This coming up session will be very busy for us students. We have SMOB voting rights and now Dyson is planing to introduce his legislation that states how many teenagers can be in a car when another teenager is driving. You guys know what I think, how do u feel?

another classic case of government overstepping its bounds...

Unless it has to do with filling the car with more people that it is supposed to have (ie 8 people in a Honda civic) its pretty stupid.

Finally you guys are on my side!

I do think it's a good idea to limit the number of teenagers that can distract another teenage driver. I also like the provisional license thing.

We're in an unfortunate day and age where parents don't police their children and set rules for them like they probably should - be home by midnight, no piling kids in your car, etc. Even more unfortunate, if you don't raise your children, the government will.

I'd vote for it because that's the rule with our teen drivers anyway. It's not that anyone's trying to curtail your freedom, SMC, it's that they're trying to keep you safe.

Add on:
When you get a bunch of kids in a car, many of them won't have the maturity to take the responsibility of driving seriously. They start goofing around, egging each other on and next thing you know, they get their name in the paper and a bunch of junk on the side of the road in their memory.

Do the limits vary based on the size of the vehicle??

Ah vrai... I think Bru has that quote by Franklin. It is very true. Vria is there any proof that this bill would keep us safer. If this bill were to pass...Ryken would probably shut down.

If this bill were to pass...Ryken would probably shut down. Why?

I may be wrong here, but I believe that this was proposed a few years back after several Patuxent High School kids were killed in an accident due to speeding. Also killed was the driver of the other vehicle. I think it was for a limited amount of time (6 month?) so the teen has more time to learn to drive properly without the distraction of friends, thus causing an accident and saving lives. I think it was proposed ok for siblings to travel with, but only a friend or two at the time. Why so bad for a short probationary period. You have to have that for your learner's permit before being cut loose on society.

Ken King? Sound somewhat familiar?

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Why?
The reason is that most of our kids come from Charles county. Carpooling would not be an option..

Originally posted by vraiblonde

We're in an unfortunate day and age where parents don't police their children and set rules for them like they probably should - be home by midnight, no piling kids in your car, etc. Even more unfortunate, if you don't raise your children, the government will.


That's the whole point. It isn't the government's job to raise our children... It IS the parents' jobs. It is irrelevant whether the parents are actually doing it or not.

I would be more interested in a law that says if your kid piles a bunch of kids in the car, and it is determined that your kid has an accident caused by this distraction, that the parents are the ones who should be held responsible. Criminally if necessary.

Rose...Dyson introduced a similar bill 5 years ago. Thanks to the lobbying efforts of the Maryland Association of Student Councils it failed.

forget the teens, how about those 80 year old men driving church vans?? Scary stuff there..

Originally posted by smcdem
The reason is that most of our kids come from Charles county. Carpooling would not be an option.. No short bus provided?

I think it might keep more kids from getting killed but I also think its their parents fault if they let them do stuff taht gets them killed.

My highschool had 4 kids killed because they thought it would be cool to do a "yard job" well they were going through peoples yards about 45 mph and hit a 6 inch diameter tree and none of them were wearing their seatbelts and they all ate glass. I knew them, I was friends with them but it was their own fault and it was their parents fault for letting them go driving with a 16 year old driver after midnight on a rainy night.

The best way to think about it is, imagine everyone in your highschool that you know, atleast one of them will probably die from being an inexperienced driver and not taking driving seriously...who knows might be you.

Originally posted by Kyle
There is no need for any teenager to have others in their car.


What about carpooling?
I think it's pretty stupid if a bunch of teens want to go to a movie or ride to school together, that they all have to pile into separate cars.

It wastes gas, pollutes the air, and increases traffic congestion.

The majority of 16 yr old drivers are not who you think. I am past 15 9 months but I have decided that I am not ready to start driving. Most Kids my age understand that Driving is a huge responsibility. Sadly, these storys are true but it does not reflect the majority of teens on this issue.

Originally posted by Heretic
My highschool had 4 kids killed because they thought it would be cool to do a "yard job" well they were going through peoples yards about 45 mph and hit a 6 inch diameter tree and none of them were wearing their seatbelts and they all ate glass. Only 4, you're much more fortunate. I lost 4 my freshman year.

Originally posted by SmallTown
forget the teens, how about those 80 year old men driving church vans?? Scary stuff there..

Now there's something I'd like to have examined...
You shouldn't be behind the wheel if you can't react within a decent time frame. Some senior citizens are worse than drunk drivers.

Originally posted by Kyle
There is no need for any teenager to have others in their car.

Yea, I know you never did that....... :rolleyes:

Originally posted by RoseRed
No short bus provided?
A bus is provided but in Charles you have to pay major bucks for it. It is already expensive enough to go there. Many just find it easier to carpool with an older student. Hell even I do that and I am only 5 min away from ryken!

Originally posted by smcdem
Hell even I do that and I am only 5 min away from ryken! Then why not walk or ride your bike?

