My friends drive a lot better than most drivers on the road, because they haven't had years to decide not to bother indicating when it's needed and not checking mirrors all the time. I agree, you do get boy racer types that drive recklessly and speed, but that isn't what the majority of young drivers are like. TBH, I'd say with the exception of old people, it's pretty hard to stereotype one age/gender as being bad drivers. Some people are just cunts and need to be taken off the roads.lowing wrote:
What do you mean change peoples minds and behaviors? Teenage drivers are the most irresponsible drivers on the road. Their only hope is to survive teenage years to become an adult without killing themselves their friends or strangers.TSI wrote:
You can change people's minds and behaviours. You can't rectify physical/mental deficiencies. Clearly this accident was a result of the latter.lowing wrote:
Shall we add old people to the list of the deaths caused by stupidity along side all of the stupid teenager caused deaths and drunk drivers of all ages deaths?
Not many people left to drive.
My Grandmother stopped driving after she pulled out into traffic and was T-Boned. She said she looked and never saw the car. She died from brain cancer a few months later.too_money2007 wrote:
Ken, I think about my grandmother too. She shouldn't be driving either and she does.
Driving is serious bussiness and I find age related problems for accidents more acceptable than the Judgement based accidents from the teen that takes out a family racing his 135hp ford focus through town at 70 mph.
I agree, except you are saying old people should not drive and even saying that at 65 you should be done. Well I am willing to bet more people are killed by 20 year olds than 65 year olds. So how about we start a policy where you can not drive until you are 27 years old and have to give it up at 65? That way everyone is "saved".TSI wrote:
I don't deny that teenagers are the most irresponsible drivers. However, in order to become better drivers, they must change their attitudes and midsets about driving. Lowing, case in point is the fact that you yourself stated that they become better drivers once they are adults; that they have "survived". Thus, that demonstrates that clearly one can change said mindsets and behaviours. I think you're just circling around here.lowing wrote:
What do you mean change peoples minds and behaviors? Teenage drivers are the most irresponsible drivers on the road. Their only hope is to survive teenage years to become an adult without killing themselves their friends or strangers.TSI wrote:
You can change people's minds and behaviours. You can't rectify physical/mental deficiencies. Clearly this accident was a result of the latter.
That being said, of course, I stand by my assertion that you cannot rectify physical deficiencies, even if the woman had a vedetta against the doctor and didn't actually have a problem (which I doubt).
RIP mate, old people suck at driving period. For all the people saying young people cant drive, ive been driving for 2 years now (19) and ive had 2 accidents both where i was NOT in the car and some old diddy has drove into my car at work and drove off. Used to work in a supermarket so it was in the car park.
Reason i know they were old was i looked at the cameras and got them prosecuted seems 50+ seems to think if its dark and you crash no one can see.
Reason i know they were old was i looked at the cameras and got them prosecuted seems 50+ seems to think if its dark and you crash no one can see.
You have to learn the rules of the game and then you have to play better than anyone else.
"Leading Cause of Death for Teensghettoperson wrote:
My friends drive a lot better than most drivers on the road, because they haven't had years to decide not to bother indicating when it's needed and not checking mirrors all the time. I agree, you do get boy racer types that drive recklessly and speed, but that isn't what the majority of young drivers are like. TBH, I'd say with the exception of old people, it's pretty hard to stereotype one age/gender as being bad drivers. Some people are just cunts and need to be taken off the roads.lowing wrote:
What do you mean change peoples minds and behaviors? Teenage drivers are the most irresponsible drivers on the road. Their only hope is to survive teenage years to become an adult without killing themselves their friends or strangers.TSI wrote:
You can change people's minds and behaviours. You can't rectify physical/mental deficiencies. Clearly this accident was a result of the latter.
The heart of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA's) mission is keeping families safe on America’s roadways. Young drivers, ages 15- to 20-years old, are especially vulnerable to death and injury on our roadways – traffic crashes are the leading cause of death for teenagers in America. Mile for mile, teenagers are involved in three times as many fatal crashes as all other drivers."
I won't let the facts get in the way of your beliefs.
taken from
http://nhtsa.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/temp … e=standard
bottom line is teen age drivers suck. If any age group is more likely to die or kill you it is that one. If any age group needs to be taken off of the roads it is that one for their sake, the sake of their passengers, and the sake of anyone that crosses their path.
