 |
| |
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP
Ok, I'll bite and go out on a limb here. How about we move past age as a criteria altogether? Everyone here seems to recognize it is merely a substitute for other criteria. Age is insignificant, it is merely used as a stand-in for other qualities. Why don't we use those qualities as the criteria? Why do we need to use an abstraction, when all it does is lead to irrational, and unfair treatment of individuals?
(1)Vote?
So let me throw out another option(out of many others), how about no voting age at all? Germany may be moving in that direction, and legislation has been introduced to abolish the voting age altogether. Now I'm not saying this is the best option, I'm talking it out for your benefit, so before you get all hysterical, please think how this would work. I doubt the vast majority of children would even want to vote, so what would be harmed by allowing them? Massive amounts of 6 year olds would NOT be showing up at the polls and swinging elections. It is entirely likely that .01% of eligible 6 year olds would be interested/able to register to vote and vote. BUT if .01% of 6 year olds ARE interested and ARE able to register and vote, why on earth would you stop them? What are you really afraid of?
As you would get older, you'd definitely see more able voters, and people more interested in voting. Voting is a self-selecting system, those people who are informed about politics are the ones who will make the effort to go out and vote, those who couldn't care less and who would be voting ignorantly, wouldn't bother registering and then voting. No one is forced to vote.
|
In many parts of the country the polling places are located in the elementary schools because elementary schools are plentiful and convenient, so actually it would be very easy for little kids to reach the polling places in "massive" numbers. I think you'd begin to see the NEA's agenda getting a very big boost since young children are very impressionable and easy to sway. Heck, the teachers might lead their little charges right up to the polling places all nice, orderly, and in single file. Man, are your local taxes going to go through the roof. quote:
(2)Drink?
In many countries there either isn't a drinking age, or the one on the books exists merely on paper. The drinking age in the United States has existed for a little over 100 years. In Portugaul where there is no drinking age, how often do we see toddler keg parties? Never. In fact in countries with lower drinking ages and lower enforcement of drinking ages we see *less drinking* and moreover less problems with alcohol. During prohibition in America drinking among adults INCREASED, it is no surprize to see such high level of drinking among American youth as compared to their European counterparts. The drinking age only causes problems.
|
Wow. This is so timely coming so soon after the tragedy of the two little kids who died drinking. I'm fairly certain that the countries with the greatest youth drinking problems are in Europe. Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Scotland come to mind. Further more, your statement about the alleged increase in drinking during prohibition sort of conflicts with hard statistics showing a decrease in the death rate from alcoholic liver disease from 1925 to 1935. quote:
(3)Drive?
Once again, a driving age is a substitute for real criteria involving a person's ability to drive a car. We already have tests for a person's ability to drive a car, a driving age is redundant. Lets suppose the vast majority of 6 year olds are unable to drive safely and competantly. Well fine, they don't drive. That simple. If .01% of 6 year olds could pass a strict (and yes, they'd have to be much stricter than they are today) driving test, why wouldn't you want to let them drive?
|
It's well established that the accident rate of teens is much higher than that of older people. In fact studies show that the accident rate among teen drivers is actually higher than that of elderly people with know Alzeheimer's disease! The higher rate isn't completely explained by inexperience, because the accident rate among newly licensed drivers older than 20 is not as high as that of newly licensed teens. quote:
(4)Hold a job?
I've been gainfully employed since 9. It has only done positive things for me. Why impose a limit? As I noted in my other post, forcing someone to work against their will is slavery and against the law. If someone very young chooses to work, then they should be able to. Of course it depends on the employer and the job. If a job requires heavy lifting and the child is physically unable to do the lifting, of course he/she couldn't do the job. If it requires advanced knowledge of math, and the applicant doesn't have it, they shouldn't get the job. Young people currently do farm work, do work at home, deliver newspapers (as I did), babysit, volunteer, and do many other productive jobs. How is this any different from hawking designer jeans? Or whatever other jobs might be open to someone young.