Originally posted by RoseRed
Then why not walk or ride your bike?

My guess is... for the same reason that the tv is only 6 feet away from me and yet I choose to use the remote.

The majority of 16 yr old drivers are not who you think. Duh! They're EXACTLY who I think they are! How old do you think my kids are? Do you think they don't have friends? Do you think I haven't spent the last 6 years of my life surrounded by teenagers?

You need to quit school, get a job, get your own home, get married and have children - and do it quickly...while you still know everything!
:duh:

ha riding your bike...cmon its 2003 And I live in Breton Bay that means going through all of L town. There is no bike path on newtowne neck road.

Many teenagers are responsible to some degree but everyone has lapses in responsibility couple that with inexperience and it turns deadly. Most of the teenage driving tragedys I hear about aren't some dirtbag but someone that gets good grades, participates in after school activities and has a bright future but has one small lapse of judgement. I can see where they are coming from with this bill but its not their place.

Just curious does Roy Dyson have some personal connection to want such a bill? Or he is just sick of teenagers driving down his street with the stereo too loud?

On a slight digression I think that anyone under 18 caught drinking alcohol should loose their drivers liscense.

vrai your generalizing sickens me...

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Duh! They're EXACTLY who I think they are! How old do you think my kids are? Do you think they don't have friends? Do you think I haven't spent the last 6 years of my life surrounded by teenagers?
:duh:

Might want to examine the habits of your kids then.. as well as their friends.

As someone who was a substitute teacher for half of last year... I found 80% of teenagers to be pretty good kids, and for the most part, responsible considering their age.

Oftentimes... they were even more responsible than their parents.

Yeah Sleuth!:biggrin:

Funny thought.. Teens are not responsible enough to drive with other teens in the car, yet are responsible enough to be shipped thousands of miles away from home with a gun in their hands to defend this great country of ours.. hmmmm

Ah the irony of conservative thought...

Originally posted by smcdem
vrai your generalizing sickens me... Your insisting that teenagers are these worldly, responsible, mature beings makes me :roflmao:

Sleuth, no offense, but you have been a substitute teacher for half of a school year - I have been a full-time parent for almost 20 years.
:roflmao:

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Your insisting that teenagers are these worldly, responsible, mature beings makes me :roflmao:

Sleuth, no offense, but you have been a substitute teacher for half of a school year - I have been a full-time parent for almost 20 years.
:roflmao:

whoa.. I thought you were a young little chickie... :smile:

Sleuth as a teacher you would be suprised to find out things about the so called "good kids". Im talking everythign from mass cheating (high school validictorians), seteriods, shoplifting, etc
Yea not just things kids aren't allowed to do but illegal things.

Originally posted by SmallTown
Funny thought.. Teens are not responsible enough to drive with other teens in the car, yet are responsible enough to be shipped thousands of miles away from home with a gun in their hands to defend this great country of ours.. hmmmm

Crap... that's two posts in a row I agree with SmallTown!!!

In addition, I for one think that if a teen can die for his country, he ought to be able to have a drink to take off the edge.

Originally posted by smcdem
Ah the irony of conservative thought...
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Conservat..... bahahaha :roflmao: Tho.. hahahaha:roflmao:

Oh my god dem, don't post that stuff while I'm here at work.. Conservative thought.. bahahahahahahah!!!!:roflmao:

ok.. I'm better now..

Everything the Media reports is something negative when it comes to teens. Maybe its to make you adults feel better I dunno. It seems us "good" kids are forgotten.

Smalltown I dont think they can include anyone over 18 in this bill since 18 is legally (although usually not mentally) an adult.

SMCDEM It doesnt have anything to do with conservative thought.

Originally posted by SmallTown
Funny thought.. Teens are not responsible enough to drive with other teens in the car, yet are responsible enough to be shipped thousands of miles away from home with a gun in their hands to defend this great country of ours.. hmmmm Oh please, Small - I don't think we're talking about limiting the driving habits of 18 year olds here. And I don't think we're talking about 16 year olds going off to war.
:duh:

I would be more interested in a law that says if your kid piles a bunch of kids in the car, and it is determined that your kid has an accident caused by this distraction, that the parents are the ones who should be held responsible. Criminally if necessary. Sleuth, explain to me how this is going to help if the kid dies or kills someone else?

Originally posted by Heretic
Sleuth as a teacher you would be suprised to find out things about the so called "good kids". Im talking everythign from mass cheating (high school validictorians), seteriods, shoplifting, etc
Yea not just things kids aren't allowed to do but illegal things.

Not really surprised...
I was a teenager not all that long ago... only 6 years removed from 19.

But before we go blasting our teenagers' behaviors, we might want to look at ourselves.

I seem to remember a NY Eve party not too long ago when several of us, myself included, had a lot more alcohol than was healthy. And I'm willing to wager that not every single person who drove home that night didn't have at least one or two less than an hour before.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Sleuth, explain to me how this is going to help if the kid dies or kills someone else?

