The Entitled Nature Of The Typical American Driver...

"J. Drew Silvers" (drewcoustic) 01/13/2014 at 10:00 • Filed to: driver's license, driving test, accidents, dui, millennials

36

96

I will never forget the day my grandfather was lying on his would-be death bed in a hospice after beginning to make slight health improvements. He had been battling respiratory issues due to decades of smoking cigarettes, fallen to critical condition, only to make a little forward progress and all he could talk about was how he was going to drive his car once he recovered. The problem was, my grandfather had been in no condition to drive a vehicle on the road long before he took a turn for the worst. Often he would forget to put the car into gear and rev the engine while stationary in parking lots, mis-judge stopping distances due to his failing vision and even worse physical reaction times, and new scratches and dents would show up on his car without explanation. During his brief period of health improvement before his eventual passing, my mother asked his doctor if there was anything he could do to make sure my grandfather would not drive if he did indeed pull through. The doctor told her that he legally could declare him unfit to drive and have his license pulled, but he wouldn't even think about filing the paperwork. There was a huge risk of having a lawsuit filed against him that he did not want to assume. My grandfather did pass away a few weeks later and while I loved him and respected him, he didn't share much regard to road safety which was probably just a product of his stubborn and resilient nature.

This is where I hit a wall of sorts when it comes to both obtaining and maintaining a driver's license in my country and it bothers me to my core practically every time I get behind the wheel. Since driving cars has been so much more prevalent in the United States over a longer period of time than pretty much anywhere else, most of us Americans assume this action is a "right" for being a citizen and not a privilege it as it stands in actuality. I would go so far as to argue that the majority of the people in this country would fail the driver's license exam if they had to take it again in both written and road-tested form.

When I was a kid, my big dream was to drive a car and that was the only goal I really had in life until I actually obtained my license one year and one day after turning sixteen years old. While having my instructional permit I had driven to church with my parents every Sunday, which is about twenty miles round-trip, as well as every time we went to the store or out to eat. Most of my friends, however, did not have as much experience as I did when they obtained their licenses. Looking back at the process now and seeing just how young these high school kids appear and act (I'm nearly 28 years old) really makes me wonder if someone of that age is really mature enough to handle a car, and makes me question whether or not I was in the same boat at their age. After thinking it over, my realization is that I really wasn't quite mature enough to be driving at sixteen, though in the moment, I would have thought much differently about the statement I just made.

A few weeks ago, my friend's mother told me that when she took her driving test as a teenager, she was required to demonstrate basic maintenance operations on the vehicle she took the exam with. Meaning, a part of your test consisted of showing the proper way to change a tire on the car, check the air pressure, the oil, and a few other bits and pieces the majority of drivers in this day and age have no clue about. When I took my written test, I studied and passed it without a problem. A year later, my mom had to sign off some paperwork saying I had completed "x" number of hours driving a car on the road, and then I took my actual driving test, which was in a parking lot with lines painted on it. I also passed that test without issue. There was nothing I had to prove to those State of Georgia appointed test administrators about my ability to avoid a collision, drive in the rain, change a tire, or know anything other than how to put the car in gear and slowly drive around with my seatbelt fastened. The biggest "scare" of anyone getting their license during that time had to do with being able to parallel park properly, which is not difficult if you actually practice as you should have been doing anyway. Sometime since that point, the testing practice has been altered to require actual road tests in lieu of the parking lot exams of my day, but in most cases, that means driving around a city block about half a mile and as long as you signal and don't run into anything, you're fine. The exception to this rule is when you take your full, Class-M (motorcycle) road test, which is still done in a parking lot and how I obtained mine a few years ago.

The thing is, most states do not require any sort of driver's education courses in order to obtain a driver's license, which baffles me completely. Those powers that be would rather the parent or guardian of those getting their license vouch that they have completed the minimum requirement for obtaining it. After that point, and regardless of whether or not the parent/guardian was truthful, all they have to do for the rest of their lives is pop in to re-register their little endorsed ID card every few years, and take an eye exam given by a law enforcement officer, not an actual optometrist. Pass that "test" and you are good to go for a few years.

At my last job, there were about thirty total employees, which is pretty high for a country club. Out of those thirty or so employees, I can name off seven people who received DUIs during my five year stint in management there, one of which was nineteen years old. The fun thing about all of those people? Not a single one of them lost their license as they were all issued "work permits". I am not sure if this is the same for all other states, but in Georgia, after you make the stupid, and inexcusable decision to drive while drunk or high, you can still legally drive again almost immediately after the fact. I cannot wrap my brain around this and I will never understand why such leniency exists. From what I gather, in the eye of the local court system, making a "mistake" like driving under the influence is not grounds enough for the state to put you in a position where you could potentially lose your job if you cannot show up to work. Nope. I don't care how you try to justify this in any direction, but I will never support it in the least bit.

There is a big difference between making a mistake and making a decision. A mistake is something which happens from being uninformed about a situation, while making a decision is just that – a choice you make on behalf of yourself. Operating a vehicle while intoxicated is not a mistake, but a decision made by every person who has ever taken to the road in said state. You do not rob a bank by mistake, nor do you get married by mistake as they are both decisions accepted and followed through with. The same logic applies to driving while under the influence of anything. People who risk the lives of everyone else on the road, the lives of whomever may be in the car with them, as well as their own lives are given a "pass" in many cases instead of having their license taken away until they prove themselves responsible enough to obtain a new one. Do you have a DUI lawyer? You may end up with a lesser consequence than those who go to trial without. Should the amount of money you put up correlate to the sentence you are given when you make such a stupid and selfish driving choice? Absolutely not, but it often does and makes me sick. Yes, I am well aware of how the legal system works in America, but I also firmly believe that if you commit a crime, you should own up to it without being an entitled brat and trying to get a lesser consequence – period.

I really do feel as if most of us find some sense of entitlement to having a license in the United States, as I mentioned in the beginning of this post. For some reason, being an American means we have the "right" to drive, and requiring mandatory re-testing or refresher courses during our stint as licensed drivers would somehow be discriminatory, because it seems like everything we do these days must be politically correct. I hate this so much. As a result of this logic, I have a list of people in my circle I will not get into a car with under any circumstance if they are behind the wheel – this should not even happen. I am sure most people have a similar list as mine, but the thing is, we joke about these people, how many accidents they get into, how they keep their cars in an unsafe state of disrepair, how they have no coordination or depth perception, and it is somehow not a problem for them to be rolling down public streets piloting a deadly weapon? Nope. Again, I do not understand this logic.

By no means am I the world's most perfect driver and I understand that, but I also believe there should be much more to obtaining and maintaining driving privileges for Americans. I would fully stand behind proper training courses being mandatory from the day you are initially licensed, and at set intervals during your lifetime. If you cannot pass after the second time, you stay on a probationary period for a bit until you can test again, just like many European countries do. This would end the "come back tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day..." until you finally pass it mentality which exists here. Failing the test enough times should mean "game over" and not taking it in continual succession until you pass it as a fluke or by sheer luck. Some people should not be driving in the same way some people should not be farmers, carpenters, or lawyers. People do not seem to realize that driving a car puts them under liability for every person they pass on the street, regardless of them being in another vehicle, or on foot. People also do not realize that a car in motion is, in fact, a deadly weapon and can be seen as such in court. Unfortunately, for now, we are stuck with having to continually self-educate concerning proper driving techniques in this country and the sad thing is, most of us don't take the responsibility to even give that much effort. Having a license is good enough for most of us. We have no reason to improve our driving habits or abilities, because if we don't get a citation, it isn't illegal. Right...

Driving is a learning process – a continual learning process.

Driving is a privilege.

Driving is not a right.

Think about the safety of others instead of making excuses for your bad driving.

