I upvoted you because I agree about the cognitive dissonance between having a lower limit but not having a higher one (as the old adage goes, don&#x27;t tell me what&#x27;s too little if you can&#x27;t tell me what&#x27;s considered too much), but I respectfully disagree. If one person is an idiot at 79, that does not mean that another cannot be well-informed and in-touch at the age of 85.<p>Then there&#x27;s the premise of your argument: that he doesn&#x27;t know what he&#x27;s talking about. I counter that just like David Cameron of the UK, McCain knows full-well what he&#x27;s proposing, but he just doesn&#x27;t care about the cost. It&#x27;s not about being out of the loop, it&#x27;s about having a different agenda than the one you&#x27;re seeing. His goal isn&#x27;t to ban encryption so &quot;terrorists&quot; can&#x27;t communicate, his goal is to ban encryption so that when someone currently not committing any crimes and without the intention of committing any crimes either does &quot;something bad&quot; in the future or otherwise falls afoul with the powers that be, decades of digital surveillance and intercepted communications would be instantly available for whatever nefarious (or otherwise) purposes the NSA, NSC, FBI, CIA, or whomever would have to serve their needs.<p>EDIT: Part of my argument seems to have been misunderstood, my response about 79 vs 85 was just in direct counter to passing a maximum age limit; I don&#x27;t believe we should have a minimum age limit, either.