Doesn't really help after the fact...
but I'm willing to bet it might be helpful in acting as a deterrent... and it might make parents think twice about watching their children's driving habits.

I think the 21 to drink rule was enacted to keep those over 18 and still in highschool from providing those younger with alcohol. It is kind of silly but drunk driving deaths decreased dramatically since the drinking age was changed.

Its really hard to put an age on it because people mature differently, hell I know some 40 year olds that shouldnt be allowed to drink alcohol.

Maybe a better measure should be if you have a highschool diploma and can support yourself you should be able to drink?

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Oh please, Small - I don't think we're talking about limiting the driving habits of 18 year olds here. And I don't think we're talking about 16 year olds going off to war.
:duh:



so a magic light goes on when someone turn 18 and they suddenly can drive a lot better, even with people in the car?

Originally posted by SmallTown
so a magic light goes on when someone turn 18 and they suddenly can drive a lot better, even with people in the car?

No but thats how the law works

I know parents who hold off teaching their kids to drive until they're 17. I have a few years to think about it, but I think this might be a good idea.

Originally posted by Heretic
No but thats how the law works

So we are not creating laws that we know are useless?

And people got upset about red light cameras being just a money maker..

Originally posted by sleuth14
Doesn't really help after the fact...
but I'm willing to bet it might be helpful in acting as a deterrent... and it might make parents think twice about watching their children's driving habits. Or, more likely, telling them... "You'll get a license when you turn 18 and can afford your own damn car and insurance."

With me I do not feel I am ready to drive. I could of gotten my permit liek three weeks ago. You see, most teens actually DO think like I think when it comes to driving. You will find many teens postponing their license, and get it when they think they are ready.

Originally posted by Tonio
I know parents who hold off teaching their kids to drive until they're 17. I have a few years to think about it, but I think this might be a good idea.

Why not start now... on private property...
I grew up on my grandpa's farm... driving a tractor and his old delta 88 around the farm for years...

Originally posted by smcdem
It seems us "good" kids are forgotten. Not at all - I consider my kids and their various friends to be "good kids" - certainly not the hellraisers I was when I was their age. How are you supposed to be the hope of the future if you end up splattered on some highway?

And Small, maturity doesn't happen at a certain age - it happens gradually over time. Some lawmaker decided that 16 was old enough to drive. Another one decided that 21 was old enough to drink. I personally know 40 year olds that aren't old enough to drink or operate a vehicle. What test do you give a kid to determine if they are mature enough to handle responsibility? And how do you administer this test to the bazillions of kids out there?

Tonio something to think about.

I got my drivers liscense when I was 16, but my parents wouldn't let me drive until I was 17 unless they were in the car with me so I had like a year to learn how to drive well. A couple months is not enough to learn how to drive well.

Originally posted by sleuth14
Why not start now... on private property...
I grew up on my grandpa's farm... driving a tractor and his old delta 88 around the farm for years... Driving a car on a farm and driving in Saturday afternoon Waldorf traffic are a bit far apart on the skills plane.

Or something worse... like beltway or rush-hour DC traffic.

Originally posted by Kyle
Driving a car on a farm and driving in Saturday afternoon Waldorf traffic are a bit far apart on the skills plane.

Or something worse... like beltway or rush-hour DC traffic.

Note that I mentioned the words ... "private property"

Originally posted by Heretic
... A couple months is not enough to learn how to drive well. I would say a few years to develop good driving skills is more realistic.

Rush hour DC traffic isn't bad at all since it hardly moves :biggrin:

Originally posted by vraiblonde


And Small, maturity doesn't happen at a certain age - it happens gradually over time. Some lawmaker decided that 16 was old enough to drive. Another one decided that 21 was old enough to drink. I personally know 40 year olds that aren't old enough to drink or operate a vehicle. What test do you give a kid to determine if they are mature enough to handle responsibility? And how do you administer this test to the bazillions of kids out there?

That is why I feel such laws are useless.. If a man commits murder with a gun, you don't take the guns away from every person out there.

Or to put it in terms you can relate to.. Just because someone dies of lung cancer from smoking, you don't take away the cigs from everyone.. or limit the number they can smoke.. or limit the number of friends that can be around you while smoking and having them suck in cancer :smile:

What it boils down to is this...

Raise your own damn kids. Don't expect my tax dollars to do it for you. And don't expect the local police to do it for you when we have real criminals out there to worry about.

I for one am sick of parents wanting to shift the responsibility of raising their children to the government. If that's your idea of parenting, do us all a favor and don't have any kids.

Originally posted by Heretic
Rush hour DC traffic isn't bad at all since it hardly moves :biggrin: It moves. And when it does they have the Taxi's cutting in and out, the commuters forcing their way in to your lane, the light jumpers and NASCAR crowd blowing through the cross streets to deal with...

And my personal favorite... That good ole DC METROBUS pushing you out of his way every chance he gets. :lmao:

Smalltown dont get me wrong I think that bill is stupid, but you are confusing rights and privlliges. Im not sure with Maryland but is 16-18 a junior operators liscense?

