In my state of MA (I'm not sure about other states) they're trying to pass a law that you need to be 18, not 16 1/2, to get your drivers license (sp?). While I know many 16 year olds arent very mature, we need to be able to drive to get to work and school and such. We can't rely on Mom and Dad forever to get us places.

Do you think the driving age should be moved to 18?

huh...THAT's interesting...

I don't think it's the age that matters. When people turn 21, and are handed their first legal drinks, they still go and get plastered and do stupid shit. No, what matters is the fact that they're getting something they've never had, so they test the limits. Age really isn't a factor. No, I'd say start training them sooner for a longer period of time until the thrill of driving will wear thin by the time they get their own keys...it's not the fact that they're "kids," it's the fact that they're inexperienced.

To me, it seems like my state is basically handing out drivers licenses. You turn 15 1/2 and then you're automatically allowed to drive with a parent, as long as you have you birth certificate with you; thats it, no tests, no prior driving experience needed, just a parent. Then, once you're birthday is near, you take a driver's ed course, which is nothing that difficult or extensive, which lasts about 3 weeks, 3 days a week. You then go down to the DMV, complete a little test (no parallel parking tests) where you drive around a big circle with 2 traffic lights, and you get a license. And then the state wonders why there are so many accidents.

Personally, i dont think that the driving age should be moved from 16 to 18, because i dont think that age/maturity has anything to do with it- it has to do with what they teach us. I just think that such a big responsibility as driving shouldnt be taken as lightly as it is.

Personally, i dont think that the driving age should be moved from 16 to 18, because i dont think that age/maturity has anything to do with it- it has to do with what they teach us. I just think that such a big responsibility as driving shouldnt be taken as lightly as it is.
But the thing is, many teenagers will race for fun, at crazy speeds excessively above the speed limit. That's where maturity comes in. I can understand a good time, but in a road with traffic and even not, there might be hills and sharp turns, deer, etc., and if you're flying at 80 mph in a 50 mph zone, you're an idiot and careless. Being mature means you are not that careless at least.

What they teach us...most of it is common sense, it depends what state you live in. In NC, the DMV class is pathetic, simple as that. Easy as hell to pass as long as you skim through the DMV booklet. You can start taking the class at 14 1/2 here in high school, or even middle actually...as long as you're old enough and got the connections (ie one past friend of mine's)

I think 16 is fine. Leave it there cause elsewhere it's going to be the same. At 16, people need to travel, go out and have a good time, movies, work, etc.

Personally, i dont think that the driving age should be moved from 16 to 18, because i dont think that age/maturity has anything to do with it- it has to do with what they teach us. I just think that such a big responsibility as driving shouldnt be taken as lightly as it is.Actually, age has everything to do with it. What you do as a teenager is not the same as what you do when you are 21, is it? At the age of sixteen most teenagers will not be able to grasp the maturity it takes to drive responsibly, I don't care what you say. At sixteen, you are just starting to discover your freedom, parties, and probably even alcohol. Why introduce everything at once? When our highest accident rate is 16-20 year olds (http://www.qualityplanning.com/news/030929-Older%20drivers.htm), raising the driving age could only alleviate some of the accident rates. It's not a full prove solution, but it's definetly one that I can see working for now.

And don't even bother on the "how will I get around" crap. I would say probably the same way you got around at 15 years old.. there is such a thing as public transportation. Giving a teenager the responsibility to let them find there own way to a friends house by means of public transportation, is a good stepping stone for them.

And don't even bother on the "how will I get around" crap. I would say probably the same way you got around at 15 years old.. there is such a thing as public transportation. Giving a teenager the responsibility to let them find there own way to a friends house by means of public transportation, is a good stepping stone for them.

Unfortunately about 50% of the population of the United States (and a large portion of Canada's I imagine) lives in outlying/rural areas where public transportation is totally and absolutely out of the question... locations where vehicles are required to go anywhere that must be gone to. I believe 16 to be fine, but perhaps a distinct stiffening of the curriculum in driver education classes could be implemented, along with more mandatory road time with instructors. My mandatory class was basically a joke.