Last edited by lowing (2009-04-29 11:41:56)
That really, really fucking sucks. Sorry to hear man. RIP.
And for the record, I've always believed that driving tests every 2-5 years (states can decide I guess) should be mandatory once people hit age 65.
And for the record, I've always believed that driving tests every 2-5 years (states can decide I guess) should be mandatory once people hit age 65.
and totally ignore the age group that I just showed is the REAL cause of highway fatalities? What about them? How about no licenses until 25?Poseidon wrote:
That really, really fucking sucks. Sorry to hear man. RIP.
And for the record, I've always believed that driving tests every 2-5 years (states can decide I guess) should be mandatory once people hit age 65.
Why would you stop people from getting their licenses until they're 25? There's a difference between TESTING people who are getting older and who's senses and reaction times are getting slower than actually taking them away from them once they hit a certain age. The OP suggested that, I did not. Where did I say that they should have their licenses taken away?lowing wrote:
and totally ignore the age group that I just showed is the REAL cause of highway fatalities? What about them? How about no licenses until 25?Poseidon wrote:
That really, really fucking sucks. Sorry to hear man. RIP.
And for the record, I've always believed that driving tests every 2-5 years (states can decide I guess) should be mandatory once people hit age 65.
Typical lowing.
never sadi you said that, I am saying it.Poseidon wrote:
Why would you stop people from getting their licenses until they're 25? There's a difference between TESTING people who are getting older and who's senses and reaction times are getting slower than actually taking them away from them once they hit a certain age. The OP suggested that, I did not. Where did I say that they should have their licenses taken away?lowing wrote:
and totally ignore the age group that I just showed is the REAL cause of highway fatalities? What about them? How about no licenses until 25?Poseidon wrote:
That really, really fucking sucks. Sorry to hear man. RIP.
And for the record, I've always believed that driving tests every 2-5 years (states can decide I guess) should be mandatory once people hit age 65.
Typical lowing.
I just showed where the REAL problem lies and the REAL safety issue lies and thast is TEEN DRIVERS. Yet you are not concerned about doing anything about them, only "old people", who statisically are not the major cause of fatalities.
If you are so concerned about the driving public why not focus your efforts on the the age group that is doing the most damage ( killing)
unless of course that is YOUR age group lol
Last edited by lowing (2009-04-29 11:54:29)
I was forgetting how young American drivers are when they start. 17/18 makes a lot more sense, 15 is just insane. But in general, a lot of teens are very responsible drivers. Just because they get into accidents that doesn't mean that they're irresponsible, or dangerous drivers, just that they aren't good enough yet. Which is why I think learning to drive at 15 (especially given what a joke American drivers test are) is far too young.lowing wrote:
"Leading Cause of Death for Teensghettoperson wrote:
My friends drive a lot better than most drivers on the road, because they haven't had years to decide not to bother indicating when it's needed and not checking mirrors all the time. I agree, you do get boy racer types that drive recklessly and speed, but that isn't what the majority of young drivers are like. TBH, I'd say with the exception of old people, it's pretty hard to stereotype one age/gender as being bad drivers. Some people are just cunts and need to be taken off the roads.lowing wrote:
What do you mean change peoples minds and behaviors? Teenage drivers are the most irresponsible drivers on the road. Their only hope is to survive teenage years to become an adult without killing themselves their friends or strangers.
The heart of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA's) mission is keeping families safe on America’s roadways. Young drivers, ages 15- to 20-years old, are especially vulnerable to death and injury on our roadways – traffic crashes are the leading cause of death for teenagers in America. Mile for mile, teenagers are involved in three times as many fatal crashes as all other drivers."
I won't let the facts get in the way of your beliefs.
taken from
http://nhtsa.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/temp … e=standard
bottom line is teen age drivers suck. If any age group is more likely to die or kill you it is that one. If any age group needs to be taken off of the roads it is that one for their sake, the sake of their passengers, and the sake of anyone that crosses their path.