Everyone irrationally fears a return to the unsafe, dangerous working conditions for child workers 100 years ago. News flash: unsafe, dangerous working conditions of the type that existed then are already outlawed. |
Our society has already been down that road. I have many patients who were children before the child labor laws were enacted. They were taken out of school and forced to work. They began their working lives at the most menial of jobs, but later found they had no marketable skills when the menial jobs dried up. Most became unemployed or under employed by their 40s because they're functionally illiterate and can not adjust to new job situations. If you were to spend at least 10 minutes with someone who got yanked out of 5th grade to go to work full time you'd know better than to suggest that the child labor laws be struck down. quote:
(5)Enter into a contract?
We want to make sure someone signing a contract understands exactly what they are getting themselves into and the implications of it. Why can't we just make sure of that? You don't need an age restriction for that. It would help out people of all ages. Look at Terrell Owens, who signed a contract and I suppose didn't fully understand what it entailed as he missed out on his free agency because of dumbly missing a filing date. If a greater effort were made to ensure those who sign contracts actually read and understood what was involved in it, then I see no need for an age requirement. |
Under the law children are generally considered to have a lesser degree of responsibility. You can't write a valid contract between two parties if one of them has diminished responsibility. Part of the process of growing up is after all the learning of responsibility. If you abolish the concept that a child has less reponsibility for his actions than an adult then you're opening up a real can of worms. Why bother to build special facilities for youthful offenders? If they're just as responsible as adults then send them to the pen! Bubba wuvs little Billy!
There are features of contract law that a kid just isn't going to understand, and saddling them with adult responsibilities is just plain unfair.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrBaggins
|
|
IMO, the British are a disciminated minority in the US. Seriously.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Verto
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP
I agree there is a lot of prejudice against LDS folks. Not really any anti-Mormon laws though, except maybe anti-poligamy laws, but I guess y'all don't do that anymore. But yea, I hear a lot of bad things said about LDS. I'm with ya. |
Well, if we wanted to devote all our efforts to punishing others for what their predecessors did, we could demand the land and property be given back, or that we be compensated for it. And then, of course, there is the emotional distress caused by the killings, the rape, etc. And then we would go after the governments of Illinois and Missouri.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OzzyKP
|
 |
Rockville, MD
Oct 1999
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
In many parts of the country the polling places are located in the elementary schools because elementary schools are plentiful and convenient, so actually it would be very easy for little kids to reach the polling places in "massive" numbers. I think you'd begin to see the NEA's agenda getting a very big boost since young children are very impressionable and easy to sway. Heck, the teachers might lead their little charges right up to the polling places all nice, orderly, and in single file. Man, are your local taxes going to go through the roof. |
Well maybe it would be good to have a voting block to counter balance the senior centers, where I might add, polling places are also located. Those impressional seniors are just bussed into their polling places to boost the agenda of groups like AARP. But of course stuff like this would only happen in a crazy world where young people voted. What an unimaginable counter-utopia.
Though I imagine in your next breath when you are making some other anti-youth argument you will say kids are all stubborn, defiant, and refuse to respect their elders. All traits of course that make your characterization of kids as being willing sheep for the NEA to troop out impossible. People who argue against youth rights make so many contradictory arguments its heartbreaking. I know I am jumping ahead here, but I've heard it far too often.
quote:
Wow. This is so timely coming so soon after the tragedy of the two little kids who died drinking. I'm fairly certain that the countries with the greatest youth drinking problems are in Europe. Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Scotland come to mind. Further more, your statement about the alleged increase in drinking during prohibition sort of conflicts with hard statistics showing a decrease in the death rate from alcoholic liver disease from 1925 to 1935. |
Oh boo hoo, 2 kids died. You know how many adults die from drinking? Do you realize the rates are much higher for adults than for youth? Also, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Scotland don't have alcohol laws as lax as countries like Italy, Spain, Portugaul, France, and Greece, who have lower problems with alcohol.
