Age Discrimination In Driving

[Zenmervolt]

perhaps we should base our driving licensing system around *gasp* ABILITY TO DRIVE rather than something as meaningless as age.

Unfortunately, driving skill and age are, in general, quite connected. The type of licensing you suggest had been brought up before (by none other than Phil Hill), but there are incredible logistical problems with this sort of approach, and given the strong correlation between driving ability and age it's not worth the added expense to develop a system based exclusively on merit.

ZV

 

[NuclearFusi0n]

Originally posted by: Lucky

That doesn't make it constitutional to restrict teens but unconstitutional to restrict anyone else.

Minors do not the same rights as adults.

For our own good, right? Where else have i heard that....

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

I'm sure that there are ALOT of teenagers that know more about polictical candidates then most "adults"

And I'm equally sure that there are A LOT MORE adults who know more about political issues than most teenagers. And if you think that it's only clueless adults who are voting because of the "get out the vote" campaigns, you're sadly mistaken.

ZV

(Please note how the phrase "a lot" is two separate words.)

(Please note how the phrase "a lot" is two separate words.) <--i noticed that when i submitted, just too lazy to edit


and what your saying is that we should discriminate against people because the majority of their "group" (whether it be racial/ethnic/age/gender, etc.) is not "up to par"?

I may be talking nonsense, but I think it has something to do with teenagers get in/cause more accidents than other age groups, thereby costing the insurance companies more money...which means the insurance companies are going to charge more for them. After all, they aren't in business to lose money. I think that makes sense. Young people may not like it, but until they, as a group, reduce the amount of money they cost the insurance companies they will always pay more.

This isn't a slam against young drivers. They simply don't have the experience yet.

 

[tcsenter]

I'm sure that there are ALOT of teenagers that know more about polictical candidates then most "adults"

Close, but you didn't quite nail it. There are ALOT of teenagers that THINK they know more about politics and candidates, in addition to everything else, than most adults.

When you're 30, you'll realize what a dumbass kid you were when you were 16, who thought they knew everything but didn't know jack sh-t about anything. Happens to everyone, with the exception of those who never grow up.

 

[NuclearFusi0n]

since when has it been ok to lump a significant portion of the US population together and strip them of an ability most of the country takes for granted?

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

I'm sure that there are ALOT of teenagers that know more about polictical candidates then most "adults"

Close, but you didn't quite nail it. There are ALOT of teenagers that THINK they know more about politics and candidates, in addition to everything else, than most adults.

When you're 30, you'll realize what a dumbass kid you were when you were 16, who thought they knew everything but didn't know jack sh-t about anything. Happens to everyone, with the exception of those who never grow up.

30? Hell, if he's anywhere near mature at 20 he'll realize what a dumbass he was at 16.

I look back at things I did four years & wonder WTF I was thinking.

I'm barely 20 now.

Viper GTS

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: Lucky

That doesn't make it constitutional to restrict teens but unconstitutional to restrict anyone else.

Minors do not the same rights as adults.

For our own good, right? Where else have i heard that....

No, for the good of the additional people on that road that minors would kill if they were given unrestricted driving priveledges.

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1
since when has it been ok to lump a significant portion of the US population together and strip them of an ability most of the country takes for granted?

We take them for granted because we are old enough to claim them.

Everybody has to go through the same process.

Viper GTS

 

[NuclearFusi0n]

Originally posted by: Lucky

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: Lucky

That doesn't make it constitutional to restrict teens but unconstitutional to restrict anyone else.

Minors do not the same rights as adults.

For our own good, right? Where else have i heard that....

No, for the good of the additional people on that road that minors would kill if they were given unrestricted driving priveledges.

then why aren't 80+ year old people stripped of their driving privledges?

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1
since when has it been ok to lump a significant portion of the US population together and strip them of an ability most of the country takes for granted?

On the bright side, you've gone from calling it a right to an "ability". On the dark side, you just don't have a fscking clue.

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: Lucky

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: Lucky

That doesn't make it constitutional to restrict teens but unconstitutional to restrict anyone else.

Minors do not the same rights as adults.

For our own good, right? Where else have i heard that....

No, for the good of the additional people on that road that minors would kill if they were given unrestricted driving priveledges.

then why aren't 80+ year old people stripped of their driving privledges?

Because the shortomings of old age are generally more than accounted for by the maturity & wisdom that you couldn't dream of having at your age.

And there are ways to take licenses away from the elderly if the situation calls for it.

Bottom line is a 75 year old is much less of a threat on the road than a 17 year old.

Viper GTS

 

[NuclearFusi0n]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

perhaps we should base our driving licensing system around *gasp* ABILITY TO DRIVE rather than something as meaningless as age.

Care to explain why teenage drivers have exponentially higher accident and fatality rates than any other age demographic, yet having SIGNIFICANTLY lower numbers actually driving within that bracket?

perhaps our licensing system should consist of more than a 20 minute written test and a drive around the parking lots.....

 

[Mill]

There is a reason why teens have driving restrictions and many states have graduated licensing procedures. Someone else brought up the point that teens have the highest accident rate than any other demographic.

Teens can't drive so deal with it. A minor does not have the same rights as an adult. Deal with it. When you get older you will understand that driving is enough of a hazard when you have to drive for work or to commute. Add in a bunch of 16 year old kids that think they know it all and can drive like Mario Andretti and you have a problem.

My cousin and I have been the victim of two accidents in which we were rear-ended. Both were by teens who had their license for less than a year.

From your website link:

"(This is because when multiple Hispanics are in a car, they begin speaking Spanish, listening to loud Tejano music, and eating burritos, thereby getting distracted and causing accidents.)"

