Malkin: Don't let the children lead

[sean miguel]

2.21.2018

Where are all the grown-ups in times of crisis and grief? Don't bother searching America's prestigious law schools.

Two adult men, occupying lofty perches as law professors, argued this week that the voting age in the U.S. should be lowered to 16 because some high school survivors of the Parkland, Florida, shooting who want gun control "are proving how important it is to include young people's voices in political debate."
That was the assertion of University of Kentucky law professor Joshua Douglas on CNN.com. He praised some student leaders at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who've been making the rounds on TV, shouting at President Trump, Republicans in Congress and the NRA "to demand change" -- which Douglas defines obtusely as "meaningful gun control," whatever that means.

Because these children are apparently doing a better job at broadcasting his own ineffectual political views, Douglas asserts, "we should include them more directly in our democratic process" by enfranchising them now.

Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe similarly tweeted, "Teens between 14 and 18 have far better BS detectors, on average, than 'adults' 18 and older." On what basis does distinguished Professor Tribe make such a claim? On a foundation of pure, steaming BS.

Undaunted, gun control advocate Tribe urged: "Wouldn't it be great if the voting age were lowered to 16? Just a pipe dream, I know, but . . . #Children'sCrusade?"

This is unadulterated silliness. It's hashtag hokum from a pair of pandering left-wing profs exploiting a new round of Democratic youth props. I have called this rhetorical fallacy "argumentum ad filium:" If politicians appeal to the children, it's unassailably good and true.

This is not compassion, but abdication. America is not a juvenilocracy. It is a constitutional republic. There is a reason we don't elect high school sophomores and juniors to public office or allow them to cast ballots. There are many, many reasons, actually.

Pubescents are fueled by hormones and dopamine and pizza and Sonic shakes. They're fickle and fragile and fierce and forgetful. They hate you. They love you. They need you. They ignore you. They know everything. They know nothing. All in the span of 10 seconds. I know. I have two of them.

If you're lucky, they've only Googled "Should I eat Tide pods?" or "What happens if I snort Ramen powder?" and not actually attempted the latest social media stunt challenges.

But that's what kids do. Because they're kids.

Many may be exceptionally smart, passionate and articulate beyond their years, but they do not possess any semblance of wisdom because they have not lived those years. Their knowledge of history, law and public policy is severely limited (Common Core certainly hasn't helped). And their moral agency and cognitive abilities are far from fully developed.

Most are in no position to change the world when they can't even remember to change their own bedsheets.

Yet, Tribe relishes the opportunity to hide behind the young Parkland activists headed to CNN's propaganda town halls and Washington, D.C.: "NRA will meet more than its match in these amazing kids," he gleefully cheered. "(I)t'll meet its master and will be brought to heel. At long last."

President Obama employed this very same kiddie human shield strategy to ram his federal health care takeover through Capitol Hill and down our throats. Immigration and education lobbyists use it, too. Their cynicism is unbounded. Human prop-a-palooza infantilizes public discourse and renders measured, mature dissent impossible. Those who question the logic, efficacy and wisdom of the latest left-wing "children's crusade" face accusations of "hating" the children. Refusing to acquiesce to their tears and protests is tantamount to letting them die.

Showing resilience and resolve in the face of horrific adversity deserves the highest praise and attention. Juvenile victim status, however, does not warrant absolute moral authority or the unfettered powers in the political arena that ideologically stunted law professors are so eager to bestow upon them.

It's fine to listen, but do not let the children lead.

https://www.truthrevolt.org/commentary/malkin-do-not-let-children-lead


once again, I love this woman.

And it is an injustice than someone not old enough to buy beer can buy an assault rifle. Lower the age in which you can buy beer.

 

[Will E Worm]

Wrong, the voting age should not be lowered.

The driving age should be raised to eighteen.

The age to see combat should be raised as well. To twenty-one.

This is just the Democrats looking for more uniformed voters.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Children should be seen and not heard.

 

[Johan]

And it is an injustice than someone not old enough to buy beer can buy an assault rifle. Lower the age in which you can buy beer.

Ok but if you're old enough to buy a beer or an assault rifle, you're also old enough to vote. Bearing guns and voting are both natural rights guaranteed by the Constitution

 

[pool_hustler]

my 2 cents:

Driving - 16

Drinking, voting, being in the military, gun ownership, appearing in porn - 21

 

[Will E Worm]

my 2 cents:

Driving - 16

Drinking, voting, being in the military, gun ownership, appearing in porn - 21

I will agree to drinking and voting at twenty-one.