Also, what good do you think the drinking age is doing? The United States has the highest drinking age in the world. Has it solved all our problems with alcohol? Has the recent crackdown dramatically changed youth drinking habits? Well since you are big on statistics, here are some for you:
For students grades 7-12 in the US
Ever had a drink:
1952 - 90%
1978 - 87%
1991 - 90%
Drinks weekly:
1952 - 47%
1978 - 46%
1991 - 48%
Reports problems with drinking:
1952 - 16%
1978 - 16%
1991 - 15%
Average age of first drink:
1952 - 12
1978 - 12
1991 - 12
Males, Mike A., The Scapegoat Generation Common Courage. 1996. p. 204
You push for a drinking age, but if its not working, and if its not having an effect on youth drinking at all, wouldn't you, empircally, be open to new options? Or are you too closedminded and ideological/prejudiced to accept any law or practice that disagrees with your entrenched beliefs? The drinking age is not stopping anyone from drinking, it just makes things more dangerous.
quote:
It's well established that the accident rate of teens is much higher than that of older people. In fact studies show that the accident rate among teen drivers is actually higher than that of elderly people with know Alzeheimer's disease! The higher rate isn't completely explained by inexperience, because the accident rate among newly licensed drivers older than 20 is not as high as that of newly licensed teens. |
I'd very much like to see a study that shows new drivers over 20 are better than new teenage drivers.
One thing I do know though is most people are guided by their prejudices, not their heads. For example if two 16 year olds are killed in a car accident everyone gets angry and immediately passes laws to tighten restrictions on all teen drivers. Its happened many times. All it takes is one accident, however rare they are, and everyone gets outraged and punishes those teens left alive for the sins of their reckless peers.
However not long ago a senior in California drove into an open air market and killed like a dozen people. Where were the outcries of shock and outrage? Sure people were upset, but no one proposed or passed legislation to restrict the driving priveledges of people over 60.
quote:
Our society has already been down that road. I have many patients who were children before the child labor laws were enacted. They were taken out of school and forced to work. They began their working lives at the most menial of jobs, but later found they had no marketable skills when the menial jobs dried up. Most became unemployed or under employed by their 40s because they're functionally illiterate and can not adjust to new job situations. If you were to spend at least 10 minutes with someone who got yanked out of 5th grade to go to work full time you'd know better than to suggest that the child labor laws be struck down. |
Perhaps you didn't read what I wrote. I believe you are a smart person however, so I'm sure I didn't use any big words that confused you. I clearly said forcing someone to work is illegal. It doesn't matter if a person is 13 or 30. If your patients were yanked out of school and made to work in some menial job then that would be against the law now, and in the future if youth were allowed to work *voluntarily*. As you say, the jobs they got were menial, so I imagine most kids would choose to go to school and get an education instead of working in some menial job. So your fears are unfounded and already addressed.
quote:
Under the law children are generally considered to have a lesser degree of responsibility. You can't write a valid contract between two parties if one of them has diminished responsibility. Part of the process of growing up is after all the learning of responsibility. If you abolish the concept that a child has less reponsibility for his actions than an adult then you're opening up a real can of worms. Why bother to build special facilities for youthful offenders? If they're just as responsible as adults then send them to the pen! Bubba wuvs little Billy!
There are features of contract law that a kid just isn't going to understand, and saddling them with adult responsibilities is just plain unfair. |
They already are sending youthful offenders to the pen! Young criminals already are sentanced as adults! Where have you been the last 15 years? But yea, if "little Billy" decides to take his hunting rifle to school and start picking off his classmates, I sure hope they send him to the pen. I'd hate for that cold blooded killer to get released back in society. These kids who kill know damn well what they are doing, the courts have already shown that.
As for contract law, as others have noted, most adults don't understand or read through the entirety of the contracts they sign. Are you going to deny them the ability to sign contracts? If not, then you are applying an unequal standard.
All I'm really looking for is an equal standard. The laws that oppress youth are full of hypocricies and rational leaps of faith.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrBaggins
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP
Btw, Kucinich supports lowering the voting age. |
and you'd mention this in support of your argument, why?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
I resent being called stupid OR insane.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrBaggins
|
|
Does being annoyed by the door bell ringing on Saturday count as repression?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-03-2004 06:23
)
|