Grace and Peace, -J. Drew Silvers

http://www.drewcoustic.com

*The photo at the top of the page was my car. 1994 Z28, Arctic White, color-matched salad shooters, T-56. In 2006, I t-boned a guy who turned left in front of me, coming the opposite direction. He was on the phone when I ran into him and stayed on the phone until the cops showed up and told him to hang it up. The collision was his fault, totaled my car and the minivan he was driving which was a rental given to him after causing an accident the week before. He never said a word to me, not one. But after receiving his ticket, he resumed his phone call.

ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 10:08

3

Exactly.

oldirtybootz > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 10:15

5

Driver's education and the licensing tests in this country are a joke and until that changes, drivers in this country will only continue to get worse. Many drivers on the road today wouldn't be able to pass a reasonable and more realistic driving test.

wkiernan > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 10:17

0

You minimize the skill needed to parallel-park, but that was a close thing for me when I took my driver's test at age 16. The problem was, I had learned to drive in a VW Beetle and I was pretty handy with it, but when I took the test my parents's Beetle wasn't available so I borrowed my friend Dean's '67 Pontiac Catalina. It had a 389 CI V8 and an automatic transmission and it was at least four feet longer and a foot wider than any car I had experience driving. It took me maybe seven rather jerky back-and-forth movements to get in between the cones when I took the test. I told the examiner, "I hope that didn't make me flunk the test, I learned on a VW and I never drove a car this big before," and he said "It's OK, you passed; you didn't touch the cones."

J. Drew Silvers > wkiernan 01/13/2014 at 10:33

0

It's like anything else, including backing up a trailer - it takes practice and you have to learn on more than one vehicle in order to do it properly and be competent. The principal is the same and if you understand the method of what you're doing, it isn't all that difficult to translate to other vehicles within reason. You proved that because you parallel parked a boat on the first try.

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > wkiernan 01/13/2014 at 10:33

0

I had to parallel park a chevy avalanche when I was 16. I botched my first attempt something fierce. I leaned out the window and asked if I could give it another go and was told "do what you think is right". So I pulled out, went back to the "starting point" and threw that pig in the spot properly. Not bad considering the pylons used to designate the spot weren't tall enough to be seen by me in the truck.

However, the kid before me not only cheated by bringing a new mini cooper, he couldn't pass the parking tests......I'm sorry but if you can't drive a mini into a spot then you just lift it and turn it into place.

Sinanigans > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 10:55

1

I agree totally. The problem is that getting a license is easy - too easy. If you make the process of earning (see: ***earning***) a license more difficult and all encompassing rather than testing a few concepts, then I believe most people will drive with more respect and more awareness. Does it get rid of the sense of entitlement completely? No. But at the very least, all people will become more educated on driving, and some will realize the challenge it took to earn a license and drive with respect and some skill.

In Switzerland, Germany, and some other European countries, getting a license requires logging a considerable number of hours over a couple years and over a wide range of conditions and weather. I had to log 6 hours to get a permit with a "driving school" where the instructor taught me how to cut off other drivers, flip them off, and curse at the in Spanish (not even joking).

In contrast, one of my best friends who had a license here in the US for years, moved back to Switzerland and decided that it was too much work and effort to get a Swiss license - and stuck with public transportation (which is excellent there). I understand that the US is very big, and people rely on their cars to commute, and we don't have a decent public transportation network in most parts of the country. But, its for that very reason that American drivers need to be more skilled and better educated when they are on the road.

pdthedeuce > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:01

1

amen .

Chase > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:02

2

Massachusetts requires 12 hrs classroom, 12 hrs driving with an instructor, 6 hrs in the back seat while the instructor is teaching someone else, and 20 hrs with parents.

Of course, this is only if you're under 18. At age 18, you can just walk in and take the test, no prior education required >.<

BeaterGT > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:12

0

Z28 NOOOOOOOOOOO

JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:25

7

Being a 15 y.o. driver who doesn't have their license yet, I fully agree with this whole article. I don't think half the kids at my school deserve licenses (and that would be an understatement). They always text, speed, and do dumb things. I know kids that drive drunk, that drive high, that are idiots. They wonder why they crash and have expensive insurances. I'm by no means perfect, but I am careful. I always signal; I never really speed; I don't do dumb things. I lock my phone in my glovebox to prevent being distracted. I don't want to crash.

FL doesn't require drivers ed. I took it TWICE becuase I wanted to be safe. FL doesn't test parallel parking. They drive you a quarter mile down a residental street.

And a coworker got a DUI and also got the limited license a week after. It is BS. He should not be able to drive; and I do liek the guy. It just is wrong.

We need to be more strict!

Naijaflavor, I Love Doritos > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:25

2

My favorite parts.

Great publish

J. Drew Silvers > Naijaflavor, I Love Doritos 01/13/2014 at 12:26

0

Thank you!

TheOnelectronic > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:27

2

Here's the issue:

If you make the test much more challenging and testing, where will you get the money to train instructors and establish the curriculums?

If you charge for the examination itself, like many european countries do, now you've essentially created a barrier to low-income people trying to find jobs. As many in "old world" countries and in big cities everywhere don't realize, in rural america, you cannot do anything without a car. Nearest place you could get a job? 10 miles. Nearest grocery store? 15 miles. These are usually the same people who don't understand why anyone would get a car because "Ugh, just take the subway!"

These areas often don't have any public transportation infrastructure at all, and walking 10 miles each way every day is not only very time-consuming and inconvenient, it presents massive problems if it rains, snows, or some other thing happens that can render you unpresentable for work.

The other thing is that while those basic maintenance items may have been essential several decades ago, they're much less of a concern in modern cars with reliability as it is. Most cars today don't need their oil checked every day because they don't burn or leak oil. Tire pressures are monitored remotely, and unless you get a puncture, won't change more than the usual variance due to temperature.

I got a low coolant light last night (Dealer didn't fill tank properly) and got out to manually check. I borrowed a flashlight from my friend. He wondered if the hood light had gone out; I told him there wasn't one. He seemed surprised that a car packed with so much sci-fi technology lacked a hood light, until I pointed out that this was the first time in several years of driving that I've actually had to inspect something under the hood. Cars are simply much more self-sustaining now.

I would -love- if some sort of at-the-limits driving course were required. It would make people much safer drivers, and make me much less infuriated getting behind people on twisty roads. However, I realize that the logistics of this are very challenging.

For things like cell-phones, distracted driving, etc... No test is going to stop that. Anyone can behave during a driving test, and everyone -knows- they aren't supposed to do it. They do it anyway. If you want to make people safer drivers, pass a law saying insurance can't pay for your own vehicle's damage if you're at fault for an accident. That'll make people much safer.

cazzyodo > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:34

1

Great write up. I have conversations with my friends about retesting being mandatory and such. My grandfather is recovering from open heart surgery right now so my mom took possession of his car, had it signed over to her and now it's my brother's whenever he is home. That's one less elderly driver out there.

But the issue isn't so much him as the normal commuter you noted at the very end. It's a damn shame, when it comes down to it, that all the privileges we have are taken for granted and not seriously. A motor vehicle is a high velocity ball of metal. If regulations in my town state that children on electric scooters technically need a motor vehicle license then retesting should commence immediately (regulations aren't enforced but they do say that and clearly retesting is not happening).

J. Drew Silvers > JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! 01/13/2014 at 12:37

2

That's a really mature outlook. Very commendable on your part. Drive safe and influence everyone you can - keep it up.

Montalvo > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 12:48

0

The process to get a license in the US is way too lenient, there needs to be a greater emphasis on vehicle care and operation. Driving a vehicle is not a right the same as free speech it is a privilege, one that needs to be enforced a lot better. In my 5 years or so of driving I have lost count of the amount of times I needed to avoid distracted drivers or people who don't understand how to respond to certain situations or traffic signals. There also needs to be harsher penalties for people who are endangering everyone around them, maybe if someone gut punches their wallet or sticks them in a cell a bit they will get it through their head that piloting a 3000lb+ hunk of metal and glass at speed doesn't just require their attention it demands it.

cuts_off_prius > Naijaflavor, I Love Doritos 01/13/2014 at 12:48

2

I think it should be framed inside every driving school/drivers ed class.

