Raising The Driving Age Essay

The big debate as to whether the legal driving age should be raised to eighteen is an ongoing issue. There are both arguments for and against this matter. Younger drivers, as well as old ones, can cause many life-threatening accidents; therefore, raising the minimum driving age could significantly reduce the number of accidents. The accident rates can be lowered considerably if the legal driving age is bumped up to eighteen. This would mean that no more kids could get hurt or worse, killed in a car accident.

On the counterclaim side if the driving age is raised to 18 then it will save young lives.On Average about nine teens ages 16-19 are killed everyday from car wrecks. If it's raised to 18 then there won’t be as many teens ages 16 and 17 killed in car wrecks. A lot of teens lose their lives a year do to car accidents. On average about 6,000 teenagers die a year due from car wrecks. So that's why it might be a good idea. According to( DRIVE-SAFELY.NET) “ A sixteen year old is almost twice as likely to die in a car crash then a 30 year old.”

The driving age should not be tampered with and raised to 21. Raising the driving age to 21 will introduce numerous of problems for parents and young teens that are working , social events ,and also school activities have

In the article “Raise driving age to 18 when teens are more responsible” by Alexander he talked about how roads would be a lot safer if we raised the driving age. It would give the kids s chance to learn more about driving safety and rules of the road. The issue of freedom for teens are not gone, they can easily take bus to school or have somebody older to them to school or work with no problem.

Teens need the freedom to drive so they don't have to rely on their parents.

According to the CDC "the crash rate per mile driven is 3 times higher for 16-17 year olds as compared to 18-19 year olds." Because of the high amount of accidents that happen among young teenagers many have suggested raising the driving age to eighteen rather than sixteen which is the current driving age. The main argument for raising the driving age is that sixteen-seventeen year olds are too immature to be good drivers, but maturity is not the only factor when it comes to making good decisions on the road. The legal driving age should remain at sixteen because it is experience that makes a good driver, and the freedom that comes with driving allows teeagers to become independant people.

Many people think it is a good idea to change the driving age from 16 to 18. They think it would reduce crashes and stress on parents. They also think it would help out parents that has jobs. However, I believe raising the minimum driving age from 16 to 18 is good because some people has a job, some have sports, and some people are responsible.

If the age limit were raised to the age of eighteen, it would give teenagers time to practice on driving skills and safety regulations of the road. Furthermore, if teens are given more time to practice and understand specific guidelines, it will gradually make them better drivers and help them recognize smart driving skills.

Busy parents, a busy young adult life, and mature teens are why the legal driving age should not be raised to the minimum age of eighteen. Sixteen is a traditional milestone in a teens life, why would one want to take that tradition away? All the opportunities sixteen year olds receive driving would be ruined if the driving age is changes to eighteen, which could also ruin a teens future. Driving is an American rite of passage and the system for it is fine just the way it is. Let’s keep the age sixteen sweet and leave the legal driving age

If the teenage driving age gets brought up to 18, we face two problems. One being they won’t gain experience driving. Number two, parents are going to get more pressure put on them to take their under-aged children everywhere.

Once I turned 16 years old I started learning the basic rules of the road and driving. I was learning many things without even having to get on the road before I was ready. I was taught by my parents whom which have been driving for 20 years and more with a license. I had to learn the basic fundamentals of how to be responsible for myself and others before getting on the road with other drivers. Once I got enough practice I was driving on the road with supervision until I was able to handle driving on my own. Of course I had restrictions on where I can go and what time I have to be back by. The restrictions didn’t even have to be by law it could be from parents as well. But coming from someone that has been driving for about a year now I believe the driving age should not be raised.

The driving age should be raised because the most likely ages to be involved in an accident are between sixteen and nineteen. The younger the teenager is the higher risk a person is to be in a crash. The reason for this is because of not being mature enough or not a lot of practice. “Those who are most at risk are males, teen driving with teen passengers, and newly license teens” stated National Graduated Driver Licensing. Males usually have a higher risk to be in a crash because they are not mature enough and want to show off to all the girls. They sometimes don’t like to wear seatbelts and when they get into a crash, they won’t survive the

The driving age should resume to stay at 16, because high school is the time you need to start learning how to be independent as a young adult. This teaches the young adults at an early age, really big responsibilities that they will need to learn also in the long run. There will be times that you won't have anyone to drive you to a certain place that you need to be based on circumstances. By the time you are 18, you are considered an adult by then. If you are just learning to drive, how are you suppose to be comfortable going places without being afraid to be in an accident or cause an accident, because you never drove before? Raising the driving age won't save lives. It's inexperience, not age, that causes accidents. Raising the driving

Raising the age was not an idea based on opinions. Over the years many people and organizations have recorded facts and statistics to support their claims. An example shown on CBS News, shows that “More than 5,000 U.S. teens die each year in car crashes. The rate of crashes, fatal and nonfatal, per mile driven for 16-year-old drivers is almost 10 times the rate for drivers ages 30 to 59, according to the National Highway Safety Administration” (CBS NEWS). One huge influence on the topic was the Insurance Institutes for Highway Safety, they created a seventeen page memo filled with statistics and examples of how raising the age is a necessity. This is not the first attempt to use statistics to support the appeal to raise the age. The Seattle Times states, “The example the institute uses most prominently is New Jersey, the only state with a minimum driver's license age of 17. The report cited a study from 1992-96 in which the rate of crash-related deaths among 16- and 17-year-olds was 18 per 100,000 in New Jersey, compared with 26 per 100,000 in Connecticut, which had a minimum driver's license age of 16 and 4 months” (Willette). Overall the argument that raising the age will result in less teen deaths while driving is highly justified. There are frequent examples and a huge amount of research that proves that younger drivers are more likely to cause harm or damage than an older, more experienced driver.

It is not the 15-19-year-olds that are the most dangerous on the roads; it is the 20-24-year-olds. The driver license age being raised just means that people have one year less driving experience when they hit the critical fatality ages. If the driver's license age were still 15, that would mean drivers would have at least five years extra driving experience before they enter the most dangerous age-period (20-24-year-olds) which in my opinion would make them much safer drivers. These explanations and examples show that the age increase from 15-16 to obtain your learner's licence was unnecessary as the driver's in the most vulnerable age group (20-24) are not experienced enough to be safer and therefore proves that the raise in age shouldn't have