I saw something on CNN (I think) yesterday and the story was talking about how recurtiers were starting to make calls to 15 and 16 year olds now Im fine with this as long as there parents are fully informed but what are your thoughts?
Printable View
I saw something on CNN (I think) yesterday and the story was talking about how recurtiers were starting to make calls to 15 and 16 year olds now Im fine with this as long as there parents are fully informed but what are your thoughts?
No, people under 18 should not be allowed in the army under any circumstances.
I recieved a call from a recruiter when I was 16 and that would have been back in the early '80s. You have to be 17 to enlist and that requires a parental consent waiver.
So no I dont have a problem with it all.
But I might be a bit biased, US Army Infantry 87-90.
So you can legally join the army but not drink alcoholic beverages? Wacky.
I don't think underage recruiting should be allowed, simply because people at that age can be influenced far too easily and also aren't yet old enough to make informed decisions. Why would you need recruits that young, anyway?
You can join at 16 here. Beats hanging around doing nothing if that's what you really want to do I guess. Can't go to war proper until you're 18 though.
The British Army got into trouble in Bosnia or somewhere because they were using 17 year olds as peacekeepers. Turns out the UN doesn't like child soldiers.
They prefer a more defenseless prey.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
Ouch! ~:)
If you ask me, we in modern western society have become way too hung up on dictating to people what they can and cannot do based on their age.
For instance we say you can't drink till you're 21 and you can't bang anyone under 18 and stuff like that, when common sense and history clearly tell us that boys under 18 would make fine junior soldiers and that 15 and 16-year-old girls are perfectly capable of being wives.
DA
Well you can get married in NZ at 15, drive at 15, and drink at 18.
I think some of the military trades allow younger entries... sparkies, metalworkers etc in Australia then combat roles.
I mean, it's not as if at 18 something magical clicks in your head and you go "Wow, this is so amazing! Now I'm a self-concious human being capable of making my own decisions!"
At least I didn't get any such click, if you did then please share with us-- what was it like? And if my lack of a click means that I'm really still a minor, then please, tell me-- what should I do?? I can't decide for myself! And who will feed me now??
An 18-year-old is just a 16-year-old who still doesn't have any real-world experience.
DA
If you need the time spent from years 15 to 18 to tell you that the Military is the right or wrong fir for you, you're probably a bit of a moron.
I wouldn't trust a 15 year old to have a credit card, but they should by then have at least enough life experiance to have a vague idea of what direction they're headed. Be woed by the military for a few years and if at 17 you're convinced, more power to you.
No, but the law presumes some things to make the process and the convivence between people more just. By general rule, a child of less than 18 doesn't know for example, what the scripture of a property means, what the prescriptions means, so by that general rule the law puts an arbitrary date and sais everyone under here, has not valid legal will, he needs a representant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Arroyo
Come on, don't be sarcastic amigo. You know that this rule was made for the protection of the minor, not just for the sake of putting limits.Quote:
At least I didn't get any such click, if you did then please share with us-- what was it like? And if my lack of a click means that I'm really still a minor, then please, tell me-- what should I do?? I can't decide for myself! And who will feed me now??
Maybe but again the law treats this subjects in abstract, it can't look after every single minor to see when they have real capacity. Personally I don't want any army to exist, I dislike them very much, but even if you don't accept it you can easily see why the life and freedom of the minos should be protected. If he/she's emancipated by judicial sentence then there's no problem, because he can be considered by the rest of society like an adult.Quote:
An 18-year-old is just a 16-year-old who still doesn't have any real-world experience.
I realise it's not a "magical click", it's a gradual process of becoming a more mature and stable person. Most 15 year-olds I know seem immature to me , and I'm sure I seemed the same way at the time; in general people under 18 are more easy to influence, still developing as individuals, and have less experience to base their decisions on. That said, I'm sure there are individual exceptions and as has been stated it's not a sudden click "hey! I can decide for myself!" when you turn 18, but a line does need to be drawn and maintained somewhere. 18 seems to me a good age at which people can take responsibility, and can make more informed decisions.
At the age of 18 in the US you can legally do anything except drink. Since a highschool diploma or GED is necessary for enlistment you dont find many 17 year olds in the service. Finally if you are under 21 you can legaly drink in the service on post.
18 may not be a precise mnumber, but it's a good rule of thumb, especially since the average teenager graduates from high school at 18, and a serious decision is required at that point, as to where his/her life is headed. I chose college; others willl choose the armed forces.
Recruiting minors, however, is absolutely immoral. They have not yet formalised their decision as to what they will do out of high school, not to mention the fact that they have not even graduated, and hence joining the armed forces will truncate their public education. Also, they tend to be more malleable. 18. End of discussion.