Eighteen to drive and porn. Unless you believe porn should be banned?


Why it's time to raise the national voting age to 25

Article

 

[Jack Davenport]

my 2 cents:

Driving - 16

Drinking, voting, being in the military, gun ownership, appearing in porn - 21

Agree with all with one exception, I think an 18 year old can own a shotgun, for legitimate hunting reasons. Younger under adult supervision.

 

[sean miguel]

appearing in porn - 21

bite your tongue.

she was 19 when she did this shoot:



as much as I loved it, I had no business behind the wheel at 16. 18 for driving, voting, drinking, serving in the military, buying guns and doing porn.

Military service is the baseline. If you're in the position to die and kill for your country, all the above should be allowed.

And waiting til 21 is too old for the military, especially with combat troops. The military needs those "young, dumb and full of cum" recruits who think they are invincible. The older you get, the more wise you get (for some of us) and the more cognitive you are of your own mortality. In lieu of years of experience, that raging testosterone is what is needed in war time. In WWII a 21-year-old would be a grizzled veteran. And at 18 we're at the peak of our physical prowess. You're fighting an uphill battle from there.

 

[sean miguel]

I think that's one of the things that separates liberals and conservatives - how they relate to their kids.

liberal parents are more concerned bout being being a friend to their child than being an actual parent. They want to be that "cool parent." God forbid ever "coming down" on them (gotdamn fucking hippies). Conservative parents are like "fuck you, I brought you into this world."

which is what I would say the main contributing factor is as to why these school shootings happen today - parents/adults abdicating their responsibility because they themselves are fucking children.

guns have been a part of American culture since it's inception. I saw a picture recently of school children in America in the 1950s bringing their rifles to school for marksmanship classes. What has changed since then?


#FuckTheLeft

 

[pool_hustler]

Agree with all with one exception, I think an 18 year old can own a shotgun, for legitimate hunting reasons.

I could consider that exception.

Eighteen to drive and porn. Unless you believe porn should be banned?

Why would porn be banned if 21 were the minimum age?
I think Will you aren't really considering the person here, just your niche preference. 18 year old girls severely lack foresight and are often oblivious about the long term consequences of being in porn. They're also often being escorted in by their glorified pimp boyfriends. Give 'em 3 extra years to learn a little bit more about life and imo the industry would be much healthier overall. Yes you'll have to give up your barely legal thrill...but let's face it you're way too old to be going there anyway.

Military service is the baseline. If you're in the position to die and kill for your country, all the above should be allowed.

I agree.

And waiting til 21 is too old for the military, especially with combat troops. The military needs those "young, dumb and full of cum" recruits who think they are invincible.

Yeah I understand that argument, and it seems to have worked well enough in the past. But at what expense? Could be wrong, but I'm guessing most of our PTSD vets were among our youngest troops. Could be too that with somewhat better developed judgement comes an overall better combat soldier.

 

[Johan]

I think that's one of the things that separates liberals and conservatives - how they relate to their kids.

liberal parents are more concerned bout being being a friend to their child than being an actual parent. They want to be that "cool parent." God forbid ever "coming down" on them (gotdamn fucking hippies). Conservative parents are like "fuck you, I brought you into this world."

which is what I would say the main contributing factor is as to why these school shootings happen today - parents/adults abdicating their responsibility because they themselves are fucking children.

guns have been a part of American culture since it's inception. I saw a picture recently of school children in America in the 1950s bringing their rifles to school for marksmanship classes. What has changed since then?


#FuckTheLeft

I don't have kids but if I had one and je had done something wrong, I would spank him, if I think it would be appropriate.

What changed ? Common sense disapeared, personnal responsability disapeared, communiquer disapeared.
Back in the days teenagers may used to bring their own rifle to school for marksmanship classe but 16 years old Forrest Gump would probably have been denied the right to bring his. Because people knew that letting him carry a rifle on his shoulder wouldn't be à good idea...

What changed ? The medias. Back in thé days a mass shooter wouldn't have had so much media coverage making it easier for some people to get fascinated and wanting to do "better" (bigger death toll).

