In the article, "Sixteen Year-Olds Are Smart. Let Them Vote", published on The Washington Monthly and written by Mike Males and Anthony Bernier, they argue on why teens as low as sixteen years old are capable enough of voting and taking responsibility of their actions because of their votes. The authors provide plenty of facts and statistics to back up their claims while also comparing teens to the intended audience which in this case are adults, and the elderly.

            The article states the opposing arguments made on their stand and addresses them with facts and new research that has been done. In this case the opposing arguments consists of teenagers being known to be “reckless and impulsive”. There’s also the fact that teens are not allowed to drink or smoke or have guns, so they shouldn’t be mature enough to decide on complex issues. Well, the authors argue that new research shows that young adolescents brain development is not directly correlated to irrational behavior. Then they provide more statistics to push for the idea of American adults being more violent than young teens.

            Overall, they provide a well throughout argument. They provide clear facts and statistics which appear to be credible. They directly address the opposing views and counter them with the facts they gathered. This essentially makes their argument more believable and more likely to convince their audience, which in this case are adults and the elderly, to change their minds on how they view teens, and perhaps allow them to vote.

            I personally don’t agree with the authors. I believe that the majority of teens are uneducated especially in the U.S., thus making me hesitant about them voting. Perhaps instead of lowering the age of voting, we should find ways to educate our young so they’re ready to decide when their time comes.