J. Drew Silvers > Montalvo 01/13/2014 at 12:59

0

Spot-on. I like it.

J. Drew Silvers > BeaterGT 01/13/2014 at 13:03

0

It was a great car. The guy I bought it from ordered it brand new with every option except leather. It had the red/grey cloth interior and was babied by both him and me. I'm pretty sure he would be heartbroken if he knew what happened to it.

Fookin' Prawns > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 13:09

1

When I took my test, I got the maximum number of passable errors. Within a year, I'd gotten a ticket and caused an accident. I am fully in support of a rigorous driving instruction program with a minimum age of 18. I want less stupid drivers like me off the road.

BeaterGT > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 13:23

0

I'm heartbroken and I never even owned the car. I have a Red 94 Z with the red/grey interior and it pains me that she is just sitting, waiting for me.

Audi-os, amigos > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 13:35

1

The key to driving is to remember one, simple, unchanging truth: You are not just "driving." You are piloting a two-ton machine at high speeds, running on highly explosive fuel, and you are responsible for the safety of your passengers.

"Driving" trivializes or mutes the danger to some people. You're guiding a two-ton metal missile at easily deadly speeds. Do not ever fuck around like you're not doing precisely that.

CAR_IS_MI > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 17:56

3

The lack of education is the biggest issue. It's basically: here is the basics (red means stop, green means go, bumping is not encouraged. GO!).

The rest is left up to the parents / guardians. So their bad driving habits get passed down to the children, who accept the bad habits a 'good driving' later to degrade into worse driving habits to pass onto the next generation. Dive it a few decades and it will basically be bumper cars.

J. Drew Silvers > CAR_IS_MI 01/13/2014 at 18:00

1

Yep. If we count on people to take it upon themselves to improve their habits, it won't ever get any better. Creating new laws isn't the answer, but creating tougher standards of education could really help. Having a basic understanding of how a car actually functions as a vehicle would help quite a bit as well.

PetarVN, GLI Guy, now with stupid power > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:04

2

I'm also a 15yr. old driver, and I'm surprised by how many stupid and irresponsible drivers exist in the US. I grew up in southern Europe, where driving is really scary. But, I grew up around good drivers. Drivers who not only know how to drive a 22 year old diesel hatchback with a clutch that's 60K mi overdue for a clutch change, but also to make sure that hatchback is safe enough for a 350mile trip in to the countryside. At the age of 8, I learned how to pump tires, pour gas, and check oil. At age 10, I learned how to change a tire, how to screw parts that a re falling off back in, and to put chains on a car. Here in the states I have friends who drive either very quickly and dangerously , or are very Jerky with their motions. Now, I'm not saying I am Mikka Hakinnen, I've stalled my Stickshift-equipped Jetta more than a few times, and I have gunned the engine and spun the wheels on hill starts.
What I don't get is how American teens, for example, are separated from driving. Some know how to drive stick, but very few know how to do basic maintenice on their cars (well, neither do I, but that's not the point) My point is, People here just don't consider driving as valuable as it truly is

CAR_IS_MI > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:10

2

I understand how a car works. The key turns it on, the gas makes it go, the brake makes it stop, and the wheel does something else.

J. Drew Silvers > PetarVN, GLI Guy, now with stupid power 01/13/2014 at 18:11

1

That's a great perspective to have. Experiencing one side of the equation at a younger age overseas and then growing into it here. When I started driving, the biggest distraction was changing the radio station and swapping CD's. Nobody had iPods, texting wasn't really all that common yet (around 2002), smart phones didn't exist, and having a GPS meant a little screen you suctioned onto your windshield that were incredibly expensive and nobody my age had. Now, I am afraid cars try to entertain you while driving, when the driving should be your only focus. You're headed in the proper direction, so keep educating yourself and never stop learning.

J. Drew Silvers > CAR_IS_MI 01/13/2014 at 18:16

0

And the visor mirror is the primary focal point, the windshield is secondary. The iPhone is for taking road selfies... Now...what is a clutch pedal?

Fookin' Prawns > Fookin' Prawns 01/13/2014 at 18:19

0

*on the road. Whoops.

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:25

2

Excellent write up, well done.

J. Drew Silvers > TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. 01/13/2014 at 18:29

2

Thank you! I hope it gets read a few more times before it disappears into the depths of Kinja. Haha.

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:31

0

You'll at least make the best of oppo so it will be around.

duurtlang > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:31

4

Living in the Netherlands I consider the hoops I had to jump through to get my license (at min. age 18 in 2001) too lenient. Not by much, but still too lenient. However, compared to what I read here and in other places describing US license requirements I'd almost be scared to set foot on your continent. Now I get why so many talk about accidents they've been in or have witnessed. I've never been in an accident myself, and as far as I know none of my friends have either. I'm 31 now, and drive about 25k km (16k miles) a year, which isn't overly much but it's not that little either.

Just an illustration: a part of my test was hill start in a manual diesel Focus. And an hour long trip through busy city traffic with roundabouts and whatnot.

camaroboy68ss > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:33

1

Great article and I agree with most of your argument. I guess I had a different perspective of driving when i 15-16 (I'm 21 now) because I grew up in a family of car people and around old cars that always need to be tended to because we were at shows most weekends. It was always put to me by my parents that it was a privilege because they would yank it over almost anything. Plus having been raised around cars that were valuable but really terrible to drive makes you become a lot more aware of your surroundings and do drive very defensively.

I can remember many classmates in high school getting into wrecks and for senior day when they hand out the person to be president type awards they actually give worst driver awards to top boy and girl! My senior year the boy backed over his mom in the driveway, and the girl totaled 3 or 4 cars in the school year. That's show the type if society where you get a reward for something that is unacceptable.

In Oregon for license testing they have the same type of thing of going for a 20 min drive around the surrounding area. I never took drivers education but learned from family doing. If a system like what ask for were to be put in place I think after a couple generations you could see parents teaching just as good of technique. To we're instruction is optional.

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:36

1

Also if it's any consolation, that guy that totaled your car will eventually be dropped by his insurance company due to all his accidents.

J. Drew Silvers > duurtlang 01/13/2014 at 18:42

1

I can count on one hand the people I know who can competently drive a manual transmission, and I can think of two people I know who actually own a car that isn't automatic. As readily Jalop as it may sound, I think we'd all be better off over here if there were more manuals. You learn about a car more readily that way, in my opinion.

Where I live, I am pretty sure once you are over the age of eighteen, you can go take a driving test (about fifteen minutes time) without actually having a probationary learning period. At least you could about ten years ago. If you want to ride a motorcycle, you take a written test and you are legally allowed to ride it on the road immediately (no highway riding, no passengers, only during daylight) which is really scary to think about. Some guy passes his test, goes to the local motorcycle shop, buys a bike and takes to the road never having touched one before. Yikes.

That said, it isn't like fiery car crashes are all over the place here and you have a 50/50 chance of survival on your work commute, but I run across at least one person who shouldn't be qualified to drive at least every other time I go out...

CAR_IS_MI > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:43

0

Its a common hook where a female companion can hang a certain type of pocketbook known as a clutch.

duurtlang > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 18:52

0

My dad (1952) got his motorcycle license in late 2012, when he was 60 years old. It took him quite a lot of driving lessons, and certainly not due to incompetence. They were €35 ($48) an hour if I recall correctly, and I believe he chose to have about 25 of them to acquire the competence needed. Those lessons at a registered school are the only way to legally train on public roads, which is the same for your car license btw. The test itself must've cost him at least a hundred Euros as well. A cocky young (25 yo?) and experienced car driver could've done it in half those lessons, but still.

