It makes no sense to reduce the voting age to 16

As Britain takes what seems like a giant leap in lowering the voting age from 18 to 16, and people here in Canada are starting to discuss whether we should follow suit, the indispensable Andrew Coyne puts out a much-needed reality check, and even asks the question: should we be increasing the voting age, not lowering it?

Many coutries lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 back in the 1960s and 1970s. It was the thing to do back then. Like in Britain today, the main argument is that these young people will have to suffer the consequences of government actions long into the future, so they deserve to have a say in which government is allowed to act. Well, yes, but 14-year olds are even more affected by today's government decision-making, as are 12-year olds, etc, etc.

Ah, but, the argument goes, many 16 uear olds are at least as responsible and well-informed as many 18-year olds, even 20-year olds. I'm sure they are, and so are some 14-year olds, etc, etc. But some - the majority, I would venture - are most definitely not.

Neurologists tell us that the pre-frontal cortex (the part of the brain responsible for impulse control and long-tern planning) continues developing until at least the age of 24. Wouldn't that suggest that, actually, the voting age should be increased to. 24 or 25, not reduced to the more-or-less-arbitrary 16? Especially im an age of social media and all the misinfornation and disinformation that comes with it.

Today's kids typically have - and apparently want - much less atonomy than the kids of the 70s. They tend to leave home later (well into their mid-20s, if at all!), get their first job later, etc. Kids - North American and European kids, at any rate - typically lead more sheltered lives these days, and their lived experiences are severely limited until well into their 20s. Should we be entrusting our social and political systems to kids, however bright, with no real understanding of the world and its ways.

Should we allow callow children to steer the ship of state when they not even allowed to drink, smoke weed, join the military, be fully responsible for crimes, serve on a jury, donate an organ, take out a mortgage, etc, etc? Yes, they can drive a car at 16, but only subject to various controls and exceptions until they are a year or two older. They are also required to pay ridiculously high insurance premiums until they are older because so many 16-year olds, especially boys, are just, well, irresponsible.

I'm sure all these debates raged in Britain before the government made its fateful decision. I'm just surprised  the consensus was on the side of reducing the voting age. If anything  it makes more sense to increase it or, at the very least, just leave it alone