Is it, when they come up with these little gems
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/wales-labour-vote-16-17-young-theresa-may-electoral-reform-cat-smith-a8181226.html
Under 16's to be given the vote.
Equate that with this
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/01/wales-bans-intimate-piercings-under-18s-health-fears
Under 18's not allowed to have body piercings.
There is no possible logical and valid argument to justify or explain these two pieces of legislation together. They are mutually incompatible.
|
A rather alarming lack of consistency for sure.
I would malke both voting and body piercing obligatory.
|
|
I would insist that anybody wanting to pass a new law must first find two existing ones that they will repeal.
|
|
It's a nightmare. Under this regime the best performing NHS Trusts are worse than the worst in England, anyone thinking of voting Labour (and I'm no Tory) - need to take a long hard look at what's going on here, mis - spending on a grand scale, bullying of their own ministers. The only saving grace is that UKIP is just as shambolic here. What a wasted opportunity. Muppetry on a grand scale.
Last edited by: R.P. on Fri 2 Feb 18 at 19:02
|
|
Agreed RP though I don't know how UKIP's shenanigans are a saving grace for a totally incompetent Labour. It's quite clear what's going on and you put it well.
|
>> Agreed RP though I don't know how UKIP's shenanigans are a saving grace for a
>> totally incompetent Labour. It's quite clear what's going on and you put it well.
>>
Confession time.
Both my wife and I have resigned from UKIP (with some regret) but the party is now being laughed at, and not just disliked and I can see no way back.
We have both joined the Conservatives, as our local constituency association is strongly pro- Brexit and active in that cause.
Quite a few of our late UKIP pals are also in the Tories locally and we hope that the combined group will keep the grass-roots pressure on the Tory hierarchy for a "clean" Brexit.
|
May I respectfully suggest an edit to the thread title; Government? Fit for purpose?
;)
|
|
The view on whether 16 year olds are children or adults is pretty fluid, depending on the argument someone is putting forward. If they seduce a teacher or run off to join ISIS they are vulnerable children with limited understanding of the world who have been groomed by wicked adults. If you think they are going to vote for you they are mature and responsible young adults who have enough wisdom to comprehend the issues involved.
|
|
A guaranteed electorate for the Labour shower.
|
>> A guaranteed electorate for the Labour shower.
Body piercings are mandatory for membership of momentum.
as I said, its an argument that does not stack up from any perspective.
|
>> Under 18's not allowed to have body piercings.
>>
>> There is no possible logical and valid argument to justify or explain these two pieces
>> of legislation together. They are mutually incompatible.
It's not any body piercings it's intimate body piercings; breasts, navels, genitalia and tongue
Guide for practitioners is here:
gov.wales/docs/dhss/publications/180201guidance-for-businessesen.pdf
and this press release highlights the dangers:
gov.wales/newsroom/health-and-social-services/2018/piercing/?lang=en
Essentially it's a public health issue, just the same as tatooing minors.
If they give 16 year olds the vote then perhaps allowing penile piercings at 16 could be a campaign issue?
|
"If they give 16 year olds the vote then perhaps allowing penile piercings at 16 could be a campaign issue? "
They could make it compulsory.
|
>> It's not any body piercings it's intimate body piercings; breasts, navels, genitalia and tongue
and?
>>
>> Essentially it's a public health issue,
Complete tripe, the health issue does not magically disappear at 17 years and 364 days,
>> just the same as tatooing minors.
Exactly 16 year olds cant be trusted to make the right choice. So give them the vote?
As I said, does not stack up from any argument
|
>> Exactly 16 year olds cant be trusted to make the right choice. So give them
>> the vote?
>>
>>
>> As I said, does not stack up from any argument
Is that the best you can do?
|
|
More a pubic health issue. We were watching various "ministers" on the Wales news last night. A real case for not letting politicians anywhere near the running of health, education and transport.
|
"A real case for not letting politicians anywhere near the running of health, education and transport."
That only leaves whelk stalls ;-)
|
>> Is that the best you can do?