J. Drew Silvers > CAR_IS_MI 01/13/2014 at 19:54

0

Bazinga

J. Drew Silvers > TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. 01/13/2014 at 20:00

2

His insurance provider was the same as mine and my agent told me they did drop him after our collision. He had taken out the insurance with the rental company (Enterprise) but when my agent was going through the motions on his end, he found the guy in their system and made note of what had happened, which lead to him being dropped.

Advice: Be very cautious if you are ever the innocent party of a collision with a rental car. Those reps try anything in the world to trap you and twist your words so they don't have to pay, regardless of what the accident report from the police happens to say.

Shiarlis > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 20:00

0

Well deserved recommend I gave you there... 16 (17 within the month) y.o. nondriver, parents want me to have Bs or above and no Us for behavior before getting my permit. However, hearing the "cool" crowd saying "So, have you seen my perrrrmiiit? OMG I KNOW RIGHT?" either rubs my lack of license in, or makes me not want to drive. Little background on my soon-to-be car/truck. My main rig will be a 1974 Jeep CJ-5 Renegadewith... List time!

-No ABS (Drums all around)
-No airbag
-No doors
-No roof
-"Rollbar" is a sport bar, or one that is only mounted to the body (for looks...)
And more, but time and space constraints... Anywho, it not only sat in an Arkansonian (I will call it that. You will not disagree. /jedimindtricks) field for 7 years, surviving tornadoes that moved one of those metal barns advertised on TV a lot, rain and... wildlife. Sure, the V-8 runs, but the trans and transfer case are shot. Back on topic. When the PO tried to remove the sport bar, the body got this massive hole punched in it, right where it mounts. And the rust, other body damage... Thankfully, it doesn't need smog. (California... :( ) But yeah. Safety at it's lowest. My other, more likely rig forced upon me (jk) is a 2002 Tundra V-8 2x4 with over 300k on the clock. Love it to death, it's practically a family member (although Jeep's PO was my gma...) but visibility is nothing compared to the Jeep. Problem is, at 6'4" and nothing but leg (Friends say I'm freakishly huge and lanky, and I agree) I really don't have the Maybach experience sitting in it. If this wasn't coherent enough, then...

TL;DR Unsafe rig, old rig, high mileage rig, no permit yet, jealous, nice Camaro, angry at the state of licensing (CDL A/M is my goal) and too tall. Any help will be appreciated, plus your other replies have been insightful as well...

-Shiarlis

J. Drew Silvers > Shiarlis 01/13/2014 at 20:17

1

I've had a few Jeeps. A YJ when I was in high school, and more recently, this '79 CJ7:

The CJ's are really unsafe, but if you respect them, they will respect you back. Finding something more simple to work on would be difficult since all of the parts are right there and bolted on without much in the way of trim or seams. I don't know how a 6'4" person will fit in a CJ5, because I'm 5'8" and they are snug for me to sit in, but if you can make it work, go right ahead. Insurance for open top Jeeps around here is cheap, and I live right outside of Atlanta, so you could have that going for you. Just don't expect your insurance company to fix it if you get in a collision, because they see it as practically nothing but a frame with an engine shoved into it.

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 20:34

0

Good to know

Bandit > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 20:37

2

I'm 17. I am absolutely terrified of other people my age that are on the road. Driving through my high school parking lot is like driving through a war zone. Just recently a guy on my swim team found out his license had been suspended for several weeks because of the amount of tickets and crashes he has received. We need some form of skill (not age) based license ranking system.

In my state to get your license before you are 17.5 you have to have 50hrs of driving time with parents, 6 drivers ed drives, and take a book work class. Once you turn 17.5 you can go to the DMV and get your license. The DMV test is a joke, I almost got 100% (the lady docked 1 point because I drove close to the middle line because it was a narrow street with cars parked on both sides) with no studying.

J. Drew Silvers > Bandit 01/13/2014 at 20:43

2

I'm actually surprised at the amount of newer drivers like you who are chiming in about this post. It really says something when an age group which is generally eager to drive comes to a conclusion like that. That should be a pretty good wake-up call if anyone of interest is listening. Share this blog on your Facebook or something and see if we can get some more people in here. I don't care about the number of views I get, but I do want this to reach as far as it can, because I really do believe in it. Thanks for your reply, by the way. It was pretty refreshing to hear.

Bandit > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 20:46

0

The problem with this kind of post is the people reading and commenting are not the target audience. We all know driving is a privilege and that it needs to be respected. General society needs a wake up call. Also, I don't know how people text and drive and don't crash, I tried once to send a simple OK text and it was too darn hard to do. It's stupid the amount of times I've been cycling and almost killed by a texter.

J. Drew Silvers > Bandit 01/13/2014 at 20:49

0

That's a big reason I never started cycling. My brother in law does, and so do some of my friends, but it's difficult enough to not get hit while in a car or splattered off your motorcycle. Especially in the metro area.

80CobraKid > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 20:49

1

My 10th Grade research paper I did on this very same topic. It isn't the best, but I think it makes a point.

Train Them For The Wolves

In the early morning of December 2, 2006, teenager Reid Hollister and his two passengers were making their way home on a rain-soaked, three-lane highway. Hollister had a year of driving experience under his belt but was traveling a bit too fast for the unfamiliar road. He missed a curve and overcorrected, slamming into the guardrail. Hollister died at the scene (Savage). Sadly, incidents like these are not uncommon among teenage drivers. In 2007, motor vehicle crashes killed nearly 3,200 young drivers aged 15 to 20 (Savage). New drivers in the United States should be required to complete more comprehensive training and testing before they are eligible for a full driver's license.

New drivers often have a reputation for being poor drivers because they have not been required to take enough training to develop advanced driving skills. Currently, the U.S. government does not require enough behind-the-wheel instruction for new drivers to become safer and more in control. Opponents of increased training and stricter laws believe increased instruction would cost too much for low-income families. They also think tougher driving laws may inconvenience some families too greatly. However, increased driver training has been proven to reduce accidents. Surveyed parents also believe their teens are not ready for the road with only the minimum required driving training (Bendall). Solutions in Minnesota include increasing the minimum hours of behind-the-wheel training from 6 hours to 75, increasing classroom instruction from 30 to 50 hours, and creating a revised test that would assess new areas such as freeway driving, vehicle control, and reaction time. Additional instruction time would be used to teach drivers advanced vehicle dynamics, defensive driving, reaction time, accident avoidance, and adverse conditions training.

New drivers are notorious for causing many accidents in the past. In 2006, the economic cost of crashes caused by drivers between the ages of 15 and 17 was $34 billion (Newcomb). Teen drivers are also most likely to crash in their first month driving on their own (Berman). Teenagers also have a stereotype of being aggressive, inattentive, and distracted drivers (Cichowski). This stereotype is somewhat truthful. Teenagers do not usually scan the road ahead while also getting distracted by loud music, friends, and cell phones. Teens are not necessarily aggressive drivers; a recent study found that common driving errors - generally related to a lack of experience - contributed most to serious crashes (Cichowski). At 21%, the leading error that contributed to fatal teen crashes was failure to scan the road ahead (Halvorson). This is a simple skill developed by additional training. With only 6 hours of behind-the-wheel training required in Minnesota, students do not have enough time to develop advanced skills like scanning. The new driver has always been a stereotype of failure and danger, but more extensive training could change that stereotype into a safe, experienced, and well-prepared driver.