In some states your not eligible for a liscense until you are 18.

Originally posted by sleuth14
What it boils down to is this...

Raise your own damn kids. Don't expect my tax dollars to do it for you. And don't expect the local police to do it for you when we have real criminals out there to worry about.

I for one am sick of parents wanting to shift the responsibility of raising their children to the government. If that's your idea of parenting, do us all a favor and don't have any kids.

Oh my.. Again.. Agreement with sleuth.. Thats like 3 times.. Heck, next time you want people to meet ya for lunch, i'll be there :smile:

Or was that someone else from earlier.. Oh well.

Do not make laws that won't worked and base them on results of fatal mistakes that few committed.

Originally posted by SmallTown
Oh my.. Again.. Agreement with sleuth.. Thats like 3 times.. Heck, next time you want people to meet ya for lunch, i'll be there :smile:

Or was that someone else from earlier.. Oh well.

yup... that was me.

Originally posted by sleuth14
Note that I mentioned the words ... "private property" I think you missed my point Sleuth.

Driving on private property isn't a "real world" skill builder. It can familiarize them with controls locations and functionality but lacks the critical element that gets so many teens into trouble.

Dealing with real-world road conditions and traffic interactions.

Originally posted by Kyle
I think you missed my point Sleuth.

Driving on private property isn't a "real world" skill builder. It can familiarize them with controls locations and functionality but lacks the critical element that gets so many teens into trouble.

Dealing with real-world road conditions and traffic interactions.

Kyle...

I will concede you that point.

You gotta admit though... learning to drive a car in snow on nonexistent roads, up and down hollers, and through fields, around cows and horses and sheep... that takes a certain level of skill. Not to mention knowing how to react when you're careening down a 60 degree slope at 45 mph with trees all around you.

It's been fun... I'll see y'all tomorrow.

I got my license at 17.. I had NEVER been behind the wheel of a car before drivers ed class (well, maybe if you count driving down the driveway..) After my first time on the road, the instructor said I was one of the best students he has had in awhile.. He thought maybe I had been driving with my parents for quite a while (since I was 17).. there was a girl in the class who had been driving with her parents for awhile before the class.. The instructor was scared to even have her pull out of the parking lot..

Point being, everyone is different.. some pick up driving rather easily, while others struggle.. It is up to the parents to determine just how far their kids go with their priveledge to drive

This issue is kind of like 2nd hand smoke. Yes it is the parents responsibility to determine what is right for their kids, not the government but since the teenagers will be driving on public roads it does effect us all whether we want it to or not.

Maybe make a law that allows the police to ticket people for irresponsible driving, someone under 18 gets one of these tickets they loose their liscense for 3 months (that would absolutely kill a kid).

I dont care how many kids are in the car. You can be a retard all by yourself. hell most of the most stupid things i did where by myself or at a stoplight.:biggrin:

If you kid is an idiot, you should usally be able to pick up on the fact and take the keys.

I don't need yet another bill to do my parenting for me.

:boo:

I for one am sick of parents wanting to shift the responsibility of raising their children to the government. That's a curious statement, coming from a teacher.

I'll tell you what I'm sick of: People who will let their kids do anything, as long as it doesn't inconvenience them, the parent. SMC is concerned about transportation issues if students aren't allowed to carpool. Doesn't it strike you as odd that parents would rather take the chance with their kid driving or riding with an inexperienced driver than transport them theirselves?

I don't agree with this law because I don't think it will be enforced any better than underaged drinking is. However, I can not understand WHY kids need to be able to drive at 16.

I did not grow up in MD but where I did grow up (and things are still the same) you could not drive until you were 18; 17 if you had drivers ed and were a senior in HS. Also, you were not allowed to drive to HS or even leave the school building unless you were a senior or doing a work study program (for those who did not drive in work/study they provided mid-day buses).

It is the parent's responsibility to get their kids to Ryken if they can't afford the bus. If it is too $$ send them to public school. I have yet to see that many kids down here who are responsible drivers.

My son has been wanting to drive since he was 10 years old, he is now 13. The rule in our house is:
- A or B's on the report card every quarter for the year BEFORE he gets his license or have made the BSA rank of Eagle Scout.
- Pays his own gas and insurance.
- He only gets to drive our oldest vehicle until he can purchase and maintain his own car.

I hear so many parents say what a relief that their kid can now drive. They don't have to be "bothered" to take them here or there. I have no problem driving him where he needs to go, even part time jobs. At least that way I will know who he is with and what he is doing.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Doesn't it strike you as odd that parents would rather take the chance with their kid driving or riding with an inexperienced driver than transport them theirselves?

Uhm, no. Seems many of the crazy drivers out there are moms in minivans racing little johny and little susie to school, then rushing to pick them up.. Then rushing little johny to baseball practice and little susie to dance class.. And somewhere inbetween rushing home or to mcdonalds for food..

I hear so many parents say what a relief that their kid can now drive. They don't have to be "bothered" to take them here or there. I have no problem driving him where he needs to go, even part time jobs. At least that way I will know who he is with and what he is doing. Amen to that. I can remember thinking it would be a relief when my son could drive. Honey, I didn't know what stress WAS until that child took off on his own. :roflmao: My daughter was 16 in October and she is moderately interested in driving but hasn't even gotten her lerners yet - and we are in no hurry for her to get it.

Originally posted by SmallTown
Seems many of the crazy drivers out there are moms in minivans So what you're saying is that you feel teenagers are more responsible drivers than soccer Moms - is that correct?

Personally, I will be glad when my oldest gets her permit. I need a designated Driver:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

Originally posted by vraiblonde
So what you're saying is that you feel teenagers are more responsible drivers than soccer Moms - is that correct?

Not at all.. But in much less of a rush than a soccer mom trying to do too many things.. Just like the kids, it is a priveledge for the soccer moms to have a license as well.. Seems that parents always tell kids that, but it no longer applies as you get older.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
That's a curious statement, coming from a teacher.

Most of the teachers I know believe that their job is educating students, not raising them.

Originally posted by Biscuit
Personally, I will be glad when my oldest gets her permit. I need a designated Driver:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

And make sure they have a truck.. I spent many nights at the all-night car wash when I was younger cleaning out the bed of my truck.. It is MUCH easier to clean from the back than on the seats up front.. I was the drunk wagon.. When someone couldn't make it, we threw them in the back of the truck.. Then there was this one time where the cops pulled me over.. Needless to say, 4 drunks in the back of a truck in the middle of the night just can't keep themselves quiet...

Originally posted by SmallTown
Seems that parents always tell kids that, but it no longer applies as you get older. So you're saying that if soccer Moms speed or drive erratically or cause an accident, they don't get a ticket or anything but kids do?
Originally posted by Tonio
Most of the teachers I know believe that their job is educating students, not raising them. Then who is it that is lobbying to teach ethics, morals, diversity and sexual practices in the schools? You could say that that's merely "teaching" but where is the line drawn between "teaching" and "raising"?

Originally posted by vraiblonde
So you're saying that if soccer Moms speed or drive erratically or cause an accident, they don't get a ticket or anything but kids do?


Are you sure you are only smoking cigarettes these days?

As you would say, what good is a ticket if they have killed themself or someone else?

We just don't need "parenting" laws when it comes to driving. Normally the kid is on the parent's insurance, so you would think they would take even greater care in making sure their kids are doing the right thing.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Then who is it that is lobbying to teach ethics, morals, diversity and sexual practices in the schools? You could say that that's merely "teaching" but where is the line drawn between "teaching" and "raising"?

kinda like the whole religion in schools thing

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Amen to that. I can remember thinking it would be a relief when my son could drive. Honey, I didn't know what stress WAS until that child took off on his own. :roflmao: My daughter was 16 in October and she is moderately interested in driving but hasn't even gotten her lerners yet - and we are in no hurry for her to get it.
You See I could of gotten my learners 3 weeks ago. I have no urge to get it. (and because the loveville MVA is closed for a while, but still I will get it when I think I am ready.)

you would think they would take even greater care in making sure their kids are doing the right thing. You'd think so, wouldn't you? :bubble:

Anyway, 95% of our laws are "parenting" laws, whether aimed at teens or adults. What do you think a seatbelt law is? What about gun laws? And drug and alcohol laws?

And while we're at it, what do you think of speed limits? Aren't those merely "parenting" laws? If I'm a safe driver at high speeds, why should I have to obey some law that was designed for people who aren't?

How about those laws that say that parents must have babies in car seats?

Originally posted by vraiblonde
You'd think so, wouldn't you? :bubble:

Anyway, 95% of our laws are "parenting" laws, whether aimed at teens or adults. What do you think a seatbelt law is? What about gun laws? And drug and alcohol laws?

And while we're at it, what do you think of speed limits? Aren't those merely "parenting" laws? If I'm a safe driver at high speeds, why should I have to obey some law that was designed for people who aren't?

No, they have taken a more scientific approach to laws such as seat belts and speed limits.. Saying you have x amount of reaction time at y speed on road z.. A law to limit the number of people in a car for a certain age group is just ridiculous.. Would you have to go along with the airlines and say that really fat people count as 2? After all, a car full of fat people will be a lot harder to slow down when compared to driving by yourself, thus increasing the chance for an accident.. Maybe we should have a law about that.. Be like an elevator, list the passenger number max, as well as a weight max for the vehicle..

No, they have taken a more scientific approach to laws such as seat belts and speed limits So you're saying that Roy Dyson just pulled this proposed law out of his...thin air with no regard to teen accident statistics, is that right?
list the passenger number max, as well as a weight max for the vehicle.. Ommm...duh! They already have that. Check your owner's manual.

Why has Dyson decided to sponsor this law? It’s simple, he is tired of seeing so many kids die on our streets. Driving fatalities for the 15 to 20 year age group well exceeds those for firearm related fatalities and we have many laws relating to who can and cannot have a gun and how the weapons must be controlled to keep them out of the hands of children. Many, like Smcdem see nothing wrong with that at all. Why because those laws are meant to save lives.

At issue is what happens when a youth gets into a car with numerous friends and how much attention that driver is paying to driving versus interacting with their buddies. It is obvious to me that a car load of kids is more likely to have horseplay occurring then a car with only a teen driver. Even one friend might not be much of a problem but it can still be a distraction. This is where the balancing starts as the legislators know they would be strung up if they simply banned driving for anyone under 18 years of age (which would probably be the safest thing to do).

Every year throughout the state many kids are killed in automobile accidents with passenger interaction as a causal factor. Should this be ignored and the death tolls allowed to climb? Or should an attempt be made to check this growing devastation? Simply raising the drinking age to 21 has reduced the number of alcohol related fatalities in the 15 to 20 age group by 13%. Will this law do the same? I don’t know, but if it saves one life isn’t that enough (especially if that one saved is your kid)?

For those that see this as unfair, I say get over it. As driving is a privilege, the state can and does determine the applicable laws. They see this as a means of saving lives and I don’t know about you but I am for that.

If you want to see some eye opening data on younger drivers check out http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSF2001/2001youngdr.pdf

You also increase the chances for accidents by increasing the number of vehicles on the road.. If you take the teens out of carpooling, you are putting even more so called "unsafe" drivers on the road.. Now THAT makes a lot of sence.

And then you have the single mom who gets put in the hospital. Her kids of course want to go see her, but they can't because only say 1 can ride with the teen driver? Nice..

And I know groups ride to church together for sunday school service..

There are just so many more "good" reasons that teens carpool than bad ones..

Small, you can't be serious.

#1, if the single Mom :bawl: is in the hospital, who's watching her kids? And why can't they catch a ride with them to go see Mom? Or are you trying to say that some Mom would go into the hospital and leave her multiple children completely unsupervised? :bubble:

#2, are you trying to tell me that kids that go to church don't drive recklessly? *guffaw*

#3, the majority of teen "carpoolers" are like SMC or my daughter, who don't drive and catch a ride with a driving friend to school, play practice, meetings, whatever. If teens didn't carpool, there would be parents (remember them?) driving the kids around instead of other teens. Of course then we'd have all those maniac soccer Moms out on the roads causing mayhem. :bubble:

#4, AGAIN we aren't talking about limiting the passengers for some 18 year old kid - I think 17 should be the limit for driving restrictions OR whenever the kid graduates from high school, whichever comes first.

Also, this has nothing to do with where they're driving or why they're driving. Going to church, going to Taco Bell - what's the difference? Kids horse around and forget to be careful. They also don't spend a lot of time thinking about the consequences of their actions. You said you were a teacher so I know you know this.

It would be nice to see the proposed legislation to read what it entails. So far in this thread there is no information as to what the bill contains. Maybe the person that started the thread will “tell us all about it” or at least cite a bill number.

The measure Roy put forward last year, that was killed (pun intended) in the Judicial Committee, placed a 180 day restriction on newly licensed teen drivers from transporting non-family member passengers. Read his 3/25/2002 newsletter at http://www.somd.com/news/dyson/articles/132.shtml

Just curious to those that think its so important for teens to carpool, what happens if the only one that has a car or a liscense is sick? Do all the others just not go to school? The thing is that I just dont buy this as a reason to defeat the bill. I don't believe in the bill but I do believe in looking at things truthfully.

Originally posted by Ken King
Read his 3/25/2002 newsletter at http://www.somd.com/news/dyson/articles/132.shtml Well, there ya have it. SMC, I know it sucks to be held to the same standard that less responsible people your age are. Try being 39 and having the same problem. :lol:

What I don't understand is why they killed the bill? The statistics are there, the bill makes perfect sense - what's the problem?
Do all the others just not go to school? :roflmao:

Days after the Judicial Proceedings Committee killed this life-saving bill, two teens who attend Henry E. Lackey High School in Charles County were killed due to driver inexperience

Nothing about someone else in the car distracting the driver.

Days after the accident at Lackey, a Gaithersburg youth lost control of his car while drag racing with another youth. The passenger in the vehicle, driven by a 16-year-old teen who had just had his license for two months, was killed in the accident.


Well duh, drag racing.. Shouldn't be doing that! Nothing to do with the driver being distracted, but about the driver knowing exactly what he was doing.. And it was stupid. Instead of having the spirit of Earnhardt going through his veins, maybe the passenger would have gotten him to stop.

This is common sense legislation. If you don’t think so, just take a moment to observe teen drivers getting into a car with their peers and watch as the driver pulls away. Every time I do this, I notice that they immediately start either fiddling with their compact disc player, talking on their cell phones or looking at their fellow passengers either beside them -- or worse talking to their friends in the backseat.


