Date: 8/13/2002 8:31:00 PM
From Authorid: 52866
It is being raised in my state to 18 without an adult, 16 with one  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:32:00 PM
From Authorid: 10534
if it was raised- not to 20! people need to get to work and college at that age. and umm no it shouldnt be raised, i get my permit in like 6 months lol  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:33:00 PM
From Authorid: 17014
Driver's Ed. was mandatory in my high school.  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:34:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
Kelsey, it used to be for many, but now driver's ed courses are steadily disappearing from the high schools.  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:36:00 PM
From Authorid: 19625
Well, I don't think it should be raised past 18 because at that age, many young birds fly free from the nest, and no longer have mummy and daddy's wings to fly them. But actually I don't think it should be raised because I'm getting my license in 2 years, and I'd rather not wait 4 :-p lol. In Washington, and a few other states if the driver is under 18 they can only have family members, and people 21 and over in the car while they're driving. Erin-  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:36:00 PM
From Authorid: 34487
I think the legal age for drinking should be 23 and the legal age for driving should 20. Sounds crazy but giving SOME teens a car, is like giving them a loaded gun.  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:36:00 PM
From Authorid: 57158
I think more classes and such should be taken, to get through to youthful drivers, that it's not a game. These things happen because their not properly educated on operating a car. Maybe if the parents spent some more time, this wouldn't happen as much either. ~*Dangerously Tempted*~  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:38:00 PM
From Authorid: 48526
i dont think it sould, i had to wait long enough to get it.  |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 8:38:00 PM
From Authorid: 34487
I didn't get my license until I was 19 and I walked or road my bike to work. I definitely wasn't a very good driver at that age either. |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 8:39:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
I agree with ya YouChoose! |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 8:41:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
For all of you who are replying no and are in the age range or pretty close to it, if they did change the age minimum, how would it PERSONALLY affect you? |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:44:00 PM
From Authorid: 28848
Of course the younger people are going to think that it shouldn't be raised because they have waited so long to be able to drive, and that's understandable. But I do agree that it should be raised to 18. I am around alot of 16 year olds and I feel that most of them are not responsible enough to drive.  |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:44:00 PM
From Authorid: 56074
i think that part of the problem is that they aren't educated enough. i know a lot of my friends think that driving is just something fun they can do and they don't care about safe driving. i think driver's ed should be mandatory. my parents made me take it and it made me a lot better than i would have been without it. -lizzythespellbound  |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 8:45:00 PM
From Authorid: 17014
Really? Wow...I know they're offered privatley,but I didn't think they'd take it out of schools....Wow, I've been driving for 8 years now. |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:49:00 PM
From Authorid: 24732
I don't think the age is the problem. I think parents giving their kids cars is. If they saved up for a car I think they would be safer drivers. Thinking of all the people I know under the age of 18 who got cars for their b-day get in wrecks and then their parents buy them a new car if they don't die. But the kids who work and save $ for their cars get into less accidents because they are not goofing off as much. So I doubt it would happen, but there should be a law forbidding a parent giving their kid a car. I never had a problem with driving at age 16 or 17, but then again I wasn't a particularly stupid person like the other 90% of people at my school. I've never even gotten a speeding ticket.  |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 8:52:00 PM
From Authorid: 19625
Well, I know a lot of teenagers aren't responsible enough to drive, but a lot are. Maybe they should just make the driving tests harder, because the kids who aren't responsible enough to drive a car safely, won't likely be the ones studing. JMO. Erin- |
Date: 8/13/2002 8:55:00 PM
From Authorid: 48812
I will admit i don't drive enough. But i've known enough people who have just gotten their license, and they got in an accident b/c they were a few minutes late for a date. It makes you wonder--what's more important? The date, or your life? People sometimes put that date above everything else, possibly b/c it's with the star of the football or baseball team, or the prettiest, most popular girl in class, and they don't think. They just don't realize that one jerk of the wheel could send them off the road and into a ditch, or wrapped around a tree. And the other teens who think they have to impress people by going 80 down a country road or whatever don't really help, either. Screw your reputation, screw the date, your life is more important. So, like i asked before--what's more important??~*Uber Soldat*~  |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 8:56:00 PM
From Authorid: 48812
Whoops! I meant to say i don't drive.....I was lookin' at somethin' else when i was typin' this, lo siento...~*Uber Soldat*~ |
Date: 8/13/2002 9:01:00 PM
From Authorid: 3321
Older drivers who are inexperienced....great.  |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:02:00 PM
From Authorid: 3321
See, if you knock off a couple of years of driving experience, you raise the age of the worst drivers from the 16-17 age group to the 18-19 age group. Its just whoever gets their license in the first year. |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:06:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
Persephone, but if courses were made mandatory and with what the following others have posted, it WOULD make a difference. |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:09:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
As informing consumers and society of important issues, EDUCATIION is key to lowering the death rate statistics of our younger drivers. |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:09:00 PM
From Authorid: 24732
Well actually studies have been done showing the particular age of 16 is a bad choice to start driving becase of kids growing their nervous system and responses are worse at that particular age. So even at age 17 and 18 their nervous system handled driving better, and also even at age 15 they did better because at age 16 something happens to the reflex systems. |
Date: 8/13/2002 9:10:00 PM
From Authorid: 54570
Yes the age should be raised to at least 18 years old. Right now in NC if you drop out of school you dont get a liscence now until you are 21. And something else that really burns me is 16-18 years olds on cell phones driving!!! They dont pay no attention and I almost was in a headon with a sisteen 1/2 year old in a volkswagon bug on her cellphone. And she didnt notice me driving offroad and through a bean field!! When I got back on the road I ran her down and cussed her out and got her plate number and submitted it to the proper authorities. Come to find out she had threee speeding tickets and had been involved in a wreck earlier that month!! and she was only 16 1/2 years old. I feel real good knowing she's out there driving and all with that kind of record. I mean hey you gotta stay in touch and impress your friends at the same time.  |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:11:00 PM
From Authorid: 54570
Ooops forgot to sign my reply ^^^^^^^^ SmoknJoe |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:11:00 PM
From Authorid: 28848
But if you allow that person two years of extra practice then you make a possibly safer driver.. I think getting your permit and driving with an adult at the age of 16 would be okay. |
Date: 8/13/2002 9:12:00 PM
From Authorid: 52419
I say make the kids keep the temps (permits)for at least a year, and then make the road test a lot more difficult. It's wayyy to easy right now. Mickle  |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:15:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
See, there is a perfect example right there, Ty SmoknJ for sharing that experience. |
|
Date: 8/13/2002 9:40:00 PM
From Authorid: 54570
You are quite welcome Chicabella... Nice tag as well. Well Im off to read and reread other posts!!! Have a good night!!! Ttyl SmoknJoe |
Date: 8/13/2002 9:44:00 PM
From Authorid: 56369
Im pretty sure its gunna get raised in australia at some point in the near future.. tough cookies for the teens that r gunna miss out gettin theyre lisence cos of the new laws :( Spewin -honeysoul  |
Date: 8/14/2002 12:13:00 AM
From Authorid: 22080
1. webpages are very biased 2. you should make it so the elderly have to take the test over again every year and 3. making the age higher will only hinder our capabilities of getting jobs and also 18-19 will become the worse age group its called experience  |
|
Date: 8/14/2002 12:19:00 AM
From Authorid: 22080
also in alaska the age your allowed your permit is 14 and can get your license at 16 last i heard was we had the lowest toll of teens dying in MVA's i havent heard an update on it since tho |
Date: 8/14/2002 6:46:00 AM
From Authorid: 27046
I find it comical that I did one of my very firsts debates on getting kids to stay in school and not drop out by making it impossible to get their license until they were 21 if they did drop out. Looks like NC thought my idea was good.....many others here didn't.....such is life. I don't know how I feel about this situation because my car was totalled memorial weekend by a 19 year old that pulled out in front of me. I was so close to him that I never even had time to touch my brake, slamming into him full force at about 28 miles an hour. Some people don't think that 28 miles an hour is much of a speed but your impact is something like double your speed. His excuse for pulling out in front of me was he waited at the stop sign for 5 minutes and he wasn't going to wait any longer. What he tried to do is cut me off and he was a horrible judge of distance. There is absolutely no way that he could have made out in front of me I was less than a car length away from him and I hit full front contact from