Sure.

If you post that as any type of proof you are an asshat.

 

[Cyberian]

What's up with that? Half of the idiots that I see at the polls are just voting because of all the "you should vote!" campaigns, not because they actually care about *gasp* THE ISSUES!

And you know this how?

 

[Dudd]

So driving is a privelage, not a right. How then do lawyers get called into play when elderly driver's get some sort of restriction? Hell, how about we just limit everyone from driving. Everyone will be forced to bike or rely on public transportation. We'd save lots of lives! It's the same logic as to why teens are restricted. Something tells me that you'd cry foul though.

 

[SWirth86]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: vi_edit

perhaps we should base our driving licensing system around *gasp* ABILITY TO DRIVE rather than something as meaningless as age.

Care to explain why teenage drivers have exponentially higher accident and fatality rates than any other age demographic, yet having SIGNIFICANTLY lower numbers actually driving within that bracket?

perhaps our licensing system should consist of more than a 20 minute written test and a drive around the parking lots.....

Then what should it consist of???

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: vi_edit

perhaps we should base our driving licensing system around *gasp* ABILITY TO DRIVE rather than something as meaningless as age.

Care to explain why teenage drivers have exponentially higher accident and fatality rates than any other age demographic, yet having SIGNIFICANTLY lower numbers actually driving within that bracket?

perhaps our licensing system should consist of more than a 20 minute written test and a drive around the parking lots.....

Perhaps teens should not drive like idiots if they don't have any experience due to the shoddy driving tests. Ever think of that brain twister bud?

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: vi_edit

perhaps we should base our driving licensing system around *gasp* ABILITY TO DRIVE rather than something as meaningless as age.

Care to explain why teenage drivers have exponentially higher accident and fatality rates than any other age demographic, yet having SIGNIFICANTLY lower numbers actually driving within that bracket?

perhaps our licensing system should consist of more than a 20 minute written test and a drive around the parking lots.....

Precisely the reason why we have graduated licensing, age restrictions, etc.

Anybody can pass the written + in car test, that only weeds out the spectacularly incompetent.

The restrictions that you're bitching about are intended to give young drivers the freedom to drive, within reason, while keeping everyone safe.

Would you rather we simply raise the driving age to 18? 21?

Viper GTS

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1

Originally posted by: vi_edit

perhaps we should base our driving licensing system around *gasp* ABILITY TO DRIVE rather than something as meaningless as age.

Care to explain why teenage drivers have exponentially higher accident and fatality rates than any other age demographic, yet having SIGNIFICANTLY lower numbers actually driving within that bracket?

perhaps our licensing system should consist of more than a 20 minute written test and a drive around the parking lots.....

Why should I as an adult have to undergoe more extensive driving tests just so an underage punk who thinks his driving abilities are perfect can get his full liscense two years early?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Dudd
So driving is a privelage, not a right. How then do lawyers get called into play when elderly driver's get some sort of restriction? Hell, how about we just limit everyone from driving. Everyone will be forced to bike or rely on public transportation. We'd save lots of lives! It's the same logic as to why teens are restricted. Something tells me that you'd cry foul though.

Elderly drivers don't speed around recklessly, drive drunk, overstuff cars, nor do they think they know it all. About everytime I almost have an accident or get cut off it is freakin' idiot kid in a car.

 

[Cyberian]

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1
Why is it "OK" to restrict the hell out of young drivers, but when old people (senior citizens) have the slightest restrictions placed on their license, there are 100 lawyers from here to florida screaming bloody murder?

Perhaps, instead of ranting, you could explain to the unwashed masses just what restrictions you are discussing.

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: Cyberian

Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n1
Why is it "OK" to restrict the hell out of young drivers, but when old people (senior citizens) have the slightest restrictions placed on their license, there are 100 lawyers from here to florida screaming bloody murder?

Perhaps, instead of ranting, you could explain to the unwashed masses just what restrictions you are discussing.

Probably time limits (ie only allowed on the road alone between certain hours) and the inability to carry passengers until they've had their license for a set period of time.

Viper GTS

 

[HappyPuppy]

I see posts every day on ATOT from teenyboppers bragging how they exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. Every one of them states they they, personally, are better than average drivers and can handle the excess speed. Every one of them is an idiotic, inexperienced moron with the potential to kill or maim other people. But, they all think that they are "special".

Statostocs don't lie. Insurance companies charge higher rates to young folks, in particular the males of the species, because they have decades of information that indisputably proves that youngsters are extremely dangerous when they get behind the wheel.

Edit: Pardon the spelling, I was miffed.

 

[Orsorum]

My father learned how to drive in the Texas oil fields when he was 14. My mom barely knew how to drive when she was 22. I got a permit at 15, drove for over a year with a permit, then got my license at 16. Never had a speeding ticket, never gotten in an accident.

It's good judgement, foresight, and not being a dumbass. Sadly, for most people, that is correlated with age and a certain amount of experience.

I support the system I learned under - driving for a full year with a permit that requires either an adult or your parents to be in the car with you when you drive. Best way to learn.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
I see posts every day on ATOT from teenyboppers bragging how they exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. Every one of them states they they, personally, are better than average drivers and can handle the excess speed. Every one of them is an idiotic, inexperienced moron with the potential to kill or maim other people. But, they all think that they are "special".

Statostocs don't lie. Insurance companies charge higher rates to young folks, in particular the males of the species, because they have decades of information that indisputably proves that youngsters are extremely dangerous when they get behind the wheel.

Edit: Pardon the spelling, I was miffed.

Good post, hp.