<p>Could it be that the teen years are just too young for a drivers license? It might sound crazy but wouldn’t there be much fewer accidents if there were fewer teenage drivers? The same could be said for drivers that are too old as well. Maybe we make it too easy for people to get a drivers license. If it was tougher and more rigorous to keep the license then people might take it more seriously.</p>
<p>It is horrible to think about all the kids who text and then die at the wheel. What is even worse is to consider all of the others that are injured or killed because of those same individuals. It is sheer stupidity and a complete disregard for others to text and drive. How is it any different from drinking and driving? </p>
<p>There are so many ways that people can get distracted on the road. Commuting is boring, especially if it is a four hour commute. That is certainly something to think about for any parent that thinks it would be better for a kid to live so far away from school and having to drive regularly. The thought of how difficult it is to drive that much, that often is something that should be part of the equation when the ideas of college and all of it’s repercussions/possibilities are being considered…</p>
<p>Yes, but advise her that this really happened (to my son, in Los Angeles): Before he initiated a phone call, he pulled off the road, parked in a mini-mall parking space, and put his car gear into “Park.” THEN he began to phone. However – he left his engine running. </p>
<p>A policeman leaving the mall store observed him with engine running and phone to his ear, walked over to the car, had him roll down the window and gave him a Big Ticket.</p>
<p>What your D did was great, just tell her to be sure to turn off the engine.</p>
Did he try to fight that ticket? I think there’s a good chance he’d have beat that one.</p>
<p>Regardless, the cop was being a (*insert adjective here) to do that to your S. In the time he spent doing that there were probably dozens of drivers actually driving past them with the phone to their ear while driving.</p>
<p>S has a gift of gab as well as diplomatic skills. As he described it, he tried to engage the officer before the ticket began. He showed him the gear in Park, described what he was doing, and so on. </p>
<p>Fact is, in L.A. our son – like a lot of young men – is in the target demographic where policemen want to make a point. </p>
<p>We discussed his going to fight it in court, but the time to go to court, not earn the hourly salary in his dayjob, and possibly lose made him decide not to fight it, but just pay it. </p>
<p>These things bother me because I know how many hours he had to work to earn back that sum.</p>
<p>Are people crazy or what? What happened to both hands on the steering wheel while driving? Texting and driving don’t mix just like drinking and driving don’t mix. It should be illegal in every state.</p>
<p>Very sad for her family. Thankfully, she didn’t hurt anyone else. Hard to feel for someone who knew she was risking her life and bragged about it. But kids do stupid things all the time. Some manage to escape unscathed – others don’t. My sons don’t text much thankfully and it is already illegal in our state for teens to be using phones while driving.</p>
<p>Joblue, the IIHS cites the national 55 MPH speed limit as THE reason for a decline in road fatalities with which it coincided. There’s no reason, unfortunately, to believe that that’s true. This study is very interesting; it reports the results of a study done in Montana that documented the effects of the removal of the National-55 law. [Safety</a> & Setting Speed Limits | NMA](<a href=“http://www.motorists.org/speed-limits/safety-setting-limits]Safety”>http://www.motorists.org/speed-limits/safety-setting-limits)</p>
<p>The issue with attributing increased fatalities to speed or travel is that the methods for measuring the total number of miles driven are very hit-or-miss. In reality, attributing increased deaths (not death RATES; the only percentages you’ll see in those studies are how much fatalities climbed or fell from year to year) to this or that is much less simple and reliable than the IIHS would have you believe.</p>
<p>So, yes, I believe speeders are demonized quite enough.</p>
<p>Gourmetmom, your patronizingly arrogant tone does you no favors. Actually, that sounds an awful lot like something one of these “infallible” teens would say to their flawless elders. And, yes, I do think that cramming hundreds or thousands of teens into a large room with no way to communicate out in the event of an emergency (save for inconveniently-placed landlines and always-reliable smoke signals) could POSSIBLY be somewhat dangerous, in some circumstances.</p>
<p>I’m not sure what I said that was so threatening to society, LasMa. Feel free to explain, though; I just didn’t understand how talking to others or texting while driving (both of which are poor choices and foolish, especially the latter) makes one a narcissist.</p>
<p>For the number of people that have responded negatively to my (admittedly contrarian) post, I’m quite surprised at how few people have even contested Izanagi. I mean, you may not feel a ton of sympathy for someone who was killed while doing something so dangerous (I feel bad for the family, but not necessarily the girl), but it’s hardly appropriate to post positively about a tragedy.</p>
<p>That’s an interesting study, Erin’s dad. I thought it was intriguing that in the 55-to-65 switch, fatalities initially went up, and then down. Is this, an initial spike followed by decreasing fatalities, a pattern? And to what limit would it apply? Also, I can’t help but doubt that a 5 MPH difference in speed limits made such a large difference in fatalities. Really, on Iowan interstates, I (anecdotally, of course) see people drive between 3 and 8 MPH above the limit as it is, and I am not bereft of samples; I live in Eastern Iowa and have all my life. What I mean by all this is that I don’t know that one should accept these figures to be causal without something of a grain of salt.</p>
<p>I do think the way Izanagi phrased it was a bit calloused, but the fact remains that this young woman was old enough to know better, clearly knew better as evidenced by her post, and selfishly risked the lives of other people on the road anyway. I feel for her family and I understand there is a physiological fact that teens’ prefrontal cortex aren’t fully developed. And this causes them to sometimes make risky choices. In that sense I have sympathy for her.</p>
<p>Is it narcissiistic ? Well that is a psychological condition. So, I can’t say that. But it is a bit self-centered IMO to be tethered at all times to a phone or other gadget. The world got along fine without them and this constant need to be in touch with people at all times is a bit much. I’m sure if there were an emergency in the gym, students would follow standard evacuation procedures and I’m sure an adult in charge could call for help. The priority would be to get everyone out and having people scrambling on their phones only slows that down.</p>
<p>Are phones nice to have in an emergency? Sure. But, other than that, people really need to give it a rest. Something at Tim Russert’s eulogy always stayed with me. He always carried a rosary, but didn’t carry a cell phone.</p>
<p>hkobb, what I meant was that if you think that speeding and passing on the right are “acts of necessity,” then you are an unsafe driver and I don’t want to be sharing the road with you.</p>
<p>Speeding isn’t always a necessity, this is true, but passing on the right is (even though it’s illegal) if slow drivers don’t vacate the left lane on an interstate. Passing on the shoulder or on a residential street is sloppy and dumb. All I was going for was that illegal acts aren’t necessarily acts of narcissism.</p>
<p>Okay, LegacyMom fair enough. I just wanted to make sure I didn’t come across as a “NO PHONE ALLOWED? WAR CRIME” type of person.</p>