English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

There seem to be plenty of solid arguments in favour -fewer accidents, less traffic and lower insurance prices, etc.- but surely there must be some arguments against... or aren't there?

2006-11-20 08:50:25 · 19 answers · asked by notgethithatonharry 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

19 answers

I rather have people drive at 21...but that's moot

But you can argue that intead of raising the age, but to start on a graudated licensing system

Ie ,at age 14 one can apply for a permit. The permit will allow only:
1) to be with a licensed Parent or legal guardian (so no, your best friend who is 18 who has a license cannot be with you).
2) are only allowed to drive during daylight hours.
3) required to put in a minimum of 100 hours of driver's education. and at least 30 hours of drive time with an instructor or 60 hours of driving simulation.

At age 16, you can apply to get a driver's license but with these limitations
1) Limited to only driving during daylight hours.
2) $2000 deposit to the state in case of accidents
3) must pass the driving test with 100%
4) cannot drive any car that is worth more than $30,000. Cannot drive a car with less than 4 doors. This is based on statistics that a powerful car in the hands of an "inexperience" driver , are prone to having more accidents than someone at the age of 25. the cost limitations will also be based on the fact that someone at age 16 can't afford a $30,000 car anyway.


Work from there.

2006-11-20 09:33:16 · answer #1 · answered by arus.geo 7 · 0 0

well there are some against it. Lets say if we did raise the minimum driving age to 18, where does it say because they are adults that they will automatically drive better? I started driving when i was 16 and now im 22 and i have never been into car collusion or accidents because i have been driving for so long.
The argument for drivers to be a minimum of 18 is because because teenagers have a high ego when it comes to driving. Whats the first thing they are gonna do when they have a drivers license? Majority of them are gonna give rides to friends around. Most will participate in illegal street racing and try to imitate stuff they watch in movies like fast and the furious or initial d. They dont think about stuff like "if i get out of control and crash or hit an innocent person, I could get into serious trouble" where as most adults are smart enough not to do illegal activities.

2006-11-20 08:59:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The age is not important it is the maturity and skill.If anyone acts without maturity whilst driving then they should be duly punished.
Vehicle confiscation springs to mind.The skill only comes with practice,so with young people in car entertainment and dangling baubles,riding with people hanging out of windows,should be offences and for anyone with less 75000miles driving under their belt.Vehicles with petrol engines of 1000cc or equivalent should be the norm for the same reason,the exception being commercial vehicles for work purposes only.Working as a Rep would not be a commercal reason for larger engined cars they should be limited to the 1000cc.Should during that 75000 miles a accident be caused by some one in that category the driving limit should go up 25000 miles for the first occasion an additional 50000 for a second.

2006-11-20 10:52:27 · answer #3 · answered by John G 2 · 0 0

There are many arguments for keeping the driving age at 16, or even lowering it....

Some people say the world is overpopulated and one way to cut back on overpopulation is war ... and a lot of people don't like war, so put immature people behind the wheel and they will die in accidents and quite often take others with them.

Younger drivers mean more accidents, so more work for auto body shops, auto part stores, orthopedic surgeons, gravediggers, etc.

More young people driving can put the famous back seat into use, so more babies.

More young people driving leads to more accidents, therefore more people in hospital and not overcrowding a school.

Does anyone else have good reasons for lowering the driving age, and if so, are they tongue in cheek or not?

2006-11-20 09:06:49 · answer #4 · answered by OldGringo 7 · 0 1

The earlier you start, the better you will be.
The accidents are mostly caused by inexperience rather than low age. In Germany in 1962, when people finally had enough money to buy a car, the accident rate was horrendous! Whether they were 20 or 50 made no difference.
I got my license at 15, was a driving instructor at 17 and taught my daughter to drive when she was 11. She has become an excellent driver (and that from a former driving instructor!).
10 years ago I taught 3 people (1 sister and 2 brothers) 28 to 31 to drive, and they were horrible (kept forgetting what they were taught and each failed 3 times). I taught their 18 old niece and she breezed through the whole thing, made it on the first try with over 90%. So it wasn't genetic! ;-)

2006-11-20 08:54:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

I'd have to drive my kids all over the place. If you're going to make it 18, why not 21, or 25, or maybe we shouldn't let people drive at all? They will still be new drivers at 18. They may have a little bit more maturity, but I don't think that will negate their being young and inexperienced.

Also, at 18 you are no longer under the watchful eye of your parents, who can teach you how to drive properly.

2006-11-20 09:33:33 · answer #6 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 0 0

you will desire to be atleast 18 earlier you will get carry of a license. I even have self belief you will desire to have the potential to bypass the driving try with a handbook transmission. the reason lawmakers do no longer bypass a regulation like this, i think, is by way of the fact at sixteen you may legally artwork. in case you may artwork, you choose the thank you to get there. and that they choose all human beings working so they are able to hold mutually greater taxes.

2016-12-28 07:00:33 · answer #7 · answered by ? 2 · 0 0

1. One could argue for raising the driving age to 26 using the same logic.

2. It would discriminate against those that need to work to survive. My father died when I was 17. If I could not drive to work, I would have gone without more often than I did.

2006-11-20 08:54:10 · answer #8 · answered by Clown Knows 7 · 3 0

With the same logic, one could impose a limitation upon drivers based upon age. Sorry, you are 85, you now have to rely on public transportation. This is the first step down a slippery slope that allows the government to impose other limitations on its people and the last time I checked: We have check and balances in place to keep the government in line to avoid things like that.

2006-11-20 09:01:34 · answer #9 · answered by jake_deyo 4 · 1 0

Maybe more education or driver training before license is given. I love driving and I couldn't imagine what I would have done if I had to wait till 18.

2006-11-20 08:54:34 · answer #10 · answered by only p 6 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers