Should the driving age be 18?

[rusty76]

I’m both ways on driving at 16 or 18. When I was 14 I was driving my Grandma to church and other places. The church was roughly three miles away. My friends would freak out seeing me pull up and drop her off and head home. I learned to drive very early on. It was mostly just the way we did things then. But funny as it is I didn’t get my license till I was 18. It made little difference in my social life and school life. I was lucky I could hitch a ride home or somewhere close by.

Now when my stepson turned 15 I was like you’re going to drive me everywhere. I need to go to the store you’re driving. I need new shoes you’re driving. I told him don’t worry about getting your license it’s not a deal breaker. He got his license and it helped a lot. He was able to run errands and other things that would normally bog us down. He got a job and that helped. But to be honest I worried more than his mother. With cellphones and other crap to contend with if he’d waited till he was 18 I’d might of slept better.

All in all I feel you shouldn’t get your license without good grades and hard work. Maybe community service for like ten hours. Rather giving out food at the soup kitchen or helping out at the humane society. Humbling stuff that helps them understand the importance of driving.

[flashed]

I got my drivers license the day I turned 16 although I was driving many years before . I bought my first beater car (a 69 Nova) at 15 years old from the local Chevy dealer for $500 cash .Even though it had no tag or insurance I drove it everywhere I needed to go . I worked mowing yards ,loading hay for the farmers or anything else for a Buck. At 16 years old I went to school and worked 8 to 10 hours a day (2nd shift) at the shoe factory and did so until I graduated high school .I then went to Tech school til I graduated all while working full time .Most all kids where I came from had to work to get a car and everything else they wanted .There was no public transportation back then or even now and its a Rural area.

[rgunlock]

Got my license and a hand-me-down car at 16. I was responsible for maintenance, gas and insurance if I wanted to drive it, so working was necessary. However, I generally did not work during the months I was in school so that I could focus on sports, grades, etc. I did work full time during the summer months though. And the kind of jobs most 15-18 year olds can get will teach an appreciation for a higher education for access to better paying jobs. Most I knew of in my situation applied themselves more and partied less in college.

[68 P.O.S.]

I don't know about changing the age limit, but I believe the driving curriculum in the US needs to be made more difficult. When I was living in Japan, to get a driver's license, you had to be 20 and go to a driver's ed class on steroids that cost around $2K-$2.5K. Under the age of 20, you could get a cheaper license for a moped or a scooter. It was very similar when I was living in Europe as well...the drivers curriculum is way more difficult, longer, and more expensive than it is in the US. After seeing this first hand, I don’t feel Americans are properly educated, experienced, or have the proper respect for the dangers of driving when they are “let loose” on the roads. I think this is a big reason why there are so many moronic drivers in the US. I’ve even seen stories on the news of how superior some European and Asian countries are with their driver’s training. The US really needs to adopt this.

[The Rocknrod]

We used to have drivers ed in public schools. Now they teach how bad America is. Strange.

[68 P.O.S.]

Also in these other countries, nearly everyone starts out on a moped or scooter as well as cycling. Because of this, people actually have respect for drivers on 2 wheels. It's rare to see someone get upset enough to hit, or run someone off the road like you do here.

[Stocker]

Originally Posted by 68 P.O.S.

Also in these other countries, nearly everyone starts out on a moped or scooter as well as cycling. Because of this, people actually have respect for drivers on 2 wheels. It's rare to see someone get upset enough to hit, or run someone off the road like you do here.

Another benefit of starting on two wheels is it teaches the value of defensive driving. Just assume everyone else on the road might run into you -- accidentally or otherwise.

[jeffahart]

Originally Posted by 68 P.O.S.

I don't know about changing the age limit, but I believe the driving curriculum in the US needs to be made more difficult. When I was living in Japan, to get a driver's license, you had to be 20 and go to a driver's ed class on steroids that cost around $2K-$2.5K. Under the age of 20, you could get a cheaper license for a moped or a scooter. It was very similar when I was living in Europe as well...the drivers curriculum is way more difficult, longer, and more expensive than it is in the US. After seeing this first hand, I don’t feel Americans are properly educated, experienced, or have the proper respect for the dangers of driving when they are “let loose” on the roads. I think this is a big reason why there are so many moronic drivers in the US. I’ve even seen stories on the news of how superior some European and Asian countries are with their driver’s training. The US really needs to adopt this.