Why else are tats banned for under 18's? Its not a health issue Its a make the right choice issue
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 3 Feb 18 at 16:25
|
|
On what basis would under 16s be banned from voting and are these same principles applied to the rest of the population who seem to vote for some mind blowing awful things??
|
>> Why else are tats banned for under 18's? Its not a health issue Its a
>> make the right choice issue
It absolutely is a health issue just like cigs, drink or drugs (albeit without the add on of addiction).
At work I'm currently sitting opposite a female apprentice who was 18 last week and has a tongue piercing. Surprisingly it doesn't affect her ability to pronounce the letter S but I'm jiggered if I can understand what she thinks it does for her.
Perhaps I'll use the Welsh ban as a peg to (discreetly of course) ask her that question.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 2 Feb 18 at 22:35
|
>> It absolutely is a health issue just like cigs, drink or drugs (albeit without the
>> add on of addiction).
Of course it absolutely isn't. It does not debilitate or kill, is not mind altering, its not addictive, it does not harm anyone else's health. It is nothing like cigs or alcohol. It is however permanent marking that needs a rational adult choice, not that of a 16 year old.
And I am not in the least bit jiggered that you dont understand
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 3 Feb 18 at 16:25
|
>> Of course it absolutely isn't. It does not debilitate or kill, is not mind altering,
>> its not addictive, it does not harm anyone else's health. It is nothing like cigs
>> or alcohol. It is however permanent marking that needs a rational adult choice, not that
>> of a 16 year old.
It can certainly debilitate via infection, particularly around the genitals or anus. In case of tongue piercings there's a added risk of damage to teeth.
>> And I am not in the least bit jiggered that you dont understand
Would you have had one in your tongue, never mind prepuce (if you have one) or frenum, at that age?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 2 Feb 18 at 23:09
|
>> It can certainly debilitate via infection, particularly around the genitals or anus. In case of
>> tongue piercings there's a added risk of damage to teeth.
Again, that does not stop being a risk at the age of 17 years and 364 days. The health aspect has nothing to do with age. You do know that piercings can come out dont you? Tats cant, which is why they are an 18 thing.
>> Would you have had one in your tongue, never mind prepuce (if you have one)
>> or frenum, at that age?
I wouldn't have either under any circumstances, but age has nothing to do with it. I do have some ink tho.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 3 Feb 18 at 16:26
|
|
Thankfully (judging by the background colour) this is not a real tattoo, just an iron-on transfer.
|
|
No, that's a real one, freshly done the background colour is inflamed skin
|
|
I think the tattoo is real, but even if not I'm guessing you don't mean iron-on.
|
>> I'm guessing you don't mean iron-on.
I do - it was supposed to be a joke.
|
>> tinyurl.com/zeros-ink
Excrement happens. No need to point it out with a tattoo. Judging by the appearance, the owner is a male adult over 18 years of age.. so proving age does not equate to wisdom.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 3 Feb 18 at 16:26
|
>> Excrement happens. No need to point it out with a tattoo. Judging by the appearance,
>> the owner is a male adult over 18 years of age.. so proving age does
>> not equate to wisdom.
Nah, female and from Milford Haven.
Ever been there?
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 3 Feb 18 at 16:26
|
>> Nah, female and from Milford Haven.
>>
>> Ever been there?
>>
Doubt it. For one thing the spelling's correct and for another her knickers aren't round her ankles.
|
It's a just scam to increase the socialist vote, as at 16, children have yet to understand that the educational system's practitioners institutionalised leftish dogma, which they have been force fed, is incompatible with maturity!
Personally, I'd welcome the raising of the voting age back to 21.
|
|
Let them vote for parish and town councils and local and county authorities at 16/17. Give them an opportunity to understand that it isn't all about Jeremy Corbyn and nasty Teresa May.
|
>> Let them vote for parish and town councils and local and county authorities at 16/17.
The Welsh proposal is, give or take the start date, exactly that. Law on voting in UK wide elections is reserved to Westminster. Not sure if Assembly can change rules on its own elections or whether that still sits at UK level.
It is sheer coincidence that the piercings ban, legislated for last year and presumably some years in gestation before that, comes at same time as a policy proposal on future voting rules.
