Age of enlistment

Adder wrote: Given science believes the brain really has not stabilized its 'growth' phase of childhood until the early 20's it probably should be at least 21.

Unfortunately that doesn't really meet the military's needs since a large part of bootcamp is changing the way you think. The younger you are, the easier it is for the military to mold you, and not in a bad way. Someone who is already established in their way of thinking is more likely to question orders, even lawful, reasonable orders. Or just simply forget. The best example I've seen of this was a guy in my boot camp who was an amazing shot, but failed the rifle qualification because he couldn't get all the saftey steps correct because he had already learned "his" way of shooting. Fantastic shot, hit every target, but he kept leaving the rifle off saftey or didn't leave the action open when he put it down. The military needs people they can teach. They need minds that aren't set in their ways yet. Personally, I think that once someone has completed the minimum level of education, they should be able to choose to serve.

True, the older someone is the more likely they have already learned particular habits... and re-learning something in a different way would seem to (most often, sometimes?) take more time then training something new. But adult's can learn, often better then kids under some circumstance IMO - possibly it might take a different technique of training, otherwise just more of it I guess.

I remember when I was in high school there was lots of talk about creating a 'univeral age' as opposed to things being rather spread out as far as laws are concerend. Where I live at 18 one can enlist, smoke, and purchase porn, then at 21 one can drink and gamble, then at 25 your insurance goes down and you can rent a car.

People were arguing that it didn't make sense that a person can willingly die for their country before they can drink in it. Admittedly these people just really wanted the drinking age lowered and didn't care so much about the rest (at least the people my age then) but they did make a good point.

let's be perfectly honest here Goken, if we really had a right to commit suicide (I'm supposed to have it where I live), all drugs and (self) dangerous activities would be allowed (like speeding on empty roads, riding a motorcycle without a helmet, etc).

ren wrote: let's be perfectly honest here Goken, if we really had a right to commit suicide (I'm supposed to have it where I live), all drugs and (self) dangerous activities would be allowed (like speeding on empty roads, riding a motorcycle without a helmet, etc).

I have a few replies that may be valid or invalid based on your meaning.

Are you referring very specifically to the line 'willingly die for their country'? My meaning there was 'to go to war with the potential to die in service to one's country', not 'to commit suicide'.

Furthermore, where I live you can ride a motorcycle without a helmet (although I always wear mine) and if you speed on an empty road and no cop sees you, is it still illegal? (joking on the last part)

All that said, I still think they made a good point. It seems odd that a person can go to fight in war but not be allowed to consume alcohol. I'm not sure where the logic is.

On a side note, I am of legal age to drink but I still don't (as in I didn't before either) so I hope you see my views on this as not biased towards being able to drink.

ren wrote: let's be perfectly honest here Goken, if we really had a right to commit suicide (I'm supposed to have it where I live), all drugs and (self) dangerous activities would be allowed (like speeding on empty roads, riding a motorcycle without a helmet, etc).

Informed and intelligent suicide...

Not accidental and the possibility of taking others too....

Cops don't stop you for your safety, their job is public safety...

ren wrote: if we really had a right to commit suicide.

I didn't think we had to ask permission to kill ourselves? :huh: What are they going to do, fine you, give your body jail time? Once you are dead, honestly, they can't really do anything to you personally. They can do things that would affect your loved ones who obtain your inheritance (the death tax lol). The difference between suicide, and performing dangerous acts that would put yourself in harms way, is the fact that some of those things you listed (speeding on a road), is that it can put others in harms way as well. That does not mean if a police officer see's you with a gun to your head, he would walk away and do nothing. In fact, most people wouldn't. Most people would try and talk you out of it, etc.

Anyways, enough of this thread derailment. I say once you are done with your minute public schooling requirements, you should be able to serve if you want too. I also believe, if you are old enough to fight and die for your country, and to elect its leaders, then you should be old enough to drink and smoke. (Some states such as AL require you to be at least 19 years of age to smoke).

Back in the days it was illegal, and they couldn't do anything to you, but they certainly could and did harm your family. Now suicide is supposed to be decriminalized, yet all sorts of activities that would somewhat shorten your life expectancy (and only yours) are prohibited.
putting yourself in harm's way "for your country" for some reason is OK because you get to kill people. If you're only a cop it's not quite as good, because all you do is help get people in prison. And of all people who put their lives on the line (over here anyway), firefighters are the ones who get the least "hero publicity". When I was a kid firemen (most were volunteers) were probably the most respected people, and generally it was almost considered criminal not to buy their calendar...And with parental consent you could join them at 16.

Revan Falton wrote: Anyways, enough of this thread derailment. I say once you are done with your minute public schooling requirements, you should be able to serve if you want too. I also believe, if you are old enough to fight and die for your country, and to elect its leaders, then you should be old enough to drink and smoke.

The age of school leave is now 18 in the UK, but between 16 and 18 you can be doing 'work based training'... I have no idea if the military would count as that. Regardless of age though.. 16 year olds are still legally children, and there is a difference between military style 'boot camps' and the actual military from which they cannot leave for 6 years.

In the very least, I think they should be able to leave at 18 if they want.

I didn't see this- it's been a practice for quite some time though and can only be achieved if you're emancipated. At 17 you can join with parental consent. I joined at 17. I know a guy they accidentally deployed to Iraq at about two weeks before he was 18 (sent him back a week later to Germany for a week and a half so he could turn 18- because legally you cannot deploy until you're 18.

Sometimes you know exactly what you want by 16- and sometimes you recognize you need more time so you go for the military to get it. As it would happen, college is too time consuming, as is trying to maintain a regular job- so the military gave me the opportunity to find myself that other routes would not have afforded me.