I don't think moving violations should be tied to the permit or license. They've got their own separate consequences. The tests just need to be much more difficult, involved and frequent.

-Brian

 

I got a speeding ticket a few months after having my license. They took my license for a month. If I had had to go back to a learners permit, it wouldn't have changed the way I drove, it would've made me bitter.

I definitely hear what you're saying about lack of experience though. I think a mandatory "one year with a permit" type thing would help a lot of that.

-Brian

 

Raising the driving age to 18 (or even 17) would be a HORRIBLE idea! People don't realize that many 16-17 year olds actually NEED to drive places, because there are no other transportation options available. For example, when I was 17 (as well as some of my friends who were 16), I was taking evening classes at a local community college, because there were not enough advanced classes available at my high school. Our parents certainly couldn't shuttle us around, and there were no buses available either. In Europe the driving age is 18 because you don't actually need a car to get most places -- but in America (and especially in California) you do.

 

^true.

-Brian

 

Except it won't. Because if we just raise the driving age to 17, just as many 17-year olds will get in accidents.

I would support more difficult driving tests though (for everyone, not just for the 16-year olds.)

 

17 sounds good, with an extra years worth of drivers training/permits.

I do have to say that it took a year or so for me to get used to driving, to stop being scared of it. Took me even longer to understand car physics (got better when I was ~18 and away at college, but not much before that I still did not enjoy driving)

I know other people are not like this, alot of kids hop right in and drive crazy. I wasnt one of these people (I had to learn to be crazy )

As far as learning at ~25 or so, I have to say that is a horrid idea. Why? Just look at my dad He learned really late in life, and his driving skill suffers horribly from it. Its a skill that does need to be developed pre-20's.

 

Why would you really need a license at 16? i could have easily taken the bus home when i got my license. Sure i may have been a bit pissed but oh well.

I think CA and other states should have a mandatory driving school for 1 month during the junior/senior summer. Make it exciting and a real challenge.

I think it's a great idea!

eric

 

You walk! pure and simple! wash the sand out of your ****, grab your ***** and do like i did for 2 years when i couldn't afford a car. If you have to walk 10+ miles then wake-up early and step it out!

 

I got mine when i was 18, i have had 2 speeding tickets, each were speed traps on hwy 17. My family comments on how much stable i am as a driver compared to my father, and i have not been in any accident when i was in any way at-fault.

Say what you want about age meaning nothing, but since i didn't have to "impress my friends" during my senior in highschool, i didn't bother to pull stupid crap.

1. Raise age
2. Raise permit duration
3. Up the difficulty on the behind the wheel exam.

 

Yes, but think of how many people (kids included) that would forego getting their licenses if the test was a lot harder. I think the place to start weeding out bad drivers is the test. That's the last hurdle before anyone can be wreaking havoc on the road. Let's just up the difficulty, that's all I'm asking.

-Brian

 

Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Just out of curiosity, I mapped the distance from where I used to live to the aforementioned college -- it's 7.5 miles one way. That's on the freeway, probably further on the city streets. It would take one close to 3 hours to walk that distance. Remember, I'm talking about an evening class -- which means that if I had to walk for 6 hours just to get there and back, I'd probably get no homework done that day.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is this: not all 16-year olds are dimwits who are destined to crash their cars as soon as they get their licences. Some of them are responsible people who actually have a legitimate use for a car.

You know, some 25-year olds cause accidents too. I got it -- let's make driving age 26!

 

It's been done before! Do you honestly think cars have been around forever? Haven't you ever used those two extremities sticking out of your hips and used a bike or walked? Why do you think a lot of people in dense populations ride bikes or walk like in Tokyo, HK, Delhi and Mexico City? It's because driving would be almost impossible for most places and for countless reasons like traffic, pollution, time etc. I used to walk everywhere at 10+ miles a day until finally purchasing a bicycle.

It's true that not all 16 yr olds are bad drivers. Of course you're going to have the cautious "10 & 2" drivers. Seems insurance companies think otherwise though when comparing the 16yr olds to the "more mature/experienced" drivers. You'd think they've actually done the math too which is why premiums are sky-high for a 16yr old, right?

Once again... nobody is perfect. It's not like you're a F1 driver on your 25th b-day. Insurance companies know this too which is why the rates are lower then the 16yr old rates. It's not rocket science buddy. Think about it... When you were 16yrs old in your POS $1000 car did you really have priorites when compared to you 25yr old adult life? Did you have to worry about rent, children, food, bills, etc. Probably not unless your were living on your own at 16 which i highly doubt.

When you're older ALL these little things pop into your thick brain and you start questioning yourself "maybe i should take it easy... i really can't afford a ticket or jepordize my health or saftey for the sake of my children". This mindset is what keeps you safer than the stupid 16yr old0 that simply doesn't give a **** and will rev his engine because he thinks he'll get laid sooner.

Eric