I distinctly remember paying 1,200 DM for my POV license in Germany. It was a DOD card, but I still had to pay for it myself and take the German driving test. I remember it being a lengthy test. Want to talk about tests. When you took your vehicle for inspection, it was no BS. Guys on post almost always got dinged on brakes. They don't let crap on their roads!


j

[In The Ten Ring]

Originally Posted by Gregski

So I got my driver's license over 30 years ago when I was like 15 1/2 and one day, lol but things were different in the late 80's

So given all the distractions these days, texting primarily do you think kids should be permitted to get their driver's license at 16? Are they mature enuff to be behind the wheel these days?

I did a bit of research and the US may be the only country that allows this, the rest of the world is 18, now I know what you may say well forget the rest of the world, but I am just being factual and providing data.

I personally believe this is money driver as the evil insurance companies make a killing on insuring teenagers, just ask any of the parents, hee hee.

So in a civil way, what say you?

I see just as many adults texting in violation of the law as I do teenagers. What has to happen to stop it is a system, built into car and phone, that blocks phone from working at all within so many feet of the steering wheel. Exception for 911 calls. Boom, no more "texting and driving."

[Stocker]

Originally Posted by In The Ten Ring

I see just as many adults texting in violation of the law as I do teenagers. What has to happen to stop it is a system, built into car and phone, that blocks phone from working at all within so many feet of the steering wheel. Exception for 911 calls. Boom, no more "texting and driving."

Agreed 100%..... I have often thought that's the best (perhaps the only) way to get a handle on this problem.
Technology being what it is, I am totally convinced it can be done. What's lacking is the will of the people, including lawmakers.

[jeffahart]

Originally Posted by In The Ten Ring

What has to happen to stop it is a system, built into car and phone, that blocks phone from working at all within so many feet of the steering wheel. Exception for 911 calls. Boom, no more "texting and driving."

How's that going to work. Cars now interface with the smart phones for more than just phone calls. You use your phone for navigation and music in the car. Now days a good driving experience includes a good interface with your mobile device!


j

[In The Ten Ring]

If cars can "interface" it can work.

Stocker, the political will isn't there. Just like how cars don't come with pre-start breathalyzers. Drunk drivers just aren't that big a killer.

I hope that the "touch screen" craze goes away, that's a big distraction since the screens are flat and one has to look at it to work it.

[Coley]

.....distracted driving has now unseated drunk driving as the reason for most vehicular injuries and fatalities.
Makes you wonder why a parent would give the car keys to their teen (nothing wrong with that)....AND let them enter the car with their funded phone in their hand.
I'm all in favor of teens learning to drive....but not them leaving the house to drive with their cell phone in their hand.

Tip: When your teen leaves the house with the car ensure that they put their cell phone in the trunk....and watch them do so.
Walk them out to the car, assert why this is important and do this for their first five or six trips.
Needless to say that what they will do on their first few trips is get around the block...then retrieve the cell from the trunk to have it in their hand while they drive.
However, unless they are absolute idiots...they will get the importance of what this means to you as their parents and they will probably start to leave it in the trunk while they are driving...possibly saving their life.

...just my two bits...

C

[In The Ten Ring]

Good points! I do not know why that is.

It is true that drunk drivers are now safer than cell phone-addicted drivers!

Smartphone apps, like social media sites, are designed to be addictive, as addictive as heroin. Here is a youtube video on that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPwR1i-sWpo

I find myself trying to see if the person behind me is constantly looking down. When I see that person is, I get into the other lane, quickly if a stop sign or traffic light is coming up.

A fun game I play is "honk at the phone addict." If I see a person looking down at a red light or walking with head down into their phone, I honk at them. They almost always look up with a shocked expression.

[special-K]

The problem is texting. Make phone so they can't go into text mode when phone is in a vehicle that is running... for all. There is no need for it... except for passengers but oh well. Maybe it could be only the driver's location.

[jeffahart]

Originally Posted by special-K

The problem is texting. Make phone so they can't go into text mode when phone is in a vehicle that is running... for all. There is no need for it... except for passengers but oh well. Maybe it could be only the driver's location.

Anything that makes you look down for a long time is bad. Texts are like an onslaught for most people these days. I can read a text on my cars navigation display. But I can't send one. I usually ignore texts when I'm driving, but I can easily read them on display. I could probably use voice to text an answer. I can voice a location for navigation, but I cannot enter it manually when the car is moving. The hands free stuff is pretty nice. I like it. I can email a destination to my car, get in the car and it's set up for destination. I used to do it a lot from my desk, now I just blabber at the thing when I get in the car.

"Nearest coffee house" my favorite voice command to navigation.


j

[Coley]

One thing in all likelihood that is in our demographic's (over 45?) favor is that we are probably not addicted to our phone...hence the typical perspective that shows up here on this issue.

This is not the same for teens and younger people who were given one at an early age or early teens...who increasingly show signs of digital addiction....and yes, this is without doubt 'a thing', as they say.

As a result, we (our demographic) can leave our phone in our pocket when we drive and don't care about missing a call or text or update about something....who cares?...I'll see it in about 20 minutes when I arrive...whatever, lol. Most of us probably are not addicted.

Teens and young people tho'....this is next cigarette or the next drink for them and they typically can't stop attending to the device....and this is the part that we are not necessarily understanding in all of this.

Pretty damn scary....but the data is showing this to increasingly be the case.

C.

[special-K]

I don't use a smart phone, so my e-mail is done before I leave in the morning and in the evening when I'm home. Twice a day has been fine. I guess with people using smart phones they expect a response faster. I have something for sale on Craigslist and had an e-mail response this morning from last night. I had to go out and check something to answer a question the buyer needed answered. I was home today and sent the reply mid-day. I get an immediate automated reply stating this person was not able to read my e-mail at the moment. For me that was a total waste of my time to read and an inconvenient interruption. I don't expect an immediate response. Then a few minutes later comes a reply. Talk about designed for addiction. I refuse to allow myself, my life, to be tied to an electronic device and I'm not concerned with getting information immediately when there is no urgency to the matter. I still know how to wait and I have the virtue known as patience. We really messed up allowing a generation to become dependent on a consumer product we've been fooled into believing we need that many of us lived a good life without before they existed.

[flashed]

A smart phone has become very handy for me even though I fought having one until my flip phone died and Verizon no longer stocked them. I buy and sell trucks and parts on several FaceBook pages and being able to post pics easily and instantly makes items sell better .

[mongocanfly]

Making a cell phone not work while car is in motion is a great idea.....but even if they made it a law ,there would be somebody that'd figure a way around it....

[special-K]

And that could be a serious crime, like a deadly weapons violation or attempted xxx charge. I say only texting needs such control. Talk mode I do not feel is unsafe. People have always been able to talk and drive. Operating a navigation device, radio, heat/defrost, etc. is more dangerous.

[Coley]

It would be very good to have a mandatory device in all vehicles that disables any internal cell signal with the vehicle in drive.
When it is in park it would be allowed through...something like that, so if you had to make a 'real' call you could always pull over and do that.
As well, the tech these days could limit the digital side to stopping text transmissions specifically.

The kids/teens might be working to disable that.....but given that most teens increasingly don't drive, (or work)...unless they are driven some where it might not be a priority for them.

That said, the Moms are often as bad as the kids, which is probably where kids learn the example....lol.

The (local) police have been asked to stop posting the statistics on back to school week as to just who is being pulled over for illegal vehicle operation in the school zones.
It used to be guys speeding....supposedly....but that dwindled out years ago.

Now, they catch the Mom's driving, texting, turning in the middle of the road, etc trying to drop off or pick their kids....and their teens.
Those statistics when they first hit the air waves were not popular with the parenting groups....lol, so that had to go.

C.

[special-K]

This function should be the burden on the phone people, not car makers. Or, I should say the responsibility of.

[Stocker]

Originally Posted by special-K

This function should be the burden on the phone people, not car makers. Or, I should say the responsibility of.

Speaking as a retired telecom 'lifer' (42 years), I agree. However, they are not likely to develop (or deploy) any such technology unless & until legally forced to.
I believe that would require an act of Congress and I cannot post my opinion regarding the ability of Congress to actually do anything constructive.

In other words...... this problem ain't goin away anytime soon.

Y'know, I just had another thought. Virtually zero chance of this ever happening, though. Pass laws allowing insurance companies to deny damage claims when it is proven an accident was caused by texting (or possibly other cell phone use).
On second thought, cancel that idea. Attorneys would have a field day at everyone else's expense.....

[special-K]

I could see that happening with insurance. Don't they do that with seat belts, deny medical coverage if injured while not wearing? They can also not cover a theft if the key was left in the ignition. I obey both of those for those reasons, if no other.

I'm not into a whole lot of specific laws. I believe enforcing the general laws we have is needed. It's distracted driving which has many faces, all contributing to the same issue, vehicle accidents. But since there is a specific law against texting while driving (actually using the hand held phone at all) the consequences should be treated differently than just another moving violation... like DUI. I mean, if you cause an accident while texting and someone dies you get charged with manslaughter, right? You'd think getting caught texting before that happens would carry more dire consequences. Not wanting to kill anyone (or hurt) and not wanting a manslaughter charge are reason enough for me, but I'm not everybody. Just like I can drive as safe as anyone talking on my hand held phone, but some can't (it's where the mind is, not the hand) and the law is more enforceable putting all hand held phone use into one.