I see just as many adults doing that.. Then you have adults fiddling with the cigarette lighter, putting on makeup, eating their bacon egg and cheese biscuit..

Seems like everything you talk about points at the experience of the driver, not distractions from people within the car. so three things we learn from this:
1) Parent should know who their kids are riding with.. If you don't know or trust them, then don't let your child ride with them.
2) Same as #1, but if you don't trust your child to drive others, forbid it.
3) a Passenger's life is more important than the driver.. We care about the passengers being hurt, but nothing about just the driver.. Right up there with a pro-lifer being pro-death penalty.. if there is a concern about the person's driving ability, they shouldn't be driving anyone around, including themselves!! Again, parents need to take care of it..

So, everything I read in the article really is useless.. And lets talk about enforcement.. Can you easily tell the difference between a 17 and an 18 year old?? Are cops so bored they have the time to pull over these people to check their age if they are car pooling? And like you said, after the have an accident and kill people, it is too late..

GO buckeyes... haha
If you adults make laws that affect 16 year olds. Than allow 16 year olds to vote.

I think the vast majority of the increase in automobile accidents involving young drivers has to do with the FACT that driver’s education has been removed from most high school curriculums. Now, a teen wishing to get their license must go to a driving school. I think this is a huge conflict of interest. Does the driving school really care about providing safe drivers on the road or more about their cash flow? I just think that if the state wants safe drivers we should educate them in school.

My hubby and I totally disagree on this issue. He believes that the driving age should be raised to 18 and he says neither of our children will get a license till they are 18. I totally disagree. I got my driver’s license at 16 (so did he) and my father put the fear of GOD in me. He made firm rules on the use of the car to despite the fact I was paying the insurance on the vehicle. I was not allowed to have passengers in the vehicle unless I asked my parents first, no drinking and they were to know where I was at all times. I thought my parents were unreasonable at the time, but now, I understand why. You would think with all the friends and loved ones I have had scraped off the road and taken away by the body snatchers, I would feel differently. But, I don't. I still think allowing a teen to get a driver’s license at 16 should be the choice of a parent. There isn’t anyone forcing a parent to take their teen to the DMV and get a license on their 16th Birthday. Parents can and should say "NO" if they don't feel thier son/daughter isn't ready yet.

As far as the two teens killed from Lackey, what they fail to mention is that they were jumping a hill. AND, if I remember correctly, the driver only had a learner’s permit and nobody else in the car was eligible to supervise an individual on a learner’s permit. There are always going to be those who break laws regardless of the driving age and those who break laws shouldn’t be clumped in with the reality of the situation. I have no problem with the 180 days Roy Dyson is asking for. I will agree that passengers in a vehicle can be distracting to an inexperienced driver. But think about this

Also, according to the NHSHA, 16-year old drivers have crash rates three times greater than 17-year-olds, five times greater than 18-year-olds and twice of those who are 85 or over.


If we change the age, we only bump these numbers up a year. Experience means a lot and I beleive the decrease is due to greater experience as a driver gets more time behind the wheel.


Are cops so bored they have the time to pull over these people to check their age if they are car pooling?

:nono: Just as long as they don't forget to give them a
brochure on racial profile and how to make a complaint if they would like to make one.

Originally posted by smcdem
GO buckeyes... haha
If you adults make laws that affect 16 year olds. Than allow 16 year olds to vote.

Laws are made concerning 5 year olds too. As you get older you will find out that you don't have alot of say in what happens arround you, get use to it. I don't get to vote on anything I do at work (just like you dont at school) and neither does just about anyone else. Heck even the elected officials that get to vote (like the school board) are bound by rules that they dont get to vote on.

Originally posted by smcdem
GO buckeyes... haha
If you adults make laws that affect 16 year olds. Than allow 16 year olds to vote.
From the tidbits in that old Dyson newsletter the proposal sounded okay and seemed to be a common sense approach to curbing "party barges". Please cite the bill you are referring to when you started this thread? I want to find out more about this, but all we have is speculation concerning a new bill. At this point I don't know if one even exists or is it that you are worried that Dyson might re-introduce it this next session?

The way I read that bill it just places a restriction on you for the first 6 months that you have your drivers liscense. Hell I think that should apply to adults too.

a Passenger's life is more important than the driver.. We care about the passengers being hurt, but nothing about just the driver..
I didn’t get that from any of this, did anyone else? It seems that the concern is for how a young person, inexperienced at driving, might not be providing their fullest attention to that task if they have other young non-family members as passengers distracting them.

Based on what you have posted, I guess that you have never experienced “peer pressure” to do anything that you normally wouldn’t have done if left to your own devices or have never observed this behavior from others. I’ve seen it, and while I have no data to support this thought, I believe that it is more likely to take place amongst younger folk.

Heretic,

Agreed, maybe if it was applicable to all new drivers it could make it past the Judicial Committee. After all, an inexperienced driver is an inexperienced driver regardless of age.

