What age do you think kids should drive at 16, lower, or higher?

chikara_neko

i dont think age really matters, aint not one of 'em able to drive worth a damn anyways. i think it should be on a "can you acually do it?" basis. i'm 16. i have my liscence. i have absolutely no trouble driving my car safely. heck, i can even control my '72 Chevy pickup safely, and it's got manual steering and badly shot manual brakes(it has no panic brakes, you have to stand on the pedal hard as you can to get it to make a stop sign...i think only it's front discs are doing anything, i doubt the rear drums are even acuating.) . what really ticks me off is what i see in the parking lot at school. take any normal school day afternoon. throw in an inch or two of rain. you have a burnout contest that half the vehicles in the parking lot engage in. the next day half of those vehicles are dinged up or not even there. i also saw a couple of kids from school, one in a '69 duster and one in a mid 90s eclipse on an access road directly across from the school one day. the eclipse's nose was destroyed and it was oozing coolant all over the place. the duster needed another passenger door and a quarter panel. I've witnessed morons use their E-brake to make turns, i've even seen them nose their civics into the ditch. most of them got tickets within the first month of driving. I've seen the SAME late-70s blazer get ticket after ticket for burning out, yet they just dont learn. I have yet to get a ticket. period. not when i had my permit, which i got to hold for an entire year, and not after i've gotten my acual liscence. why can i drive that well, yet they cant? i guess it boils down to needing little more than a pulse and good eyes to get a liscence. our acual behind-the-wheel test is simply going around our tiny little airport. if you do the speed limit, the most you'll end up doing is 45. i say we should disregard age and base it on 2 factors. 1: they can physically control their vehicle, and that it is not too much vehicle for them. an example for this is a tiny little 95-pound chick trying to drive an excursion. the second factor is: can they acually do it, and do it right? they need to go on the freeway, into heavy rush-hour traffic, down winding two-lanes, and then back through the suburbs to the testing station. that's not a problem here since we're only a few miles from nashville, TN. they should also be tested on parking ability, which is rather pathetic. they should also have faraday cages installed in their vehicle so their cell phones wont work in it and their radio reduced to stock and required to be this way or face impoundment. there should also be a circuit in the seat belts that wont allow the engine to run if they're not on. I say run and not start because if they were only needed to start, the kids could more easily bypass it. they take them off after it starts, it dies and wont even crank. governors should also be installed, limiting them to 65MPH or 3,000RPM, whichever comes first. in the case of my '72, it'd just be safety against blowing it up. also, they should be forced to learn to drive a manual, which would force them to pay a little more attention to what they're doing. there goes escalades for sure. sadly, the rest of america wouldnt stand for standards high enough to make the roads safe after the current bunch of idiots dies off, so ittl never happen. besides, i've seen stupid driving from 16 to 60, so making the age limit higher isnt gonna solve anything. but if my ideas were put into use word-for-word, and properly enforced, we'd see alot less teenagers cutting big trucks off and burning out and getting into wrecks. now, this may not curb them doing 65 down a twisty 2-lane, but my idea for that involves barcodes on speed signs and a barcode reader in the headlights that scans and adjusts the governor accordingly.

Slick

16 thru 18.

shortdude42004

I just got a DL and i just turned 16 but to be honest i think it should be higher lol

brianbb98

16. but limit driving to only with family, after 6 months then they can have other passengers... but only 1. after 1 year, full privlidges.

Uncle John

I think it should be 18 or 19. That just sounds safer.

warlands

I think it should be 18. 16 is too young, although not totally responsible, your more responsible at 18.

angelhimm

I think 16 is a good age to start driving. In Ontario, Canada we have graduated driving which lets young kids get their license over a period of time, and makes them more responsible with driving a vehicle

DAN

14, thats mexican law!

Pumpkin

14 yrs of age, because teens can get permits or even drivers ed as early as then. Of course, I believe a hardship license will enable a young person to drive sooner.

corbinator

It doesn't matter how old a person is when they drive, it matters upon how well they drive. I think if said person has acquired X hours of driving with an instructor and they pass a test then their age shouldn't matter. To keep out-of-control kids away from the wheel if a 16 and under kid who can drive(after getting X amount of hours and everything) is caught breakin a driving law then the punishment should be more severe

beekiss

Definitely NOT lower than 16!!!
If the age stays at 16, then there should be restrictions placed on them until they're 18. Such as:
No passengers can be in the back seat (pretty much limits your passengers to one!)
You're not allowed to talk on a cell phone while driving!
Definite curfew on week-nights and week-ends.
If you get a ticket while in the 16-18 age range, have your license taken away until you reach ? age.

yars232c

I heard as a kid in some states, as long as you can see over the wheel you can have a license.

lavender_ties

I think it should be a lot higher! I think that kids of that age have enough things going on in their lives without adding another repsonsibility to their plate.

Also, with the "it won't happen to me" attitude that we all had at that age, I think it tends to make them more reckless and do things they wouldn't do if they had a little bit more maturity (yes this coming from someone who used to street race in the middle of the night).

I drove truck for about 3 years, with the amount of just plain stupidness out there on the roads, I think for our kids, we should keep them safe a long as possible! And trust me, the stupidity doesn't just happen to kids, but I think part of staying out of a bad situation is maturity to be able to make the right decision instead of maybe freezing behind the wheel or making a huge correction which makes thing worst.

chef spicey

way higher

sheelabobella

even though I'm glad that I got mine when i was 16, I truly think that it should be higher. So many people have gotten into accidents within thier first year of driving.

fiddle mike

Age 21 unless they work or go to college, then, age 18.

JOHN

LOWER LIKE 14

Kiki T.

16 I like that age to dive.

kilgore9900

Due to gas prices and Insurance and u have to be 16 in most states to get a job legal. Yes u would have to be 16. Some teens are to busy for mom or dad to transport them around. Then agian ur parents are in charge so u might not get them till 18 all up to parents, not the teen.

JuneSuicide

I think 18 is a good age. 14-16 is too young. Kids that age are too irresponsible. If the age was higher there would most likely be less accidents. No one can afford to drive that young anyway. You have to be 16 to get a job, + the cost of car insurance (which is lower the older you are). Anything less than 18 is asking for trouble.

markski037

jany50002002

I believe at 14 because it would be nice to know how to drive and possibly a car in you 9th grade year.

Selkie

higher, like 18

Jennifer H

79 just like me

Nicole

I think that it should be higher than 16. At the same time its hard to say, some kids mature faster than others. All I know, is that I should have been older than 16, when I got mine, cause I didnt understand how dangerous a car could really be.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: