But the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is calling for states to delay entry to their driver's license programs until age 17 or 18 in a bid to save lives.
Car crashes are the leading cause of death among teenagers, according to the IIHS, and moving up the age requirement is a sure way to reduce the death toll, reports the AP. "The bottom line is that when we look at the research, raising the driving age saves lives," said Adrian Lund, president of the IIHS.
Similar arguments were made to support the states raising the drinking age to 21. The federal government even backed up the move by making highway funds contingent upon adopting the higher age limit. So far there is no sign of a similar movement forming for the driving age, but the IIHS has just begun to take the safety data to the public.
Already the safety group is approaching the Governors Highway Safety Association conference being held in Arizona. While the agency realizes it will be difficult to convince states to change their laws, Ann McCartt, IIHS senior vice president of research, says "it’s an important enough issue to challenge the silence and at least consider changing the age at which we allow teenagers to get their licenses to drive."
The UK is undergoing a similar movement, while at least one U.S. state has seen its own programs meet with success. By operating a graduated licensing system that limits teens to driving certain times of day and with a limited number of passengers, Michigan has reduced the number of 16-year-olds killed or injured in the state by 41% over the last ten years. Another important step could be making sure teens wear their seatbelts, as the NHTSA recently reported that over two-thirds of all teens killed in car crashes weren't wearing one.
Reader Comments
Tue Sep 9 2008 11:30 AM
Laz says
It's sad that our government has to babysit our teens! I think that a 16 year old should have the ablilty to have a drivers licence under one condition. The parent/parents will be legally reponsible to drive with their teen until the age of 18 or face a big fine. Most parents are so scared to be parents now a days and let their kids run a muck.
Tue Sep 9 2008 11:47 AM
battousai says
Maybe they should change the way they train new drivers? My understanding is that there are plenty of dumb drivers through the age scale, teens being one of the worst. It all comes back to shitty drivers training if you ask me.
Tue Sep 9 2008 12:39 PM
Nick S. says
Doing this will solve nothing--the driving test is way too easy to pass and we should model it after the UK's, which can take very good drivers a long time to pass. Kids aren't the only problem though; elderly drivers are much more dangerous than young drivers.
Tue Sep 9 2008 1:29 PM
W says
Elderly drivers are not much more dangerous than teen drivers. They are the second most dangerous group of drivers.
Sometimes I would love to see the age limit received, but if I look back I was happy to get my driver license before I hit 18 years old.
These days a good portion of drivers are bad drivers and they are mostly adults.
I constantly see extremely slow, absent minded, cell phone yapping, texting, reading, and eating drivers on the road. It causes such a headache as they are not considerate towards other drivers.
I'd rather have a speeder and a more aggressive driver, than a person that holds up and pisses off vehicles around him/her. Speeders really do not hinder other drivers.
Adults are the role models and they are failing at their role model jobs...
I agree that the driver education is absolutely pathetic and needs to be much more strict. Granted, class time to learn about the laws and rules are necessary, but there needs to be more videos and hands on experiences.
The videos I saw were extremely old and quite boring. A modern video would get the message through much better. Sometimes a closed course is pretty good as you get to judge the car width, etc with less stress from doing the real deal. Perhaps a realistic simulator would be great, but I can see how it will not come into play due to the time and cost.
I have to say I am a chronic speeder and a more aggressive driver, but the 0 tickets (0 accidents) under my belt shows how dedicated I am to safe driving.
When I get in the car I always try to concentrate on driving and focus on the cars around me. If there is a car quickly approaching from behind I would not be afraid to speed up and switch to the "outter lane", etc.
Sometimes you just have to know how to analyze yourself so you can stop doing the wrong thing.
It courteous and doesn't piss off other drivers.
Tue Sep 9 2008 4:16 PM
Gus says
These commenters all hit it just right.
It's silly to say the there is a 41% reduction in the deaths of 16 year olds if you take more 16 year olds off the streets.
If you ban 16 year olds from driving, I'll bet we have a 100% reduction in deaths of 16 year olds.
The key is training. My 4 year old daughter will start in electric carts, then in progressively more advanced machines until she is ready for a car on a track, where I and others will teach her to handle a car at it's limits. Then- when it's time to hit the street - she'll be taught by me personally what is right and wrong, safe and dangerous. There is no single more dangerous task she will have to learn in her life than this, and we are killing our kids - at any age - by the mediocre training they receive...
Tue Sep 9 2008 4:40 PM
Craig S says
I think all have provided valid input but one major issue in my opinion has been left out. The fact that teenagers today have an attitude that everything is their right but without any obligations. Driver training is one thing but when a person has a shitty attitude that they can do what ever they want because they are entitled to it that leads to major problems on our roads & highways. Attitude training from parents (whom are also major culprits in this way) needs to take place and to humble drivers more and make them appreciate this benefit and other drivers on the roads.
Tue Sep 9 2008 6:44 PM
HECTOR says
Insurance companies are some of the worst corporate thieves so I have no lost sympathy for any of them. Ever. They care a rat's ass if teenagers die in droves as long as it doesn't cost them a penny.
About driver education here's a point worth making. In Spain you have to go to a driving school and the driving school tells you when you're ready to go take one of several tests. Each practice run with the driving school costs you a pretty penny and they can fail you - thus keeping you from taking the test with the DOT - for any reason they damn well please. They're in the business of making money and if you pass too quickly they lose a customer.
Many are in cahoots with shady characters at the DMV who fail you so that you have to go back to the driving school for more practice runs. You may be in that situation over a year, my sister was. If the rest of Europe is like this I have no idea though I wouldn't doubt it.
So I'm all for more driver training but to copy the European model in American may not be the best way to go.
Tue Sep 9 2008 7:05 PM
Roy says
No, I think the legislators have it exaclty right! Raising the drinking age has completely prevented college kids from drinking, hasn't encouraged binge drinking and is responsible for engendering very safe drinking attitudes. I'm sure the government should definitely take on more of the parental role - we clearly shouldn't depend on the parents!
Seriously, though, in the UK one-third of 17-19 year olds is involved in a serious motor vehicle accident, despite having much more stringent driver's education. The data from Michigan argue that some sort of probation program works well. I would question whether just changing the age wouldn't just shift the problem later in time. Also, I would note that no country should allow drinking and driving on the same birthday - that's just a recipe for disaster!
Leave a Comment
Login or register to leave comments.
Please keep your comments on topic. Your involvement is governed by our Privacy Policy and Terms.