• Registered: 09-19-2010
  • Posts: 13

Topic: Anarchy concern

While I do recognize the need for reform and the injustice of numerical discrimination in terms of chronological origin, there is a legitimate concern regarding anarchy that people do not want irresponsible minors to destabilize certain institutions.

Major changes could be slowed with gradual adjustments in age, but there is some truth that there ARE correlations in maturity and such things, so to compensate for opening the door to new troublemakers, I think other restrictions should be put in place to keep those additions out, and perhaps this could also help to restrict those of them who exist in the current adult populations.

The best thing I could see for this would be licensing and especially graduated licensing. This is already done for driving licenses (although you still need to be a certain age to apply for the first level of a driving license, not sure why that is since if you were so young as to be incompetent I'd assume you would just fail the examination).

It's also done for a lot of important occupations, there's graduated education progressing from secondary to post-secondary to even things like law or medical schools. To enter positions of trust or power like police or army you need to pass psychological screening and special skills informing and demonstration.

The main impediment in all this is likely economic infrastructure, so the major opposing criticism is: should ages be lowered before the resources exist to compensate for the void of regulation that will exist? Can these regulations be put forth in preparation, or will this superior alternative be neglected until it's need is made to be felt necessary by the problems that result from the void of more age-inclusiveness?

Thumbs up

  • From: Mountain View, CA
  • Registered: 04-23-2011
  • Posts: 57
  • User Karma: 1

Re: Anarchy concern

This starts to sound very much like a literacy test. Anyone who isn't competent to vote likely won't  vote. Even if they did, would we stop an incompetent adult from voting? No.

Thumbs up

  • Registered: 05-03-2009
  • Posts: 9,067
  • User Karma: 9,002

Re: Anarchy concern

The best thing I could see for this would be licensing and especially graduated licensing. This is already done for driving licenses (although you still need to be a certain age to apply for the first level of a driving license, not sure why that is since if you were so young as to be incompetent I'd assume you would just fail the examination).

ASFAR officially has no position on graduated licensing in general, though we oppose its current form in which it is entirely age-based. Personally, though, I think it's a great idea. It just needs to be changed to be based upon experience (your first year of driving you have some privileges, your second year more, third year full) instead of age.

Put a ChodaMonster in your Anus!

Thumbs up

  • From: Mountain View, CA
  • Registered: 04-23-2011
  • Posts: 57
  • User Karma: 1

Re: Anarchy concern

'[maxh wrote:

']

The best thing I could see for this would be licensing and especially graduated licensing. This is already done for driving licenses (although you still need to be a certain age to apply for the first level of a driving license, not sure why that is since if you were so young as to be incompetent I'd assume you would just fail the examination).

ASFAR officially has no position on graduated licensing in general, though we oppose its current form in which it is entirely age-based. Personally, though, I think it's a great idea. It just needs to be changed to be based upon experience (your first year of driving you have some privileges, your second year more, third year full) instead of age.

You're still assuming that skill correlates with experience. How does 5/5 on a test change when you've been driving for a year or a day?

Thumbs up

  • Registered: 09-19-2010
  • Posts: 13

Re: Anarchy concern

Robesdesaixtare wrote:

This starts to sound very much like a literacy test.

Literacy or some other form of advanced communication would be an excellent prerequisite.

Robesdesaixtare wrote:

Anyone who isn't competent to vote likely won't vote.

I don't agree with that, I think they can be manipulated to vote to stack the numbers by unethical people who don't care if voters they talk to understand the issues.

Robesdesaixtare wrote:

Even if they did, would we stop an incompetent adult from voting? No.

Perhaps not, but I would want their vote to be worth much less than more competant voters. Say 0.02 compared to a full vote that an informed person gets?

Thumbs up