the very front end of his car all the way down the front quarter panel to right before his driver's side door. It was completely head on for me with the whole front of my car. What is even more aggrivating to me is I had a 1997 with 43,000 miles on it with nothing going, gone or about to go on it and 9 months left on my loan before it was paid off. I took extremely good car of this car and it would have lasted me a long time. But because I hit him with the full front end of my car and because he had his tire turned out trying to take a right in front of me, my radiator was punctured the hood bumper and both front quarter panels were severly damaged and both of my air bags deployed on impact. They totalled my car and I ended up with $2700 after they paid off my loan. I now drive a 1991 honda civic with a beat up rusted body, a horrible looking interior and 164,000 miles on it. So I went from a brand new car to hunk of junk off the side of the road and I did nothing wrong. Despite the fact that my chest was a bruised mess from the airbag and my seatbelt, that my arm was cut open and my right hand. My knee was badly bruised when I tried to take that split second I had and hit my brake from slamming it under my dash, I did not have enough injuries to sue the insurance company for compensation. Even though it's been almost 3 months my chest is still sore to the touch from the impact of the airbag, my arm and hand are scarred from the cuts and I may have some muscle damage in my left arm because my hand was over the top of the wheel because I had just put the car into 3rd gear and it was hit by the arm bag and throw out and over my head. I still don't have injuries...they are all considered soft tissue. So I think that I have issues with drivers in their teens period. And yes I am very bitter...I was the victim in the accident, minding my own business when this kid decided that he wasn't going to wait at the stop sign any longer and pulled out endangering my life first and foremost and then leaving me for years to come with a series of old beat up unreliable vehicles to drive my kids around in simply because I cannot afford to buy a new car again.  |
|
Date: 8/14/2002 12:56:00 PM
From Authorid: 54196
Yes, to at least 18. Teenagers are idiots. We all were, so don't argue. Most adults are idiots, too, but you've gotta relent sometime! ;) |
Date: 8/14/2002 3:01:00 PM
From Authorid: 53339
I think that the reason that the younger drivers get into more car accidens is because they are inexperienced. I think that if the age was raised to 18 than that age group would be having the most accidents because they are inexperienced. But in my state you need to have 40 hours of driving experience to be able to get your license. Which is good idea so that they could get the experience with their parents and not while they have gotten their license and are driving around with a carload of friends.  |
Date: 8/14/2002 5:13:00 PM
From Authorid: 38256
No i don't think so it's innexperiance as much as anything else that makes youth fatalities so high. Raising it would just raise the age of the inexperianced driver. In RI there is already a program that makes it so you're at least 17 1/2 before you can get your full license.  |
Date: 8/14/2002 7:07:00 PM
From Authorid: 41067
One point I would like to raise is that if it is lack of experience that is a big problem, then raising the age is not going to help. Perhaps a system of at least a year on a temporary permit before getting a full one? Here in the Uk our driving age is 17, so its a little older than in the US, or so I gather by the comments I read here.  |
|
Date: 8/14/2002 8:07:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
Jestr, as much as i appreciate your comments, you always seems to go off on the deep end and change the subject of debates, LOL but thanks anyways |
|
Date: 8/14/2002 8:11:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 48129
And here's another perfect example that just proves inexperienced, irresponsible, and immature youths are behind the wheel and do not think of the consequences...Az's post said that AND more...thank you for your post Az! |
|
Date: 8/16/2002 2:23:00 AM
From Authorid: 22080
ok my second reply was a waste of time but meh |
|
Date: 8/18/2002 9:01:00 PM
From Authorid: 54071
NO it should be lowered. it used to be 13 or 14 like 50 years ago and the teen car death rates were WAY lower back then.....when you tell them they cant, they want it more, when you hold them back, once they finalyl get it, they go crazy. |
|
Date: 8/20/2002 9:23:00 AM
From Authorid: 48812
hey 54071, you wanna know WHY the teen death rates were down so low about 50 years ago? B/c almost NOBODY had enough money to buy a car. We were still getting out of the Great Depression. Sure, the death rates would be down now, too, if nobody had any cars....b/c we couldn't afford them. 50 years ago, most forms of transportation came from the public. The bus, the train, those were publicly operated. Of COURSE the death rates would've been down by then.~*Uber Soldat*~ |
Date: 6/20/2005 7:40:00 AM
From Authorid: 16376
I am also thinking it should be. I have heard they are going to make it illegal to drive with someone else in the car for the first month after you get your liscence. I think that is a good idea because it is really other passengers that distract the driver.  |
|
Date: 6/20/2005 7:40:00 AM
From Authorid: 16376
first 6 months I mean |