The story of Reed Hollister is too common among young drivers. Nationally, automobile crashes are currently the number one killer of teens - more than homicide, suicide, and cancer combined (Shellenbarger). With the major contributing factor of these fatal crashes being common errors and failure to scan the road, an increase in minimum hours of behind-the-wheel seems logical. Hollister obtained his license in Connecticut, one of the toughest teen driving law states. He had 20 hours of training. The law was changed to 40 hours 9 months after his accident (Savage). Imagine what Minnesota drivers are missing with only 6 hours of behind-the-wheel training, especially when proof of additional behind-the-wheel time is not necessary, as it is in Connecticut. The government isn’t the only reason teens aren’t getting enough training. The emphasis at too many driving schools is to get kids through training as quickly and as cheaply as possible. Teens would be better drivers if more emphasis was placed on intensive training (Cichowski). If more comprehensive training was imposed by the government, driving schools would be required to give advanced driving lessons instead of just simple parking and signaling techniques. “Crashes kill more teens than anything else,” Pam Fischer, a traffic safety consultant who formerly ran the New Jersey Division of Highway Traffic Safety, said, “and a good way to prevent fatal crashes is training” (Cichowski). Parents already spend thousands on their kids’ sports camps, yet rarely spend money on driving lessons to develop more sophisticated skills (Cichowski). The current problem of teens being involved in fatal accidents can be solved by mandating advanced techniques be taught at all driving schools.

The opponents of increased drivers training say it would be too expensive for some families. The increased hours of driver training may cost more, but competitive pricing between driving schools could drive down prices to an affordable level. There are also fee-free driver’s education courses sponsored by major car and accessory brands (Newcomb). Another option to consider is having driving schools split up the required hours for students to complete different levels of training when they can afford it. Car insurance premiums could also drop with more intensive driving courses (Mitchell). An extra advantage of lower premiums would be more insured drivers. Another point brought up by opponents of stricter driving laws is that they could cause inconvenience to some families. For Kristen Miller of Shelton, Connecticut, her sister has to get a ride to school from her mother instead. Miller can’t drive her sister to the school they both attend because of the strict driving laws prohibiting the transportation of siblings during the first year of having a license (Cleary). While this argument is valid, a driver with a license under increased training laws would be skilled enough to drive siblings and peers after just a few months. Therefore, stricter laws about new driver preparation could replace current laws designed to prevent tragic accidents. A third argument brought up by opponents is that some laws may not fit rural counties as well as they fit large urban cities and suburbs. They argue that fewer drivers on rural roads create fewer accidents, so increased laws would be overbearing. However, 56% of fatal car accidents happen on rural highways (Smith). Stricter laws would benefit more than inconvenience people due to the increase in good drivers on the road over time. Opponents can argue, but they must understand these new laws would benefit more people than inconvenience them.

The goal of increased instruction and stricter new driver laws is to decrease teen driving fatalities. As the leading cause of teen death (Shellenbarger), action must be taken to reduce such statistics. More experience in adverse conditions would reduce accidents, as evidenced by statistics from advanced driving courses. At the Driver’s Edge training camp in Las Vegas, 100 graduates surveyed after the advanced training courses had 54% fewer accidents than a control group who did not take the course (Cava). Even after an eight hour course like Driver’s Edge, great improvements in driving skill are made, making the argument for more mandatory driving education.

Another study showed that 47 percent of parents said there was at least one driving condition they felt their student wasn't prepared to handle. One in three parents didn't think their teen was ready to drive alone in heavy traffic or on the highway. One in five said they didn't think their teen was ready to drive alone in the rain (Bendall). Even parents know that their teens are not receiving enough training before obtaining a driver’s license, yet they are not investing independently in the necessary courses to be comfortable with their teens’ driving habits. Sixty-eight percent of parents also noted that their busy schedules limited time they could spend driving together while the teen has a learner’s permit (Mahlum). Even parents agree that teens need more training and driving experience, with 99% of parents whose teens participated in Driver’s Edge think that it should be a required part of driver’s education (“The Program).

By gaining experience of adverse driving conditions and situations in a controlled environment, teen drivers will be better prepared when they encounter them in the real world. Programs like Honda’s Teen Defensive Driving Program provide learners with conditions ranging from emergency lane-changing to skidding in ice and snow (Newcomb). Learning these skills early on will reduce accidents when the conditions are actually presented to teens while driving. With the majority of accidents caused by simple driving errors that are corrected with additional training, logic dictates that teen accidents will be reduced with training in adverse conditions.

There are solutions in requiring new drivers to partake in more training prior to receiving a driver’s license. A state or national requirement of a minimum 75 hours of behind the wheel training, 50 hours of classroom instruction, and a revised driver’s test that tests more parameters of driving would greatly improve driving techniques for every new driver coming onto the road. Additional behind-the-wheel instruction would be used to teach new drivers accident avoidance techniques, such as rapid evasive lane change, skid pad training, vehicle limitations, and defensive driving. In Oregon, mandating 50 hours of behind-the-wheel training and an additional 50 hours of classroom training reduced accidents by ten to twelve percent (Silk Carty). Additional classroom instruction would be used to teach advanced vehicle dynamics and technique theory. Christopher Murphy, chairman of the Governors Highway Safety Association, states that driver’s education programs must “teach ways to reduce risk, including hazard recognition, vehicle handling, space management and speed management” instead of focusing on helping students simply past their licence tests (O’Donnell).A newly revised drivers license test would include freeway assessment, accident avoidance technique assessment,and skid pad control assessment. With these additions, test administrators could ensure the future safety of new drivers. These changes in requirements of the federal driving laws would significantly reduce teen accident fatality rates, improve new drivers’ experience levels, and decrease teen accident rates. With teens being killed in car crashes every 6.5 minutes (Newcomb), something must be done to improve teen driving skills.

Works Cited

Bendall, Izzi. "Study Finds Teen Drivers Need More Time in Adverse Conditions - Autoweek." Autoweek.com. Crain Communications Inc., 10 Dec. 2010. Web. 17 Jan. 2012.

Berman, Mark. "Teen Drivers Most Likely to Crash in First Month of Solo Driving" The Washington Post. The Washington Post Company, 15 Oct. 2011. Web. 02 Feb. 2012.

Cava, Marco R. Della. "Driver's Ed Gets Turbocharged." USA TODAY. 02 Mar 2005: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 23 Jan 2012.

Cichowski, John. "Dispelling 'Myth' About Aggressive Teen Drivers." The Record. 22 Apr 2011: L.1. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Jan 2012.

Cleary, Tom. "Teen Driver Laws Frustrate Some; Officials Say They Save Lives." Connecticut Post. 06 Dec 2011: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Jan 2012.

Halvorson, Bengt. "Researchers: Distraction Aside, Teens Need More Driver Training." Thecarconnection.com. High Gear Media, 11 Apr. 2011. Web. 04 Jan. 2012.

Mahlum, Fairley. "Teens Not Exposed to Diverse Driving Experience Prior to Licensing, Finds AAA Foundation Study."

Mitchell, Steven. "How to Lower Car Insurance Premiums." EHow. Demand Media, 05 June 2008. Web. 17 Feb. 2012.

Newcomb, Doug. "The Staggering Cost of Teen Driving." MSN Autos. Web. 19 Feb. 2012.

O'Donnell, Jayne. "Finding Driver's Ed Programs That Really Work." Edmunds. Edmunds Inc., 5 May 2009. Web. 17 Feb. 2012.

"The Program." Driver's Edge. Driver's Edge. Web. 17 Feb. 2012.

Savage, Melissa. "Teen Driver Tune-Up." State Legislatures Vol. 35 No. 8. Sep 2009: 20-21. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Jan 2012.

Shellenbarger, Sue. "Why Teen Drivers Are Dangerous - The Juggle - WSJ." WSJ Blogs - WSJ. Wall Street Journal, 14 Feb. 2011. Web. 05 Feb. 2012.

Silk Carty, Sharon. "Teen Driving: Think Driving Schools Make Safe Drivers? Think Again."Aol Autos. America Online, 14 Sept. 2011. Web. 17 Feb. 2012.

Smith, Shane. "Are Urban Roads Safer than County Roads?" The Law Offices of Shane Smith. Shane Smith Law, 8 Apr. 2011. Web. 17 Feb. 2012.

J. Drew Silvers > 80CobraKid 01/13/2014 at 21:00

1

Like I said in another comment, the amount of younger people supporting this idea is astounding to me. By the way, your paper turned out really well and I hope you were given a high mark. Everything was clear and to the point and I can tell you actually did research it and didn't just pull facts off of a screen. I'm impressed.

80CobraKid > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 21:04

0

Thanks, took a few days and a college grad (sister) helping me to write it. got a 98% on it, so I was pretty damn happy.

I look at how many utterly useless people my age that are driving and it just makes me sad. In MN, if you are over 18, there is no need for behind-the-wheel classes or another person in your car (and who's gonna know the difference?) and after 6 months on a permit, you can get a full license.

J. Drew Silvers > 80CobraKid 01/13/2014 at 21:21

0

It's not that different in Georgia. If you are over 18, you can take the permit test, pass it, get back in line, and take the road test as far as I know. It was that was in the past, at least.

That 19 year old kid I mentioned in my post was an employee of mine. He drank himself silly one night, drove back to his subdivision, hopped the curb, over the sidewalk, over the shrubbery, and crashed his truck through the massive stacked stone sign out front. He somehow backed it out, drove it home, and the cop followed the dirt clumps from his tires all the way to his house. Brilliant...

80CobraKid > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 21:30

0

Good god. I know a girl who has to sit on phonebooks to drive, and is the most inattentive person in the world. My friend works with her and she gave him a ride to work (he usually drives her) and he thought he was going to die. This shouldn't happen. EVER. I liked the intro Top Gear made for the Finland segment (damn, video missed that part):

jvirgs drives a Subaru > J. Drew Silvers 01/13/2014 at 21:35

1

Great article! My 90 yr-old grandfather still drives and its scares the shit out of me having been in the car with him a few times. He is also too stubborn to realize he should stop driving. As for the younger crowd, there were people I went to high school with that should not have gotten their licenses when they did. I drove pretty much every time we went somewhere for the 10 months I had my permit. This was long enough for me but for some, they could have used a longer practice period. Those kids were also the ones who's parents bought them fancy new cars the second they got their licenses while mine were smart and gave me a beater that i needed to earn the privilege of driving and to learn to respect the power of the I was now in control of.

J. Drew Silvers > jvirgs drives a Subaru 01/13/2014 at 22:33

0

*Edit: Thanks for the compliment! Share it.*

I'm sure it's a tough reality for older people to give up driving. Apparently my other grandfather put up a decent fight when my dad and uncle took his license. As for the first car thing, mine was a '66 Mustang. Spoiled? Nope. My dad bought it when he was 17 years old, and it sat in a nasty barn for about twenty years before I acquired it. I started working retail at 15 years old and put every paycheck I earned into that car. It's sitting in my garage right now.

J. Drew Silvers > Fookin' Prawns 01/14/2014 at 00:01

0

You taking the discretionary blame actually made me laugh. Well done.

J. Drew Silvers > TheOnelectronic 01/14/2014 at 00:07

0

Nice counter topic. I agree it would take massive effort and may shut some people out, but eventually it would standardize most likely. I'm not a "more government/regulation" type at all, but lives potentially saved does equate to a bit more than being economically fair. They taught driving courses as a high school elective back in the day. Maybe there is a possibility in that realm.

J. Drew Silvers > camaroboy68ss 01/14/2014 at 00:13

0

I think that's where we are now. My parents and all of their friends took driver's ed in high school and then they dropped the course sometime between then and now. Most parents don't care because if the kid can drive, they're out of the house.

TheOnelectronic > J. Drew Silvers 01/14/2014 at 00:39

1

Or give provisional "work" licenses, like they already do for certain people below 16.

camaroboy68ss > J. Drew Silvers 01/14/2014 at 01:07

0

Yeah that's about how it is now. my high school didn't have any drivers ed classes to take so it was up to you or parents to enroll you in a private course. by some of those are not much better than a parent.

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > J. Drew Silvers 01/15/2014 at 08:04

1

The lax driving test and of subsequent re-test really is worrying. Most ly due to the all the baby boomers. Many of out grand and great grand parents drove, but the baby boomers grew up in the suburbs, "got a car at 16" and telling them their no longer fit to drive is going to be an ever harder thing to force.

McLarry > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 19:25

1

This is a great writeup, thanks for sharing. It awakens this inner conflict in me, because on the one hand I have this notion that driving is easy. It's intuitive, you watch your parents do it for hours as you grow up such that by the time you take the wheel you know exactly what to do, almost without training. ( Clarkson says it better , of course) On the other hand, there's the fact that a lot of people are really bad at it. I remember around the time that I got my license some of my friends would joke around about how many times they failed and when they could retake it and I was almost shocked. How can so many people suck so badly at something that's so easy? I suppose it was around this time that I really began to catch on to the fact I was becoming a petrolhead...Driving interested me, so I payed attention and practiced because I sincerely wanted to be good at it. This really seems to be the defining characteristic sometimes...Do you like driving? Does it interest you, or do you find yourself looking for distraction? This strikes me as a stupid question, but the more I think about it the more it seems many people welcome the distraction over the act of driving (eg I know several people who use commutes as a convenient time to make phone calls and catch up with friends...good use of time, sure, but not a great time to purposely distract yourself).

This is all pretty fragmented in my mind, but just thought I'd share some thoughts. Also I fat-fingered the 'publish' button like halfway through, so sorry if you read it when it made even less sense.

J. Drew Silvers > McLarry 01/23/2014 at 20:30

1

I like your perspective. Ambience is one thing when driving, distraction is entirely different. If someone needs a distraction they shouldn't be driving. Driving in heightened emotion is on the same cheque.

Thanks for your words, and for reading!

 TT > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 20:40

0

This brings back memories

Conan > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 21:04

1

I feel like you catch the duality of it. As an educator I see that most seniors in the high school I teach at only have two required credits (Government and English) to complete before they are awarded a diploma. Most of them should have an internship or college credits to take to fill up those holes, but a year long driver's education course might go a long way to more fully begin to prepare them for what they encounter on the road. Along with the whole "offer more practical life skills in school" I feel like advanced driving/off road safety classes might be courses that could save lives in the future as well as lead to more enthusiasts in new generations. From the other end I wonder if states ought to reduce driver's test time for the elderly. Even though my grandpa voluntarily surrendered his driver's license conditions can change a whole lot in eight years and I know that's the common standard.

sammon287 > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 21:21

1

I decided a few hours ago, before reading this, to try to set a better example for my two sons (7 and 9). Specifically, I have to stop doing e-brake slides into the driveway when we come home. During a discussion about driving with the nine year old, he listed that as my signature move. I did my last one tonight. Quitting cold turkey might be hard. I really shouldn't have chirped the tires going into 4th gear trying to make it to a kid movie on time the other day. At least I have three stick shift vehicles. I don't know how I made it through my teenage years hooning a 79 Mk. 1 Fiesta and a 84 E-150 Clubwagon.

Jimmy Joe Meeker > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 21:52

0

Being this is some 10 days old as I first see it I typically would not respond. But I am so tired of this 'driving is a privilege' mantra that I must respond.

Privileges are the ability to do something granted by an authority.
The authority, the grantor of the privilege may demand anything it wants in exchange for that grant.

Are we free people? Do we have rights? Do we own ourselves?

If the answer is 'yes', then we don't have an authority that grants us privileges. Because if we have an authority that grants us privileges, we aren't and we don't.

Progressively government has used driving, new to the 20th century, to get a power over our right to travel. It tells people driving is a privilege it grants. That's a lie. The history of road use, of transportation, of licensing and how it started tells us that. Even the structure of the laws is still largely avoids this concept of government granted privilege. Although that's changing. Governments are tying things unrelated to driving to driver's licensing.

Now I agree that driving knowledge and abilities such that a dead cat could get license are bad. But that's what governments do, they foster the mediocre. I agree there are a lot of people who are irresponsible asshats. They've hit my cars. But who fosters this behavior? Where does it come from? It's a result of the very managers, the would be grantors of privilege.

We lack a culture of responsibility. Government teaches people that there are "accidents", not collisions. Accidents just happen. They are like the weather. Collisions happened because something was done wrong or went wrong or broke. Real accidents are rare. I've had a few collisions but only one accident... and even then that's probably a stretch because the tire was blown out by some debris, debris that was probably there because someone irresponsibly had it fall from their vehicle.

Government teaches us that we have to go slow to avoid the other guy, so what do people do? They become the other guy. After all, everyone else should avoid them. A few of these I've missed I got to talk to. You know they told me? I was going too fast. My usual vehicle when I get to talk to them? A bicycle.

I'm trying to be brief, I've written this subject in the past and this is not my best effort.

The guy who turned left in front you? I missed hitting that asshat's cousin. But his cousin is a cop. A cop who did u-turn and came screaming after at me to pull me over and scream at me. He's why I usually run video when I drive now. He's employed by the government to tell us driving is a privilege and write us tickets... he turned left in front of me with his cell phone glued to his ear. He was the second guy in a line to do it. But he's the agent of the grantor. Privilege? Do we really want that?

What we want is a culture of responsibility and competence. That doesn't come through government. It comes through us. When we stop having government do things. When we stop dumbing things down and demand more from ourselves. When we don't want government to treat our neighbors (but not ourselves) as children. Because so long as we are children of the government, granted privilege, then what we have now is what we get.

Treat people like irresponsible children, you largely get people who behave like that. They don't develop competence. That's hard work. They don't develop responsibility, that's difficult. They don't develop respect for other people's property. They take advantage of the conditions to do as little as possible.

The problems being complained about are because we ended up with a parental privilege type system instead of one of personal responsibility.

J. Drew Silvers > Conan 01/23/2014 at 22:02

0

That's a great perspective from someone who works with students and can see their characters on a daily basis. A person's dimeanor usually has a connection to their driving habits from what I see. If driving is standard in America, education requirements to drive should be as well.

J. Drew Silvers > sammon287 01/23/2014 at 22:03

0

Oh, good lord...Haha

J. Drew Silvers > Jimmy Joe Meeker 01/23/2014 at 22:14

0

I'll stay out of the deep end of this because I don't talk about politics online, but I see it as a privilige because the local, county, or state governments build and maintain roads we can actually drive on. We pay taxes in our cities and counties or States we live in, but not for every road we travel on. Local governments pay for the roads, so I have no problem with them requiring more rigorous education than we have now to utilize them. That isn't saying to write new laws, because new laws never fix anything. That is saying to test more stringently and weed out the people who shouldn't even be driving.

Now, I don't want the government controlling anyone or even attempting such. I hate it when people are dependent on government. I like it when governments try to protect their investment in the same way I like it when businesses and individuals do the same.

I'm out though. That's as far as I'm going. Thanks for your input!

caddyak > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 22:29

1

It's not just driving. It's the whole hyper-individualism prominent in American society. Most of this comes down to parents actually teaching kids how to drive (or not teaching them). We want as little government interference as possible because we can do it better ourselves. So keep your hands out of my kid's driving education/pants, Uncle Sam!

I fortunately grew up in a family of gearheads. My mom's dad blessed her and her brothers with all types of fast, dangerous toys when they were young and her first car was a manual '68 Cougar V8 with rusted out floorboards (her brothers had a Barracuda of some sort and an Impala 409. All beaters, but fast. They were poor). My dad's first car was a used Porsche 914-6 he went half in on with his dad.

Anyway, they started teaching us to drive up and down our 2 mile winding, uphill driveway when we were about 12. I remember my mom making me spin out the family Montana van in an empty parking lot, in an attempt to show me what happens when its snowing.

From the day any of us turned 15 (when you can get a learner's permit in Indiana), our parents never drove. It was always us kids driving, so we got as much wheel time under their supervision as possible. In snow, ice, rain, fog. In the minivan, Hummer, GTI, Porsche. They wanted to make sure we knew how to handle all types of cars and conditions.

Most parents aren't this patient. They're too scared to let their kids drive while they have permits more than they absolutely have to. Then they give them a Focus once they've learned to stop on red and use signals (maybe). And that kid becomes an adult who can't control a vehicle any more than stopping on red and using signals (maybe). That adult then becomes a shitty teacher for his kids.

Meanwhile in Germany, it takes about 2 years of intense schooling to get a license. My German friend got his license in America while he was studying here, since it was so much cheaper and easier, and it would work in Germany. But his insurance was through the roof, because they know just how substandard our insurance is. So he had to go to German driving school.

monkeyracing > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 22:57

1

A few thoughts:

- The last time I rode in a car with my dad was 10 years ago, when he was still in his 60's. It was terrifying then and I can't believe he still has a license now.

- I'm not sure any amount of testing will weed out the terrible drivers. TV programs like (name a country) Worst Driver started in Europe, where testing standards are much higher in general.

- People that park in handicapped spaces are assholes. Just thought I'd throw that in. I'm disabled and just got home from a restaurant where the one handicapped space was filled by an able bodied employee.

- No one is as good a driver as I am, and I'm not even allowed to drive anymore.

- 28? In twenty years, you'll look back and wonder why they let a 28 year old dumbass have a driving license.

Chester77 > J. Drew Silvers 01/23/2014 at 23:00

0

I like your Z28. I've had 2 3rd gens (84, 91) and 2 4th gens (01, 02). When I was a teenager I had a car very similar to yours hanging on the wall of my bedroom (while I drove my 84 5.0 H.O. 190 hp!).

Driving is not a right but a requirement if you don't live in a major city. That is probably why Georgia let those people drive with work permits.

People need to work. Families depend on working parents to pay bills. I understand that if penalties were more strict people might consider not getting behind the wheel after they consumed a mind altering substance... but they wouldn't. Anyone who drinks and drives (or smokes and drives) thinks what they need to do at the moment is more important than ensuring the safety of anyone on the road (including themselves).

The Georgia legal system probably does not want to punish hungry children because mommy or daddy is a loser OR more likely if you can't drive then you can't pay your taxes. I'm not saying I agree with it but that's probably what it comes down to.

People working is more important than people acting responsibly.

J. Drew Silvers > caddyak 01/23/2014 at 23:04

0

I like that assessment. I grew up in a family of "survival" gearheads who learned to fix cars because they couldn't afford to take them to a shop. They did it because they had to and passed it down to me. It became something I'm good at and enjoy. Now I fix their stuff even if the can now afford the shop bills. Everyone doesn't need to be a gearhead, but everyone driving a car needs their skills accounted for and kept up to date.

J. Drew Silvers > monkeyracing 01/23/2014 at 23:10

1

Agree with everything - but in two decades we'll be sitting in a self-driving iCar which follows an iMap. This is the car you plug in at night, comes equipped with a fully functional iEntertainment system, has no windows, and includes an iToilet where you can take an iCrap on the highway at 65mph.

bobrayner > duurtlang 01/23/2014 at 23:19

0

Why does the Netherlands include a hillstart as part of the test? :-)

J. Drew Silvers > Chester77 01/23/2014 at 23:21

0

Thanks, I liked it too. :)

Punish the kids? No. But there is so much more to that equation that could be done. If a parent is stupid enough to drive intoxicated, they should be investigated to find out if they are fit to be parents. Foster systems are terrible, I know, but that's a choice they make as parents. My parents knew better.

As far as GA goes, I live in Metro Atlanta and so does the majority of the state. We have transit, but people in the suburbs refuse to use it for some reason. Yeah, there are rural areas, but I still stand behind what I said. If you can't control what decisions you make when you drink, you should stop drinking.

By the way: My name is Drew, I'll be 28 in two weeks. I have been in sober recovery for fifteen months now. I am an alcoholic. I have never had a DUI.