Somebody took their eye off the ball there. For all the allegations of control freakery in, for example the Blair years, somebody's 'grid' would have identified this conflict and put the announcement of the voting consultation off for a while.
|
>> Personally, I'd welcome the raising of the voting age back to 21.
>>
I too would agree with that, unless they're in full-time employment.
|
>> I too would agree with that, unless they're in full-time employment.
>>
Perhaps the same rule should apply to the over seventies
|
>>
>> >> I too would agree with that, unless they're in full-time employment.
>> >>
>>
>> Perhaps the same rule should apply to the over seventies
Certainly in referenda, they have no long term stake in the result
|
|
so no children then ? How unusual..
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 4 Feb 18 at 02:24
|
|
If the over 70s have kids under voting age they will be very unusual
|
Perhaps it would have been fairer if votes in the referendum had been granted on the basis of age and therefore your stake in the result. Say 3 notes each fo 18 To 50, two votes each
For the fifties to seventies and one vote each fo the over seventies.
|
>>
>> Certainly in referenda, they have no long term stake in the result
>>
Lots of other categories don't either - sick, would-be emigrants, unhealthy, obese, smokers, drivers of diesel vehicles, residents of inner cities, junk-food consumers, meat-eaters, the childless.
Old people with very young grandchildren however probably have the longest-term stake of all.
|
Radio 4 had the results on a study this week that contradicted earlier results about young voter turn out in the last election. It showed hardly any change from the norm in previous elections, despite claims that it was the younger voters who were responsible for Corbyn's support.
That is as it should be. Teenagers have no business taking an interest in politics, they should be out humping, drinking and generally getting up to no good like all of us were. Those who are politicised at an early age are the types who should be kept well away from it. There is something deeply unhealthy and worrying about them.
|
>> Radio 4 had the results on a study this week that contradicted earlier results about
>> young voter turn out in the last election. It showed hardly any change from the
>> norm in previous elections, despite claims that it was the younger voters who were responsible
>> for Corbyn's support.
Different surveys have come to different conclusions on that so the jury may well still be out.
If the 'youthquake' didn't happen in 2017 then there's everything to play for next time!!
|
>>
>> If the 'youthquake' didn't happen in 2017 then there's everything to play for next time!!
>>
>>
They will be older next time, and their views will have moved on.
You'll have to start all over again with another lot of young minds.
There's no guarantee the pattern will continue. The next generation might be punk neo-nazis voting for the BNP, and the Left will be campaigning to raise the voting age.
Or the impoverished elderly, robbed of their state pensions by the funding crisis, will have swung left.
|
RoR
Some of us still do.....
Which isn’t necessarily a good thing.
A very good friend of mine married late 20s, and now has two teenage sons, both at Uni. They barely touch alcohol, don’t smoke ( apart from occasional weed) and are super fit athletes and all round nice young men. Incredibly polite, eloquent with brains, and well travelled for their age. At their age I had only just been to Spain and drank too much booze, as did my contemporaries.
As for the parties they throw at my friends home during the Uni hols, he’s banished for the weekend by his wife. No good for the blood pressure she says.
I think you should be 18 before you can vote, maybe even older.
|
>>
>> A very good friend of mine married late 20s, and now has two teenage sons,
>> both at Uni. They barely touch alcohol, don’t smoke ( apart from occasional weed) and
>> are super fit athletes and all round nice young men. Incredibly polite, eloquent with brains,
>> and well travelled for their age.
>>
That's disgusting.
Has your friend tried to get any help?
|
>>
>> A very good friend of mine married late 20s, and now has two teenage sons,
>> both at Uni.
I don't see how that is possible.
If they are say 18, and she is 28, ... ?
|
>> I don't see how that is possible.
>> If they are say 18, and she is 28, ... ?
>>
Norfolk?
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 5 Feb 18 at 13:08
|
|
I see the pedants are out this morning. Pretty obvious what the poster meant.
|
Must be very old now if they'd married in the late 20s.....was it 1928 0r 29 ?
|
Thinking about it, he was in his late 30s when my pal married. His child bride was in her late 20s, hence their offspring both now at Uni.
I was best man at the nuptials so should have remembered
|
Devolved Government? fit for purpose? - CGNorwich