Unfortunately about 50% of the population of the United States (and a large portion of Canada's I imagine) lives in outlying/rural areas where public transportation is totally and absolutely out of the question... locations where vehicles are required to go anywhere that must be gone to. I believe 16 to be fine, but perhaps a distinct stiffening of the curriculum in driver education classes could be implemented, along with more mandatory road time with instructors. My mandatory class was basically a joke.Driving classes are pointless, as that is not the issue. Implementing or even forcing driving classes does not even begin to touch the problems associated with driving at a young age. People at sixteen years old just aren't mature enough. I wouldn't trust them to vote, and I don't trust them to drive next to me. It's really that simple.

And as for poor transportation systems.. how did they get around before they turned sixteen again? I don't care where you live, I live in a smaller town that does not have a subway, skytrain, or streetcar, just regular transportation and do you know what? People really do get to where they need to go, believe or not. Where do sixteen year olds really need to go that requires a car anyways? Seriously, there are school buses and I am really not that concerned how they get to a party.. so long as it's not next to me on the road. ;)

Driving classes are pointless, as that is not the issue. Implementing or even forcing driving classes does not even begin to touch the problems associated with driving at a young age. People at sixteen years old just aren't mature enough. I wouldn't trust them to vote, and I don't trust them to drive next to me. It's really that simple.

And as for poor transportation systems.. how did they get around before they turned sixteen again? I don't care where you live, I live in a smaller town that does not have a subway, skytrain, or streetcar, just regular transportation and do you know what? People really do get to where they need to go, believe or not. Where do sixteen year olds really need to go that requires a car anyways? Seriously, there are school buses and I am really not that concerned how they get to a party.. so long as it's not next to me on the road.

Before they turned 16 they might not have had as many scattered obligations, thereby diminishing the need to move around. Jobs become a part of life when people are about that age, where they weren't before. Part of the problem exists as someone being a first time driver, no matter what the age. The ability to smoothly and effectively control a vehicle at high speeds and in traffic doesn't come with age, but with experience. An 18 year old who's never touched the wheel of a car will most likely have the same initial difficulties as a 16 year old. This was the basis for my statement about needing more road time with an instructor.

I agree that maturity is an issue between the two, but driving skill and maturity are not concretely bound together. In my state it is illegal to be found driving between the hours of 11 pm and 5 am if you are 16, and I agree with this policy, and probably you too perhaps, because there is very rarely anything "good" happening in a 16 year old's life at those hours in a setting other than home. As you stated, them going to or from their party at that time of night after they've been experimenting with alcohol or whatnot is certainly not a good thing.

Also, I really can't tell, but you come off as though you were offended or that I put you on the defensive. If I did, then I had no intention of doing so. This and the previous post are examples of me emotionlessly spouting sentences like a computer. I could also agree that I'm just not reading you right, if you say that's the case. There's no emotion here, so don't take it personally, if indeed you were.

Before they turned 16 they might not have had as many scattered obligations, thereby diminishing the need to move around. Jobs become a part of life when people are about that age, where they weren't before. Part of the problem exists as someone being a first time driver, no matter what the age. The ability to smoothly and effectively control a vehicle at high speeds and in traffic doesn't come with age, but with experience. An 18 year old who's never touched the wheel of a car will most likely have the same initial difficulties as a 16 year old. This was the basis for my statement about needing more road time with an instructor.

I agree that maturity is an issue between the two, but driving skill and maturity are not concretely bound together. In my state it is illegal to be found driving between the hours of 11 pm and 5 am if you are 16, and I agree with this policy, and probably you too perhaps, because there is very rarely anything "good" happening in a 16 year old's life at those hours in a setting other than home. As you stated, them going to or from their party at that time of night after they've been experimenting with alcohol or whatnot is certainly not a good thing.

I don't know if i should be posting anything right now, but...

