Would you support raising the driving age to 18?

[Googer]

I would keep it at 16 only for straight A students with a 3.4GPA or better and can demonstrate good classs conduct, all others will have to wait untill they are 18.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby
Some would be able to find rides and make older friends, but overall, the number of incidents is going to go down if you cut off some 16 year olds access to transportation.

Overall it would be more difficult to find trouble.

You make it sound like I'm implying juvenile deliquency would be completely eliminated, no. But it would go down.

And 16 year olds don't go out looking for trouble? Hanging out during all hours of the night? LMAO How old are you?

So instead of dealing with the problem itself (kids causing trouble/doing illegal things), you'd remove anything with a remote link with it and hope the problem goes away?

Hey, you know, people sell marijuana in plastic bags...if we make plastic bags illegal, people will have no way of selling marijuana! Drug problem = solved!

 

[Black88GTA]

Originally posted by: Googer
I would keep it at 16 only for strieght A students, all others will have to wait untill they are 18.

I disagree. The grades you make in school have nothing to do with your driving skills (or lack thereof). I knew plenty of straight A students who were the most miserable drivers you ever saw - and, on the other end of the stick, some near-dropouts who were very skilled drivers.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: Black88GTA
I disagree. The grades you make in school have nothing to do with your driving skills (or lack thereof). I knew plenty of straight A students who were the most miserable drivers you ever saw - and, on the other end of the stick, some near-dropouts who were very skilled drivers.

Your few personal examples mean nothing.

It is a fact that, for the overall majority, the better you do in school, the more likely you are to be responsible in most every aspect of life.

Don't give me the, "I know a guy" crap. Use common sense. I'm speaking of only the majority.

Most bad drivers are bad not because of skill but because of carelessness.

Lack of skill is usually the problem with the older set believe it or not.

Younger drivers are just naive and careless, but then again I guess you could consider those two things a skill.

And if you want proof of my statement, call an insurance agent. They give students with good grades discounts for a reason. They do the statistics on that stuff. And it's just common sense.

 

[Jeff7]

No. Just tougher driver ed. I took the driver's test. It was like a high school test - easy.

You should have to really KNOW how to drive, not think about the laws. Drivers tests should be tougher, to make sure that you really know what you're doing. Too many people just want to get on the road, without understanding that nature of what they're getting themselves into. It's a big heavy hunk of metal, and if you control it wrecklessly, it won't be very forgiving to your fragile body if it hits something.

 

[Killerme33]

Originally posted by: Black88GTA

Originally posted by: Googer
I would keep it at 16 only for strieght A students, all others will have to wait untill they are 18.

I disagree. The grades you make in school have nothing to do with your driving skills (or lack thereof). I knew plenty of straight A students who were the most miserable drivers you ever saw - and, on the other end of the stick, some near-dropouts who were very skilled drivers.

I don't think he was talking about pure driving ability, more about overall intelligence. The drop-outs are gonna be the ones doing 60MPH in a residentual neighborhood, not the straight A ones.

I'm against raising the driving age to 18, but all for making the test to about your ability to drive, not stuff like how far away from a fire hydrant you have to be. But don't think teens are the only bad drivers, plently of ppl 30+ are horrible drivers. They have been driving so long they no longer feel the need to use things like blinkers, squeeze thru the red, ect...

Edited for grammar

 

[Paulson]

I've helped out with drivers training in Minnesota for 2 years. Let me tell you, it's an absolute joke what the kids actually learn.

We have a classroom, driving simulation, and the "driving range" aka. huge parking lot with fake roads painted on it.

Kids want their license but could give a rats ass when it comes to actually learning what they need to know. Also most of them are cocky little sh!ts that get behind the wheel and think they know everything.

True story, I had a kid who was slow take drivers training, and honestly, he was better than any of the other kids. He knew how to back up in a straight line multiple times when others would get crooked and out of the line. He also obeyed everything that was put out there, while all the other kids would act dumbfounded while you were bitching at them because they just about caused an accident.

 

[compuwiz1]

I think they should raise the age of operation of all lethal weapons to 21.

 

[Black88GTA]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: Black88GTA
I disagree. The grades you make in school have nothing to do with your driving skills (or lack thereof). I knew plenty of straight A students who were the most miserable drivers you ever saw - and, on the other end of the stick, some near-dropouts who were very skilled drivers.

Your few personal examples mean nothing.

My "few personal examples" are not the point. The point I'm making is that basic driving skills have NOTHING to do with grades.

It is a fact that, for the overall majority, the better you do in school, the more likely you are to be responsible in most every aspect of life.

Again, responsibility is not the point. That does factor in, to some extent; however, no amount of responsibility will make up for a complete lack of raw skill.