I wonder if the DOT has any statistics for fatal accidents based on the amount of time the driver has held a license.

SMC, doesn't it ever occur to you that we're about a hair's breadth away from being totally government controlled and none of us having any rights whatsoever?

I'm reading about eminent domain cases right now. You think having a limit on the number of people you can transport as a teenager is bad? You think not being able to vote at 16 is bad? Try having your home or land taken by the government because some developer greased a few palms.

Originally posted by Ken King
I didn’t get that from any of this, did anyone else? It seems that the concern is for how a young person, inexperienced at driving, might not be providing their fullest attention to that task if they have other young non-family members as passengers distracting them.



what if the other people in the car are mutes?

The point being, if they (the government or parents) feel they aren't capable to drive, they shouldn't.. By themselves or with other people.

As far as peer pressure being involved, if someone in the car is trying to get you to do something stupid (like drag race or jump hills) you have two choices.. Not do it and don't worry about it, or do it and may the consequence of wrapping your car around a tree.. Darwin wasn't so dumb after all, the weak weeding themselves out seems to work just fine.. You know, God did give us one incredible invention.. Free will.. The ability to make choices.. Though not fully refined, you have this from the day you are born.

Originally posted by SmallTown
what if the other people in the car are mutes?

The point being, if they (the government or parents) feel they aren't capable to drive, they shouldn't.. By themselves or with other people.

As far as peer pressure being involved, if someone in the car is trying to get you to do something stupid (like drag race or jump hills) you have two choices.. Not do it and don't worry about it, or do it and may the consequence of wrapping your car around a tree.. Darwin wasn't so dumb after all, the weak weeding themselves out seems to work just fine.. You know, God did give us one incredible invention.. Free will.. The ability to make choices.. Though not fully refined, you have this from the day you are born.
Peer pressure is significant. Ask the kids, they will tell you. You do have kids, don't you? And of course there are some very mature kids who do avoid those pressures that would be penalized if this measure became law. But today we have many weak parents that don't do a very good job of raising their kids and as soon as they are 16 they sign the application for the license and buy them a car. As to weeding out that would be fine if they were only killing themselves. But it wasn't that long ago that horseplay caused an innocent man to be killed over in Calvert when kids were hot-rodding in that brand new Mustang.

To date I haven't seen a new bill re-introducing this concept, until that time isn't all of this moot?

Originally posted by Ken King
Peer pressure is significant.

Yes, It was the :king:'s peer pressure that caused me to drink on NYE. :bawl: It was all his fault!:biggrin:

Ken I don't know much about what the bill exactly says. It is under the little legislation preview of Fridays enterprise.

Originally posted by Ken King
But today we have many weak parents that don't do a very good job of raising their kids and as soon as they are 16 they sign the application for the license and buy them a car.

Exactly.. It is the parents who need to do a better job.. The government is not a tax-paid baby sitter

Originally posted by SmallTown
The government is not a tax-paid baby sitter

I agree, but the next time I hear someone bring up government sponsored daycare Im going to hold you to that.

Originally posted by smcdem
It is under the little legislation preview of Fridays enterprise.

That explains why no one saw it! :biggrin:

I don’t read the Emptyprise, but since the 2003 State Legislature doesn’t start until Wednesday the 8th there are no new bills out there on this topic. Even if Dyson attempts to get this through he will probably face the same fate as previous bills on this subject. A little tidbit, identical bills were introduced as SB527 in the 2002 session, SB128 in the 2001 session, SB404 in the 2000 session, and SB597 in the 1999 session. All were given an unfavorable report by the Judicial Proceedings Committee.

Dyson says that it will pass in committee this time because of a new chairman.

...cars kill more teens than all other causes combined, including drugs, pimples and even, *shudder* guns, then, shouldn't we make them illegal for minors, period?

I mean, the goal is child safety, right?

"No cars until you are 21"

and then, it must be a "smart car" of some form or another that can't possibly hurt you because we'll put so many devices on it that buy the time you get it started it'll be to late to go anywhere anyway thereby serving the REAL goal of...elimination of private automobile ownership!

Think of all the kids who would be alive today if we only cared enough.

Originally posted by Larry Gude
Think of all the kids who would be alive today if we only cared enough.

I thought we were just trying to make teens lives miserable enough so they respect adults more, and appreciate the priveledge of living long enough to become one?

OK. We can do that!

Oz, the idea is to make them so miserable that they can't wait to get their own apartment and will never, as an adult, entertain the notion of coming back to live with the parents.

See, all the adults got off on this government intervention kick, but we all lost sight of the fact that teens lives *should* be made miserable by adults in retaliation for learning to talk, and then talking back!

I know - all those months teaching them to walk, talk and hit their face with a fork. Then you spend the next 17 years telling them to sit down, shut up and quit eating you out of house and home. :roflmao:

Some people forget the saying that "Kids are great, and then they start talking" long enough to conceive.