I cant say how this works precisly now since my experience with it was over 20 years ago. When the recruiter called I told him I wasnt interested and that was the end of it. Latter when I did enlist I had the same recruiter and he was nice and asked me what changed my mind. At that point in time the Marines and Airforce would not accept anyone without a high school diploma. The Navy and Army would take enlisties without a GED if a waiver was signed to get a GED within the first year of enlistment. I know this was changed in 88 for the Army to a minimum of GED.
So what all that means is that if someone is receptive to the idea it isn't like they leave school and head off to boot camp. If a person does decide to enlist they will be placed in the delayed entry program which is only one year at the maximum and is when they will activly enter the service. So for them to even enter the DEP it would have to be in their senior year of highschool. I know some people that have done this while still in highschool to reserve a slot in a field the ywere interested in.
For one if you were under 17 when you signed under parental permission you can get out of the contract.
1 it's not an advertised option and 2 dont ever think of trying to sign up again.
People under 18 are perfect for the army. It teaches kids how to be responsible for their actions and builds character.
I think by the time we get to 18, like me for instance, we have lost all our gravity of soul.
There's not better way then snatching them in their beds when no one's looking. ~D
When I was getting calls from recruiters it was at 17 and 18, and they were trying to get me into one of the academies based on my test scores. I knew quite a bit about the military as I had been around it for a long time, but most people I knew at the time were rather clueless about it.
Honestly. I don't think it is a good idea to let recruiters contact those under 17. The military is a positive thing for most, but I think both the individual and the armed forces are better served by waiting until the person is a bit more mature. As Dad always said, don't believe anything a recruiter tells you (and he did recruiting at one time.) I could tell if I was getting a snow job because I had been around it, but many 15 or 16 year olds can't.
When the shit hits the fan, everyone from 13-55 will have a rifle.
Suck it up and thank God we have a country that gives us an option to restrict recruiting age to 18-30.
:charge: :duel:
Nope. Not anymore bud. Gotta be 21. Or else me and my MP posse gonna getcha.:charge: :army: :policeman:Quote:
Originally Posted by OlafTheBrave
I don't see the harm in giving people information. I decided not to look at the forces at 18 (and again at 21) because I thought, wrongly, you had to put in a 20 stretch to get into anything that might be fun to do, and that if you came out any earlier employers wouldn't be interested.
If someone had explained that, on the contrary, you can do a few years getting fit, messing around in landing craft and so on, and come out and get all the same jobs you would have been able to get anyway, I'd have been interested at least.
So I can't see the harm in giving kids info on their options. Its not as if they are being press ganged.
The military has the right to do is provide information to anyone that requests it regarding recuirtment into the military. The military has the right to pass out information about military careers in highschools - just like other occupations have that ability.
Some would call this recuritment - some would not.
Information on occupations and what it entails should be available to all high school students so that they can determine what career possiblities they might want to pursue.
The police also give information out on career days in highschools - they also tell the students what the age and education requirments are needed to become police officers.
I think recruiting underage is ok. It is a good thing to know more options when you are younger and when you are 15-16 you are still trying to figure out “what to be when you grow up”:book: . As long as the recruiters are informational and not too aggressive I don’t see it as being any different than colleges recruiting applicants or religious organizations looking for new members. I guess, just because others do it doesn’t make it right but I don’t see why the military shouldn’t have the same opportunities to recruit as other organizations.
Additionally “light” recruiting is being done to all ages that watch TV or listen to the radio. I saw an Army commercial during a kids show the other day, cant tell me that was on accident. ~;)
Were they cold-calling? If so then I would regard that as suspect. If, however, the potential recruit had asked for career information previously then I think that is fair enough.
These calls, do you know if the kids in question had requested information regarding military service, or if it was more or less random?Quote:
Originally Posted by strike for the south
Personally, I don’t appreciate the thought of kids being indoctrinated into an organization where killing other people is the ultimate terminus.
So out with the police also then?Quote:
Personally, I don’t appreciate the thought of kids being indoctrinated into an organization where killing other people[ is the ultimate terminus.
Wow that sucks. Hey lads, take that ridge and I'll give you all a drink... Except you, you can have lemonade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
Britain's 18 limit is much better. Off to the pub later... Hehe.
Depends on the police, I guess. I must however add that in my experience, military and police are oppressors, not protectors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
But I do assume that in America, the ultimate goal of the police isn’t killing people. So I am less inclined to condemn youth recruiting efforts from the police, as opposed to the military.
Protectors here. Definately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dâriûsh
Unless you are doing something illegal/a teenager driving a car.