the sale of alcohol to an adult if they’re accompanied by a child and think the alcohol is being bought for the child.)
For someone under 18 to buy alcohol, attempt to buy alcohol or to be sold alcohol.
For someone under 18 to drink alcohol in licensed premises, except where the child is 16 or 17 years old and accompanied by an adult. In this case it is legal for them to drink, but not buy, beer, wine and cider with a table meal.
For an adult to buy alcohol for someone under 18 for consumption on licensed premises, except as above.
To give children alcohol if they are under five.
It is not illegal:
For someone over 18 to buy a child over 16 beer, wine or cider if they are eating a table meal together in licensed premises.
For a child aged five to 16 to drink alcohol at home or on other private premises.

Crumbs James 2451! Are you just trying to provoke angry remonstration? Brainwashed by tabloids? Crikey! I'm sure you know that the way people gain info and what they believe, how they form their political opinions, does not change that much across each cohort or age group. The differences go with educational attainment. You'll just get people here telling you how well informed they are now. I do find I know a lot more than my children on a lot of subjects for two reasons. First, I'm older so was around when it happened, also have had time to get a lot of university education in different subjects. Second; I'm not only retired but disabled so immobility leads to a lot of internet trawling and news reading and researching. My kids are bright but sometimes don't realise how much I know. I don't rub it in. I do find the ignorance of people who ought to know better - seen in the media, e.g. MPs, very distressing.

Thanks for the correction, OldMeg

I was trying to illustrate that, although he still didn’t have the vote until he was 21, my father was considered to be grown up and responsible at 14
NfkD that fits in with what I was saying about inconsistency, both then and now..

Luzdoh,
Crumbs you are making many assumptions about me, I actually quoted the views of some younger members of the familily, within the family circle we do have a variance of political leanings. I have stressed their views were not necessarily my views. Why you being disabled is particularly relevant or having had a University education I am not sure? I am proud that all my grandchildren have managed to obtain higher education and most have excellent professional careers and are today following in both their Grans and Granddads footsteps by obtaining good sound professional careers. They all accept they been lucky they have all had the right opportunities and grasped them. Many other young people unfortunately do not have the same opportunities for many different reasons.

I was particularly encouraged by the recent comments of the Leader of the Conservative Party in Scotland, who publically stated in the Scottish Parliament that originally she believed young people aged 16 were not mature enough to vote. However, she now has no doubt she was wrong and the Scots experiences since giving the votes to 16 year olds has been a great success and that the maturity of those 16/17 year olds, has proved how wrong her original views have proved to be.
It is my view that our democracy has change considerably for the better since women won the right to vote. However, it can still continue to improve if we adopt a more open mind approach and put an end to the manipulation of our voting system and also by ensuring it is reflecting all of the Country’s true views and gets rid of those false manipulative political majorities that are so often the creation of safe seats for the two main parties. We still have a long way to go and I don’t suppose I shall live to see that democratic utopia, but hopefully, I will be allowed to continue to try seek a far improved and fairer society for future generations before I depart.

Before I sign off, many many thanks, to those who have sent me personal get well messages. The consultant is pleased with my progress and I hope to be discharged to return home tomorrow after all the stitches are removed, fingers crossed. At least these online discussions have helped to prevent me from getting too bored in a hospital ward.

Bye for now, James.

Oh blow James I was hoping to engage with you again and getting a response to my post as I so enjoyed your style of posting. It was a pleasure.

I sincerely hope you find being discharged not too much of a trial tomorrow, usually a lot of hanging around in my experience.

within the family circle we do have a variance of political leanings.
James that sounds like our family and our circle of friends, which is why I am astonished when some posters say they have no family members or friends who think differently!

Get well soon and Hasta Mañana as Abba would say (sing)

James good luck with the stitches tomorrow and keep posting on GN when you get back home. ??

M0nica I'd never heard of the Children's Newspaper before, so I have been having a good time learning about it! Publication stopped before I learned to read, but I would have loved something like that. I never missed John Craven's Newsround or Newsround Extra. I think the First News newspaper for children is today's equivalent of the Children's Newspaper and a subscription would make a great gift for grandchildren.

I've always thought the age for voting, getting married leaving school, etc. should all be the same and I favoured 16 as that age.

But the opinions on this thread have given me reasons to have another think about the age. You have to be 16 to leave school and most 16 year olds have limited life experience. I think 16 is too young to get married. So why did I support 16 year olds being able to vote in the Scottish referendum? Well, I thought Scottish schools were making a point of covering the subject of the referendum in class. I've since found out that councils prohibited this because of their interpretation of the 'purdah' rules that govern what public bodies can do or say in the runup to an election. Schools did assist students with the registration process.

I don't think I can support the voting age being reduced to 16 until political literacy is a compulsory subject in schools. It bothers me that it isn't already a compulsory subject no matter what the voting age is and as a nation we're letting everyone down, not just under 18s by allowing students to leave school without at least the basic understanding of the democratic process in the UK.

The UN says a child becomes an adult at 18. The age of consent for sex is 16. A child is responsible for it's own actions at 10. They can have their own passport and marry at 16. Driving age is 17 but the government a few years back were considering raising this to 18.

Googling when is a child an adult and voting ages throws up interesting information. (In Liechtenstein the voting age is 30.) Under 17/18 years old many children are going through that self-conscious phase of only seeing themselves, only seeing the world from their perspective. Did all those students who voted for free university education consider fully where the funding was coming from or just vote for what would be best for them in their current situation?

I think 17 is the absolute minimum age they can vote .

Well, we are a very 'Left -Wing' family, but i voted leave, as I thought Europe was crashing and burning and would take us with it! I do believe that the 'Millenials' are very arrogant to blame everything on the older generation. We are not all right wing, tabloid believeing racist bigots! I am so glad that my Millenial children appear to have a more balanced view of what makes people tick. The Media is terribly biased, and I dispair at listening to people at work take it as Gospel, but, equally, Social Media is also full of b*$$S%&£t.