Others may feel as if the current voting age is too young for people to start voting and that people should earn the right to vote in their twenties, once they’ve gained some life experiences and can think independently. At 18 the youth feel as if they what is good for them but the reality of it is that they do not. Because at 18, one is easily swayed in their decision making by friends or by parents and have not been given the right amount of time to mature their own opinions or are still undereducated on politics but just vote as it what everyone else is doing by extending the amount of time in which a person can vote may make them want to vote by the time they are in their twenties as they have been
Another benefit of being smart is that I have a chance to go to a better college or university. As a result if I get into a better college, I can get a better job. Furthermore I can get a better carrier because some colleges are specialized in the carrier I want. Also if I were more intelligent I would pass my classes in college with high scores. Those are the results of being more intelligent than being more popular more popular.
Attend a TruAge Scanning event near you and learn how you could manage your TrūAge. Don't let your age slow you down anymore. The TrūAge lifestyle helps you feel younger, longer. In the UK, gains in life expectancy have outstripped gains in healthy life expectancy; people are living longer, but they are not necessarily in good health. * By adopting a TrūAge lifestyle, you can minimise these A.G.E.s and feel younger for longer.
Another argument for reducing the vote age is that younger people are making important decisions such as in their education, employment and in life, for example people at the age of 16 are able to get married, therefore they should be able to vote as if they are able to make such choice in their life they should be able to vote on a representative they agree with based on their individual thoughts and understanding. Also there isn’t a huge difference between the ages 18 and 16 therefore their knowledge at the age of 16 to 18 does not have a significant difference and they are as capable of making a good decision at the age of 16 compared to 18. Others may argue that reducing the age
If resources are allocated properly an effectively run government crime prevention program is invaluable. The cost-benefit analysis suggests that an economic activity should be expanded as long as the results provide more benefits than the overall costs. In both the U.K. and the U.S. the taxpayers are required to foot the bill for an ever-expanding crime prevention program. However, it is safe to assume that most individuals would rather invest in their own personal safety as well as the safety of their communities. A safer society would also see long-term economic benefits such as overall increase in GDP.
European countries have a lower legal drinking and appear to have lesser alcohol related problems. Trying to enforce the drinking age of 21 is ineffective and pricey. Even though the law says one has to be 21, teen drinking is a major problem and there will never be a way to stop it. It would be more effective to spend money on educating the youth about how to drink responsibly rather than attempt to enforce the drinking age of 21 and continuously waste money and effort.” For 21 years, the legal drinking age has been set at 21 years. This has been an issue topic for quite some time now, and more states are considering revising the law.
Juveniles have greater possibility than adults to make a change in their lives with the right help with counseling and rehabilitation. Stier also states there is new brain research showing that the full development of the frontal lobe, where rational judgments are made. However, that does not occur until their
If children were tried as adults it would be seriously unfair due to the fact that adults are much more mature. Adults have been on this planet much longer then children so why should children get punished to the same degree. Adults have the experience in these situations and have knowledge due to previous history to be able to make an educated decision. Children are still young and without this experience. I do think that courts should consider other factors, like the severity of the crime, the juvenile's previous criminal record and their upbringing, before determining if they should be tried as an adult.
The amount of lives that can be saved by raising the driving age to 18 would be very large. Teens are just not responsible enough to have this responsibility. “ There is evidence to suggest that the part of the brain that assesses risk and controls impulsive behavior is not fully developed until the age 25 (23 for females), providing a physical reason why restrictions such as night curfews and limiting peer passengers is so important”. ( Professor Cass) One of the leading causes of teenage accidents is inexperience. Teenage drivers don’t have the experience of driving a car.
Therefore, older voters are relatively more encouraged on a typical vote. However, young voters explosively participate in voting once in a while, and their decisions control the result of the vote. As people grow old, have their own family, and their children grow up, their duty to take responsibility for their family would get bigger. Then people want to participate in politics or societies more than they were younger because they would recognize those things directly related with their life. They now want to protect or to emphasize their benefit, such as children education, health, community development, or common interests, through supporting a representative who defends their opinions and rights.