Don't give me the, "I know a guy" crap. Use common sense. I'm speaking of only the majority.

I am using common sense. Read my replies above. Take your own advice?

Most bad drivers are bad not because of skill but because of carelessness.

So you're saying, that if all distractions could somehow be removed, most people would be excellent drivers? Please. Driving is just like anything else - some people are naturally gifted at it, others are average, and some suck terribly, regardless of outside influence.

Lack of skill is usually the problem with the older set believe it or not.

No, I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of the old drivers' problems on the road would not be due to lack of skill, but rather due to deterioration of senses - hearing, sight, etc. You'll have a hard time disproving that. Not to mention, many seniors' minds are not as sharp as they once were.

Younger drivers are just naive and careless, but then again I guess you could consider those two things a skill.

Naive and careless - maybe to some extent. I'll give you that. However, how can you say that many of the problems younger drivers face are NOT due to lack of skill? There's no replacement for real-world experience. New drivers, by definition, do not have that. You have to start somewhere. Raising the age to 18 would only delay the "new driver break-in period" by two years.

 

[Black88GTA]

Originally posted by: Killerme33

Originally posted by: Black88GTA

Originally posted by: Googer
I would keep it at 16 only for strieght A students, all others will have to wait untill they are 18.

I disagree. The grades you make in school have nothing to do with your driving skills (or lack thereof). I knew plenty of straight A students who were the most miserable drivers you ever saw - and, on the other end of the stick, some near-dropouts who were very skilled drivers.

I don't think he was talking about pure driving ability, more about overall intelligence. The drop-outs are gonna be the ones doing 60MPH in a residentual neighborhood, not the straight A ones.

I'm against raising the driving age to 18, but all for making the test to about your ability to drive, not stuff like how far away from a fire hydrant you have to be. But don't think teens are the only bad drivers, plently of ppl 30+ are horrible drivers. They have been driving so long they no longer feel the need to use things like blinkers, squeeze thru the red, ect...

Edited for grammar

But you can't have a discussion like this without talking about pure driving ability. And how can you assume that the "dropouts" will be the ones doing 60 through a residential neighborhood, where the straight A students won't even dream of such a thing?

It boils down to common sense - not necessarily "book smarts," or ability to do well academically. There are plenty of people who are very smart on paper, but don't seem to have a lick of common sense. I think everyone knows at least one person like this.

 

[Bassyhead]

I would probably leave the age at 16 and make it harder to get a license.

 

[Trikat]

Originally posted by: Bassyhead
I would probably leave the age at 16 and make it harder to get a license.

What this guy said.
Kinda too hard to weed out all the bad drivers though. People make mistakes and you don't know if they are a chronic bad driver or if they just made a mistake.

 

[farmercal]

It's not an age problem its an experience problem. I think the poster that said "putting powerful cars in the hands of inexperience divers is causing the problems", was more to the point. Any inexperienced driver at any age can get a car they can't handle and be potentially dangerous on the road. My son inexperienced (got license late do to being out of country), had and accident at the age of 19 because of his inexperience. Maturity had nothing to do with it, and the same thing has happened to a lot of new drivers at all ages. TEACHING people to drive defensibly is the answer, not older age requirements. Also like someone else said how else are they going to get around in most of America where there is no mass transit?

 

[Cattlegod]

Originally posted by: Killerme33

Originally posted by: Black88GTA

Originally posted by: Googer
I would keep it at 16 only for strieght A students, all others will have to wait untill they are 18.

I disagree. The grades you make in school have nothing to do with your driving skills (or lack thereof). I knew plenty of straight A students who were the most miserable drivers you ever saw - and, on the other end of the stick, some near-dropouts who were very skilled drivers.

I don't think he was talking about pure driving ability, more about overall intelligence. The drop-outs are gonna be the ones doing 60MPH in a residentual neighborhood, not the straight A ones.

I'm against raising the driving age to 18, but all for making the test to about your ability to drive, not stuff like how far away from a fire hydrant you have to be. But don't think teens are the only bad drivers, plently of ppl 30+ are horrible drivers. They have been driving so long they no longer feel the need to use things like blinkers, squeeze thru the red, ect...

Edited for grammar

i was riding through our little town with our valedictorian during a lunch break at about 60 mph through a curve. he lost control, ran into a guardrail and right up next to a store.

i however, was not a valedictorian and have never lost control...

i fail to see your connection and infact, i think the valedictorian types will be more prone to going fast to try and be cool and fit in with the rest of the kids.

 

[walkur]

How are drivers licences obtained in the US anyway?