What changed ? Internet. Now through internet anyone can but any gun.
Back in the days some gun retaillers (not all of them but some) would have refused to sell guns to a guy they knew unfit to own à gun. Maybe they would even have warned authorities or people in the community that the guy wanted to buy a gun and that he definately shouldn't get one, for the safety of the community

It's not 1950 anymore, you can't pretend you can live like you used to 60 years ago

 

[Will E Worm]

I think that's one of the things that separates liberals and conservatives - how they relate to their kids.

liberal parents are more concerned bout being being a friend to their child than being an actual parent. They want to be that "cool parent." God forbid ever "coming down" on them (gotdamn fucking hippies). Conservative parents are like "fuck you, I brought you into this world."

which is what I would say the main contributing factor is as to why these school shootings happen today - parents/adults abdicating their responsibility because they themselves are fucking children.

guns have been a part of American culture since it's inception. I saw a picture recently of school children in America in the 1950s bringing their rifles to school for marksmanship classes. What has changed since then?


#FuckTheLeft

Back in the 1950s and even later, many high schools had shooting ranges. Students even brought their own rifles to school. What changed in society that we could trust such activities then, but not now? (Communist agenda in America is what happened. Time to kick the Communists out.)

Article

Article 2

I think Will you aren't really considering the person here, just your niche preference. 18 year old girls severely lack foresight and are often oblivious about the long term consequences of being in porn. They're also often being escorted in by their glorified pimp boyfriends. Give 'em 3 extra years to learn a little bit more about life and imo the industry would be much healthier overall. Yes you'll have to give up your barely legal thrill...but let's face it you're way too old to be going there anyway.

By eighteen if they can have sex off camera then they can do it on camera. People have to take responsibility for themselves. Anyone shooting video should be required to tell them everything before hand; consequences and so forth.

And waiting til 21 is too old for the military, especially with combat troops. The military needs those "young, dumb and full of cum" recruits who think they are invincible.

Wrong, we don't need to be sending untrained and young people off to be slaughtered; especially for a foreign country.

But at what expense? Could be wrong, but I'm guessing most of our PTSD vets were among our youngest troops. Could be too that with somewhat better developed judgment comes an overall better combat soldier.

That is why three years of military training is best then at twenty-one they can see combat if needed.

For a reason that is in America's interest.

I don't have kids but if I had one and je had done something wrong, I would spank him, if I think it would be appropriate.

Your child would probably be spanking you. :tongue:

What changed ? Internet. Now through internet anyone can but any gun.

Wrong.

It's not 1950 anymore, you can't pretend you can live like you used to 60 years ago

We will make the world great again so we can live better like they used to live.

 

[Johan]

We will make the world great again so we can live better like they used to live.

There's no way the whole world will go full on Amish

 

[Will E Worm]

There's no way the whole world will go full on Amish

Who said Amish?

Maybe the 50s.

 

[bobjustbob]

Lowering the voting age ...ummm. Since it was lowered from 21 to 18, it is the lowest demographic for elections local and national. Drop it to 16? Go ahead. With the information superhighway available to the public and younger persons having more access to news and information, I'll go with it.

Now what's going to happen on election days? Not just November dates, those local elections in June or July. Schools close for bringing in the booths. Students have the day off. My guess is that less than 20% of the 16-21 year olds will bother to get a ride to vote. PlayStation points are up for grabs. Those precious hours may deny them access to a weapon or power.

 

[Johan]

I'm not saying "lower the voting age". I'm saying "If you're old enough to buy a gun, you're old enough to vote".

 

[bobjustbob]

I'm not saying "lower the voting age". I'm saying "If you're old enough to buy a gun, you're old enough to vote".

What would say to raising the voter and gun ages? Set them both at 21? Military service at 21 also? I'm open to this.

 

[Johan]

What would say to raising the voter and gun ages? Set them both at 21? Military service at 21 also? I'm open to this.

I think 18 is fine.
I know liberals would like to lower the voting age to get more young voters 'cause they know a majority of these young voters would vote for the Democrats
I know conservatives would like to raise the voting age to get less young voter 'cause they know a majority of these young voters vote for the Democrats

 

[sean miguel]

I think 18 is fine.

I know conservatives would like to raise the voting age to get less young voter 'cause they know a majority of these young voters vote for the Democrats

they'd have to raise the voting age into the 30's to have any effect. we're in agreement i think that 18 is the sweet spot. speaking of sweet spots, I love my 18 year old porn. not sorry for that at all.

 

[bobjustbob]

So as a tree hugging, bleeding heart liberal, you agree to leveling the playing field at 18. War, guns, smoking, drinking, gambling, porn. consensual sex, independence from your parents. Would I be right on that?