The point isn't so much about the knowledge of being able to properly operate a vehicle, but rather the maturity level of the person driving it. While a 16 year old is driving with his parents, he may be very inhibited as keeping to the rules and safety of the road. However, when he is alone or with friends, he may be more tempted to "show off" or just drive reckless because he doesn't think or care about the consequences.

Of course an 18 or 21 year old can be the same way. But it's much more likely the younger a person is when, most of the time, maturity and experience in general is still developing.

As for getting around to work and stuff, I used to take the bus. Sometimes I had to walk. Yes, it was tough, and yes I didn't like it. But you do what you have to do, and having a driver's license is not a necessity.





Bah, I hope I wrote that out clearly...

I agree with you Shivercide that they'd probably like to show off more. The first post kind of makes me think it comes down to opinion here, so I'll have to go with the "don't let a few bad apples ruin it for everyone" approach. My friends and I behaved on the road at that age, but I certainly know many don't. The only thing I can think of right now though is better training and stiffer consequences. Me thinking right now though could quite possibly be an issue because it's ass o'clock in the morning and I hardly slept the previous night. Come to think of it, I've seen devices that record the lateral g-force pressures, speeds, acceleration, and braking of a vehicle, like an airplane's black box. It was designed just for parents with teenagers. They're probably expensive and not practical, but I bet it would be an incentive to drive properly knowing someone was checking up on you.

I agree with you Shivercide that they'd probably like to show off more. The first post kind of makes me think it comes down to opinion here, so I'll have to go with the "don't let a few bad apples ruin it for everyone" approach. My friends and I behaved on the road at that age, but I certainly know many don't. The only thing I can think of right now though is better training and stiffer consequences. Me thinking right now though could quite possibly be an issue because it's ass o'clock in the morning and I hardly slept the previous night. Come to think of it, I've seen devices that record the lateral g-force pressures, speeds, acceleration, and braking of a vehicle, like an airplane's black box. It was designed just for parents with teenagers. They're probably expensive and not practical, but I bet it would be an incentive to drive properly knowing someone was checking up on you.
It's many more than just a "few". It's a fact that teen drivers have the highest crash rate among any other age group (http://www.safeco.com/safeco/planning/tips/teen.asp), 16 year olds being 3 times more likely (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/DailyNews/teendriving_020327.html) than 18-19 year olds, and eight times as likely as 25 year olds.The risk goes up considerably more when friends are in the car.

Doctors say that 16 — the traditional driving age in most states — may be the worst age to give children their driver's licenses, because at that age they are often in the middle of a growth spurt in which their bodies grow faster than their central nervous system.
Not only going by statistics, but in my own experience I've lost 4 of my friends in car accidents - the first was topping 90+ speeds while weaving in and out of cars on the freeway, and eventually lost control. He wasn't wearing his seat belt and was chucked 30 ft. from the car. He was 16 at the time, old enough to know whether to wear his seatbelt and pay attention to the speed limit. The other three I was supposed to go with, but I backed out at the last second because I wasn't feeling well - turns out, the driver was speeding down a mountain road and decided it was fun to swerve into the oncoming lane around the corner for a "thrill". And I have a friend whose sister was killed by a drunken 16-year-old trying to race home from a party before curfew.

Besides all that, I've seen the way kids drive, and most I wouldn't feel safe riding with (neither then or now) or driving next to in a car.

It's many more than just a "few". It's a fact that teen drivers have the highest crash rate among any other age group (http://www.safeco.com/safeco/planning/tips/teen.asp), 16 year olds being 3 times more likely (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/DailyNews/teendriving_020327.html) than 18-19 year olds, and eight times as likely as 25 year olds.The risk goes up considerably more when friends are in the car.
Yeah, but...couldn't that be because teenagers are the least experienced drivers out there? If we raised the driving age to 18, wouldn't the highest crash rate be for the 18-22 age group, since we're merely shifting the driving age two years up, with no change in experience. I don't think it's maturity as much as experience. And for those of you who take the public transit bus system? I guarantee you that rural counties don't have bus systems. For those of you who insist that walking is an option? When you live in the city, work may be a block away, but when you live out in the country, work could be as far as 15 miles away. Walking is sometimes just not an option.