Because the reason that there's so many accidents in the teenage age group is because they're learning and inexperienced. If they made the minimum driving age 30, THAT would be the group to have the most accidents. So using your ideology, let's just not let anyone drive.lowing wrote:
never sadi you said that, I am saying it.Poseidon wrote:
Why would you stop people from getting their licenses until they're 25? There's a difference between TESTING people who are getting older and who's senses and reaction times are getting slower than actually taking them away from them once they hit a certain age. The OP suggested that, I did not. Where did I say that they should have their licenses taken away?lowing wrote:
and totally ignore the age group that I just showed is the REAL cause of highway fatalities? What about them? How about no licenses until 25?
Typical lowing.
I just showed where the REAL problem lies and the REAL safety issue lies and thast is TEEN DRIVERS. Yet you are not concerned about doing anything about them, only "old people", who statisically are not the major cause of fatalities.
If you are so concerned about the driving public why not focus your efforts on the the age group that is doing the most damage ( killing)
unless of course that is YOUR age group lol
The reason behind the accident is not at issue. The dead person really does not care why he was killed. The issue still remains that a teenager is more likely to kill you on the road than an "old person". SO why not take action against the teen age driving groups in the name of public safety?ghettoperson wrote:
I was forgetting how young American drivers are when they start. 17/18 makes a lot more sense, 15 is just insane. But in general, a lot of teens are very responsible drivers. Just because they get into accidents that doesn't mean that they're irresponsible, or dangerous drivers, just that they aren't good enough yet. Which is why I think learning to drive at 15 (especially given what a joke American drivers test are) is far too young.lowing wrote:
"Leading Cause of Death for Teensghettoperson wrote:
My friends drive a lot better than most drivers on the road, because they haven't had years to decide not to bother indicating when it's needed and not checking mirrors all the time. I agree, you do get boy racer types that drive recklessly and speed, but that isn't what the majority of young drivers are like. TBH, I'd say with the exception of old people, it's pretty hard to stereotype one age/gender as being bad drivers. Some people are just cunts and need to be taken off the roads.
The heart of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA's) mission is keeping families safe on America’s roadways. Young drivers, ages 15- to 20-years old, are especially vulnerable to death and injury on our roadways – traffic crashes are the leading cause of death for teenagers in America. Mile for mile, teenagers are involved in three times as many fatal crashes as all other drivers."
I won't let the facts get in the way of your beliefs.
taken from
http://nhtsa.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/temp … e=standard
bottom line is teen age drivers suck. If any age group is more likely to die or kill you it is that one. If any age group needs to be taken off of the roads it is that one for their sake, the sake of their passengers, and the sake of anyone that crosses their path.
It is not inexperience, it is show boating, it is distractions, it is immaturity, it has nothing to do with experience maintaining the speed limit, or slowing down around curves or being cautious in bad weather.Poseidon wrote:
Because the reason that there's so many accidents in the teenage age group is because they're learning and inexperienced. If they made the minimum driving age 30, THAT would be the group to have the most accidents. So using your ideology, let's just not let anyone drive.lowing wrote:
never sadi you said that, I am saying it.Poseidon wrote:
Why would you stop people from getting their licenses until they're 25? There's a difference between TESTING people who are getting older and who's senses and reaction times are getting slower than actually taking them away from them once they hit a certain age. The OP suggested that, I did not. Where did I say that they should have their licenses taken away?
Typical lowing.
I just showed where the REAL problem lies and the REAL safety issue lies and thast is TEEN DRIVERS. Yet you are not concerned about doing anything about them, only "old people", who statisically are not the major cause of fatalities.
If you are so concerned about the driving public why not focus your efforts on the the age group that is doing the most damage ( killing)
unless of course that is YOUR age group lol
Last edited by lowing (2009-04-29 12:03:52)
Because as Poseidon pointed out, it's lack of experience that's causing them to crash. Even if you start to learn to drive at 40, you'll still lack experience, and so you'll still crash. What would solve this, would be much more stringent driving tests, so you'd have that extra experience by the time you're driving your own car, high on crystal meth, with two hookers in the car, driving at 120MPH doing a beer run, or whatever else it is kids these days get up to.
You really just don't have a clue, do you?lowing wrote:
It is not inexperience, it is show boating, it is distractions, it is immaturity, it has nothing to do with experience maintaning the speed limit, or slowing down around curves or being cautious in bad weather.Poseidon wrote:
Because the reason that there's so many accidents in the teenage age group is because they're learning and inexperienced. If they made the minimum driving age 30, THAT would be the group to have the most accidents. So using your ideology, let's just not let anyone drive.lowing wrote:
never sadi you said that, I am saying it.