Bansheeisacomin > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 00:25

1

In British Columbia, it's a written test to get your L(need full license driver over 25 with you) which you have for a year. Then a 45min road test for your N(can drive alone, only one non-family passenger) which you have for 2 years. Finally, and 1h road test for the full license.

evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) > 80CobraKid 01/24/2014 at 00:37

0

I live in Connecticut and there are still TONS of unfit drivers. My driving test was a trip around the block and one exit to the next on the highway (which is apparently uncommon). No parallel parking either.

Jimmy Joe Meeker > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 00:39

1

But you are discussing, or at least writing about politics online with the article above. There isn't much to write about beyond competition and car road tests/reviews auto wise that doesn't involve it. Driving is very political because government has involved itself in or interfered with practically every facet of it. It is from driving topics that I got sucked into learning about the political world.

Technically speaking, in a free society, government would be an institution that manages the roads for the actual owners, the people. The institution of government would not own the roads. That is if this were a free country for the people by the people and all that jazz.

We would all have the right to use the public way in a manner we saw fit provided we did not damage it and followed some basic rules not to interfere with other users. If we caused harm we would be responsible. Government would be mere managers, referees so speak. Not grantors of privilege. Notice they are expanding that granting power with reserving road spaces for certain users and the like BTW.

Now there is a quite a lot written on how to have private roads and competition and such. But that's a lot to go into.

As to government controlling, the power to grant privilege always comes with control. That was main thing I wanted to express.

evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 00:55

1

I'm 20, and I've been driving for nearly 3 years now. I agree on all counts with what you've said, as well as the wonderful suggestions other have made in the comments. Now, I'd be lying if I said I haven't made some dumb moves before, but I do think more rigorous testing and education could have prevented those. Last year, I took the Tire Rack Street Survival Course (mostly because it was cheaper than autocross but a similar experience) and I highly recommend it. Most of the kids there had just gotten their licenses or permits and only went because their parents made them. Several of them drove large SUVs (Highlander, Mountaineer) which is another problem. But it was great to get a feel for your car's capabilities and limits, especially on the wet skidpad. This should be a required part of driver training, because right now most drivers learn where their car's limits are as they're careening to certain death.

I also want to emphasize others' comments on parents passing down bad habits.

There are so many problems with American drivers and no real change in sight. I'm starting to doubt that I'll let my future kids drive at all unless I move to a country with responsible drivers.

J. Drew Silvers > evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) 01/24/2014 at 01:01

0

Very nice. I didn't even know that existed, but I should look into it. Like I said in a few other places, younger drivers are stepping up and saying they're unprepared. That is saying something big. We don't need new laws, just realistic training requirements and to realize some peopld just shouldn't ever drive.

SquirrelyWrath > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 01:14

0

Bad drivers all over the world chief. It's not just the US. Try driving in Sao Paulo or Mumbai or Beijing. You will long for the safe predictable snarl of LA or NYC or Atlanta.

duurtlang > bobrayner 01/24/2014 at 01:37

1

Dikes. There are dikes everywhere, and you'll have to deal with their curvy nature.

J. Drew Silvers > SquirrelyWrath 01/24/2014 at 01:43

0

The difference being I don't live and pay any sort of road taxes there.

SquirrelyWrath > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 01:57

0

The difference is, I'm guessing, that you have never been outside of the US and thus your world view is centered on your country, state, town, neighborhood, which translates into broad statements like "The entitled nature of American drivers" which comes off as a bit myopic. Are American drivers bad? Compared to whom? Had you ever ridden a cab in Hanoi or Colombo you may not think so. Which is the point I was trying to make. America may not be the best by a long shot. And yes SOME people in the US are entitled and arrogant. But nether is it the worst. The problem with cynicism is that though it feels good at the time to say, it never holds up under scrutiny.

CSphotography > Jimmy Joe Meeker 01/24/2014 at 02:19

0

I find it counterintuitive to blame a lack of personal responsibility amongst the people on the government...perhaps we (and our culture) are the ones responsible, if you will, for that lack of responsibility. I don't think you can make a case that the government breeds bad drivers; I think you can make the case that we breed bad drivers, and the government throws a series of useless tests at those bad drivers that keeps them bad drivers. But ultimately, this problem lies with the people.

E30Kid > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 02:50

0

At 11 seconds in.

monkeyracing > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 03:56

0

Well, at least I won't have to rely on people to chauffeur me about then.

Saf1 > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 07:54

1

Your penultimate sentence was fantastic. Just like your article bro!

J. Drew Silvers > Saf1 01/24/2014 at 09:47

1

Thank you!

J. Drew Silvers > SquirrelyWrath 01/24/2014 at 09:55

0

Yes, I have been outside the US. Making assumptions is fun, huh?

American drivers are bad because they don't have enough training, period. We have so many more resources than many other countries do, but we do not invest enough into educating our drivers. I didn't say Americans were the worst drivers. I compared them to countries which train BETTER drivers.

Casper > J. Drew Silvers 01/24/2014 at 11:12

0

The reality is that the DMV is there to collect money, safety is an after thought. The education system is there to collect money and push agendas, not teach. Most of the road regulations are there to collect money and empower police, not maintain safety. Combine all this with a horribly flawed idea that safety somehow relates to simply obeying rules, and you have this nightmare driving system that we are currently suffering through.

At the end of the day the problem is that the government and systems and failed parents that create these attitudes. They enforce that being completely terrible as a driver is ok so long as you pay your fees and drive x miles and hour most of the time a cop sees you. They protect the stupid and incapable by lowering requirements to meet the lowest common denominator.

I also hate the "maturity" idea. I know people in their 30's that aren't mature enough to handle a butter knife, let alone a car. The reality is that there is no benchmark to use, so it needs to be based on your actions. I was more mature than 20 year olds when I was a teenager, and am still mistaken for being much older than I am... simply because of my personality. Pretending that at x age someone is ready or not is just idiotic. Children as young as 6 can run farms and preteens have run nation states, it's all about the expectations they are raised with.

Jimmy Joe Meeker > CSphotography 01/24/2014 at 16:38

0

The overall way society is today, where people are more less like dumb ignorant, irresponsible children was a creation done over about a 150 years. This space does not allow for all the history required. I can recommend reading books/articles etc by John Taylor Gatto on schooling. It's a good place to start on how people who want to shape society for their own benefit have used government and other institutions do so.

There are fictional works to that deal with the progression of such things as well.

American society has gone from having institutions to serve it to being shaped and controlled by those who run those institutions. That's why we now have a "privilege" to drive. It's a reshaping of thought, of the language, of the society.

Irresponsible people need to be controlled. Responsible people don't. Who benefits from the former?

CSphotography > Jimmy Joe Meeker 01/24/2014 at 16:46

0

Well, your last sentence barks up a much larger tree. The question of government intervention in issues of personal responsibility is touchy. I want the police to arrest a criminal who carries a gun to cause trouble, but I don't want the police to arrest a hunter who carries a gun to feed his family. If the hunter's livelihood must suffer so the criminal is prevented from carrying a gun, is that worth it?

Here in New York, we have the much more urban form of this question: stop and frisk. Should New Yorkers of color have to get used to being stopped and frisked by police officers because there are statistically more black and Latino criminals in the city than there are white criminals? Personally, I think the answer is a firm no for a variety of reasons, starting with the blank unconstitutionality. It's a tangent, but it's all the same debate here.

Back to driving: I agree that is is a shame that driving, one of man's great freedoms, is now a privilege. But, at the same time, I think the alternative, in our society of drunk drivers, careless drivers, etc., is a much more grim prospect.

Jimmy Joe Meeker > CSphotography 01/24/2014 at 19:44

0

There is no just having laws for bad people. Those with power will always eventually exploit them against everyone but themselves.

Driving is not a privilege. People believe it is. That belief was deliberately created.

Cormac > J. Drew Silvers 01/25/2014 at 15:57

0

I immediately thought of this as Jeremy's response to Murica