Here in the Netherlands you first have a Theoretical exam, 50 questions (Mix of yes/no, multiple choice and open ended)

Then after about 20-30 hours of driving instructions (of which 80% are on public roads) you have the Practical test.

Total costs nowadays approx $2500

 

[xanis]

At first, I was going to agree, but after thinking about it, I would not support it. I'm currently 17 but I got my DL when I was 16. I passed the driving test (which seemed way too easy) with flying colors and other people have told me that I'm a good driver. I've seen great drivers who are 16/17 and bad drivers who are 25 and older. Driving is not necessarily something that can be fixed with age. Good or bad driving depends on one's level of maturity. There is not always a correlation between age and level of maturity.

I vote no for several reasons. One reason is most kids under 18 have jobs and things to do. I know that I'm busy a couple days a week going to doctor's appointments, work, school functions and local errands. Most of the time, my parents aren't home and don't have time to run me all over town. This is where having a car comes in handy. I can do almost all of my errands myself and my parents don't have to worry about picking me up, dropping off and using more gas than they need to. Having car also helps on the weekends when I go and hang out with friends.

So basically I say no because increased age does not necessarily mean increased maturity, and having a car at 16 makes a lot of sense.

 

[WolverineGator]

Originally posted by: farmercal
It's not an age problem its an experience problem.

QFT. Graduated licenses are a possible solution because it allows some freedom and gradually increases it with experience. There has been proposed legislation to restrict night time driving as well as number of occupants in a vehicle.

 

[Acanthus]

yes, the vast majority of accidents are caused by people under 18 who arent mature enough to properly handle driving a vehicle.

 

[skace]

Hell no. The further up the ladder you push responsibilities the longer children go without being responsible.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Anyone who thinks an average 16 year old driver is mature enough to understand the risks involved in driving a vehicle is either:

a) 16 years old
b) Forgot what it was like to be 16 years old
c) Is friends with a 16 year old
d) Michael Jackson

It's a general progression. I drove like a madman when I was in high school. Slowed down in college and now drive about 5 miles over the speed limit whether it's 15 or 70. The craziest driving I ever experienced was when I was in high school. Of course there will be idiots who drive with insanity in any age group but I think it's fairly safe to say that maturity/aggression is greater, especially in males, at 16-18 than later in life.

 

[DougK62]

No. Are some of you even thinking about this before you answer? Young workers are a huge part of our economy - if you take away their transportation we'll have huge problems.

 

[moshquerade]

no.

for one thing 16 is when most people get their first jobs, and need to drive themselves to work.

 

[ValkyrieofHouston]

Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
There are so many bad drivers on the road, and at 16 1/2 years of age, not everyone is mature enough to be driving behind the wheel, imo. A google search alone shows a lot of states with pending legislation to this effect. Would you support it if similar legislation was proposed in your state?

Hell, I think we should all go back to Horse and Buggie days! GRIN

besides... let's get all the elderly people off the roads... remember the elderly man who plowed into all those people in that market some time back?

 

[McCarthy]

Originally posted by: Kalvin00
no, i would not.

if you raise it, it's just going to be 18 year olds who have all the wrecks..

Originally posted by: skace
Hell no. The further up the ladder you push responsibilities the longer children go without being responsible.

I'm with these gentlemen. Not that there aren't other good comments, but at the time of my reply they are the first and last to respond and got read.

I started driving legally at age 13. This was during a training period leading up to a school permit when I needed a parent with me. On my 14th birthday I ran out, scraped the ice off the windows and drove to school. By the time I was 14 and a few weeks old I knew how fast the family car would go.

By 16 I was bored with my new toy, the V-8 automobile. Since my friends were just getting their licenses then it might have been closer to 17, but the point is it's not when you start driving. Make the driving age 70 and you'll just have 69 year olds with cars they've been souping up queued up for the past few decades in line at the DMV.

There's always going to be a facination with something you're not allowed to do. At the point you are allowed to do it the trend is people will abuse it. This country is famous for legislating people into extended childhood - from smoking to alcohol to the way Universities speak down to students like they're in preschool. Let's not take an already artificial age restriction and make it worse.

16? Why go to 18? Why not 11? That's the age of the youngest known Pony Express rider and while he had only 1 horse power, he had a world of responsibility. Skace's point is a good one.

 

[Tommouse]

I voted no because as it has been stated before, its maturity that is the problem, not age.

Also from my personal experience, I wouldn't have been able to get to work, or to my friends house easily. Lets not forget the youngin's I had friends my freshman year in college who were 17 until about November. How would they realistically get around then? Rides are annoying, and you feel like a mooch, or you need to coordinate your schedule with someone older. Just a lot of hassle for another shortsighted bit of legislation.