I just showed where the REAL problem lies and the REAL safety issue lies and thast is TEEN DRIVERS. Yet you are not concerned about doing anything about them, only "old people", who statisically are not the major cause of fatalities.
If you are so concerned about the driving public why not focus your efforts on the the age group that is doing the most damage ( killing)
unless of course that is YOUR age group lol
So inexperience has nothing to do with it the fact that teen drivers are the worst? The fact that they only have a few months/a few years of experience has nothing to do with why they crash? Yeah, right.
And distractions don't just stop once you hit a certain age, you know.
I don't have a clue? You act as if immaturity, imortality, and just out right shitty behavior, and attitude on the road has nothing to do with teen driving stats.Poseidon wrote:
You really just don't have a clue, do you?lowing wrote:
It is not inexperience, it is show boating, it is distractions, it is immaturity, it has nothing to do with experience maintaning the speed limit, or slowing down around curves or being cautious in bad weather.Poseidon wrote:
Because the reason that there's so many accidents in the teenage age group is because they're learning and inexperienced. If they made the minimum driving age 30, THAT would be the group to have the most accidents. So using your ideology, let's just not let anyone drive.
So inexperience has nothing to do with it the fact that teen drivers are the worst? The fact that they only have a few months/a few years of experience has nothing to do with why they crash? Yeah, right.
And distractions don't just stop once you hit a certain age, you know.
How much "experience" does it really take to maintain the speed limit? How much "experience" does it take to pay attention to road signs? How much "experience" does it take to slow down around curves?
I have identified the real safety concern on the road, and you are not denying it, You simply want to give a pass to this group and take all of the old people that do not pass your test of proper driving skills out of the way.
You refuse to want to give a "test" to teen age drivers to see if they maintain proper driving skills after their initial drivers test. Why is that? Or are you content with them using the rest of us to build their "experience" level?
Lowing, at what age do you stop hating kids? 25? 35?
They/we do get a test. It's called a road test. And when they pass it they are given their license. Or were you not aware of this?lowing wrote:
You refuse to want to give a "test" to teen age drivers to see if they maintain proper driving skills after their initial drivers test. Why is that? Or are you content with them using the rest of us to build their "experience" level?
All age groups have people with shitty driving habits. They don't dissipate once you hit a certain age.
We all now know something new now - if a 20 year old and a 40 year old fly planes, the 40 year old will instantly be superior to the 20 year old even if he's had his license since he was 17 and the 40 year old got his license yesterday.
Last edited by Poseidon (2009-04-29 12:16:26)
But that's because those darned kids can't do anything right! In my day you'd be working the mines for 16 hours a day! Not drivin' around in some fancy car, fornicating with ever girl you see and smoking marijuana!Poseidon wrote:
They/we do get a test. It's called a road test. And when they pass it they are given their license. Or were you not aware of this?lowing wrote:
You refuse to want to give a "test" to teen age drivers to see if they maintain proper driving skills after their initial drivers test. Why is that? Or are you content with them using the rest of us to build their "experience" level?
All age groups have people with shitty driving habits. They don't dissipate once you hit a certain age.
We all now know something new now - if a 20 year old and a 40 year old fly planes, the 40 year old will instantly be superior to the 20 year old even if he's had his license since he was 17 and the 40 year old got his license yesterday.
Re-read I said retesting after their initial test. You want to re-test old people, why not re-test the PROVEN problem age group?Poseidon wrote:
They/we do get a test. It's called a road test. And when they pass it they are given their license. Or were you not aware of this?lowing wrote:
You refuse to want to give a "test" to teen age drivers to see if they maintain proper driving skills after their initial drivers test. Why is that? Or are you content with them using the rest of us to build their "experience" level?
All age groups have people with shitty driving habits. They don't dissipate once you hit a certain age.
We all now know something new now - if a 20 year old and a 40 year old fly planes, the 40 year old will instantly be superior to the 20 year old even if he's had his license since he was 17 and the 40 year old got his license yesterday.
Oh yeah, all we kids do is blast the darn hip hop music in our car, text on the freeway and talk on our cellular phones at the intersection.ghettoperson wrote:
But that's because those darned kids can't do anything right! In my day you'd be working the mines for 16 hours a day! Not drivin' around in some fancy car, fornicating with ever girl you see and smoking marijuana!Poseidon wrote:
They/we do get a test. It's called a road test. And when they pass it they are given their license. Or were you not aware of this?lowing wrote:
You refuse to want to give a "test" to teen age drivers to see if they maintain proper driving skills after their initial drivers test. Why is that? Or are you content with them using the rest of us to build their "experience" level?
All age groups have people with shitty driving habits. They don't dissipate once you hit a certain age.
We all now know something new now - if a 20 year old and a 40 year old fly planes, the 40 year old will instantly be superior to the 20 year old even if he's had his license since he was 17 and the 40 year old got his license yesterday.
Because they already had a recent test and their senses and reaction times aren't diminishing like older people's are.lowing wrote:
Re-read I said retesting after their initial test. You want to re-test old people, why not re-test the PROVEN problem age group?Poseidon wrote:
They/we do get a test. It's called a road test. And when they pass it they are given their license. Or were you not aware of this?lowing wrote:
You refuse to want to give a "test" to teen age drivers to see if they maintain proper driving skills after their initial drivers test. Why is that? Or are you content with them using the rest of us to build their "experience" level?
All age groups have people with shitty driving habits. They don't dissipate once you hit a certain age.
We all now know something new now - if a 20 year old and a 40 year old fly planes, the 40 year old will instantly be superior to the 20 year old even if he's had his license since he was 17 and the 40 year old got his license yesterday.
Really lowing, it's not that hard to understand.
Oh I see, so instead of arguing a point, you want to just dismiss my point as hating youth now.ghettoperson wrote:
Lowing, at what age do you stop hating kids? 25? 35?
Shoulda seen that tactic coming. Lets just add that to the list shall we?
1 you're generalizing
2 you're a racist
3 you're a bigot
4 you're a nazi
5 you're a warmonger
6 you're a war profiteer
7 you're a young people hater ...there, got it.
Yer right, sure does beat the hell outta having to come up with an argument against anything I actually say. What a relief that must be.
Last edited by lowing (2009-04-29 12:39:34)
It isn't their reaction times that are of concern, it is their habits, their attitude that is.Poseidon wrote:
Oh yeah, all we kids do is blast the darn hip hop music in our car, text on the freeway and talk on our cellular phones at the intersection.ghettoperson wrote:
But that's because those darned kids can't do anything right! In my day you'd be working the mines for 16 hours a day! Not drivin' around in some fancy car, fornicating with ever girl you see and smoking marijuana!Poseidon wrote:
They/we do get a test. It's called a road test. And when they pass it they are given their license. Or were you not aware of this?lowing wrote:
You refuse to want to give a "test" to teen age drivers to see if they maintain proper driving skills after their initial drivers test. Why is that? Or are you content with them using the rest of us to build their "experience" level?
All age groups have people with shitty driving habits. They don't dissipate once you hit a certain age.
We all now know something new now - if a 20 year old and a 40 year old fly planes, the 40 year old will instantly be superior to the 20 year old even if he's had his license since he was 17 and the 40 year old got his license yesterday.Because they already had a recent test and their senses and reaction times aren't diminishing like older people's are.lowing wrote:
Re-read I said retesting after their initial test. You want to re-test old people, why not re-test the PROVEN problem age group?Poseidon wrote:
They/we do get a test. It's called a road test. And when they pass it they are given their license. Or were you not aware of this?
All age groups have people with shitty driving habits. They don't dissipate once you hit a certain age.
We all now know something new now - if a 20 year old and a 40 year old fly planes, the 40 year old will instantly be superior to the 20 year old even if he's had his license since he was 17 and the 40 year old got his license yesterday.
Really lowing, it's not that hard to understand.
Clearly, as the stats have PROVEN IT, a teen age driver can "react" their way straight into another car pretty well. Why not re-test to make sure they have not picked up any bad habits?
Damn, like every thread that starts on this board just ends up in a shouting match. Funny shit!
lollowing wrote:
It isn't their reaction times that are of concern