Oh, and about friend being in the car? I think that's an experience thing too. It takes experience to learn how to tune out the distractions friends present while you're driving.

<3 Mary

Hm... Interesting. I just got my learners permit on Wednesday because that was the day I turned 16. Here in NY they have this thing, which I guess is a good idea but still annoying. You get your permit after you turn 16 and then you need to take drivers ed. While taking drivers ed and while driving with a guardian you need to require 20 hours of driving experience. Then you can take a test or soemthing to get your jr liscence, which has limitations. Only one or two people under the age of either 18 or 21 ( i forget which) are allowed in the car with you and you can only drive to and from work and to school, or something like that. After having your junior liscence for 6 months, you can get a regular liscence. Although the person is still fairly young when learning to drive, it requires them to know more and have more experience before being allowed to drive on their own. Right now I need a liscenced adult who is at least 21 in the car, in the front seat, with me if I want to drive. Honestly I dont mind, because Im too scared to be in the car by myself. In fact Im afraid to put my foot on the gas pedal. Although the majority people my age may not be mature, some of us are. (Id like to think I am even though I still have my immature moments.) I take things seriously. And driving a 2 ton metal heap filled with a flammable liquid is one of them. It can be a death trap waiting to happen if used incorrectly or when mixed with something its not supposed to be (i.e a bunch of people who have been drinking alcohol.) Maybe the other states should do what NY has done and implimented this new procedure to get a liscence. I hated the idea at first but when you look at it, it does make sense, even if it means I have to wait a little longer before I can get my liscence and even if I have to do a little more work.

Y'know, this whole thing might be solved if kids were taught at an early age, and throughout their lives, to A) be responsible, and B) to have some respect...respect for the car, respect for themselves, respect for their passengers, and respect for everyone else on the road. I think in today's society, such teachings of respect and responsibility have dwindled to a minimum.

But then again, that would take a lot of changes...changes in what many parents out there teach their kids, changes in what the teachers teach their kids, and therefore what is in school curriculum, etc. My way of thinking tends to be very idealistic...and the world we live in is far from that...so I'll shut up now.

Yeah, but...couldn't that be because teenagers are the least experienced drivers out there? If we raised the driving age to 18, wouldn't the highest crash rate be for the 18-22 age group, since we're merely shifting the driving age two years up, with no change in experience. I don't think it's maturity as much as experience. And for those of you who take the public transit bus system? I guarantee you that rural counties don't have bus systems. For those of you who insist that walking is an option? When you live in the city, work may be a block away, but when you live out in the country, work could be as far as 15 miles away. Walking is sometimes just not an option.

Oh, and about friend being in the car? I think that's an experience thing too. It takes experience to learn how to tune out the distractions friends present while you're driving.

<3 Mary
I agree that lack of experience could be a factor, but anyone who is licensed is supposed to already be experienced enough to drive without being reckless, and you seem to have missed my point. Included in the links provided, it also indicates a lack of maturity in most at that age. Also, many teens use driving as a form of "rebellion". Even if it were so that it is just lack of experience, then raising the age higher will still null out the accidents that were caused by those younger than the new age.

As for the work issue, I realize this that many small towns don't have a transit system. But there are other ways of getting a ride to get to work if needed.

As far as friends in the car, it does take experience to tune out noise in the background, but again, I wasn't trying to imply this had as much to do with lack of experience as it does immaturity. Distraction would be an understatement as a reason for why so many teens get in accidents. Many tend to want to show off for their friends and are more easy to bend under peer pressure.

A licensed teenager can usually be an okay driver when they want to, and know the proper functions of a vehicle, the speed limit, rules of the road (that's what driver's ed, driving schools, and trial periods of driving before actually being licensed are usually for), not to drink and drive, and to put on their seat belts.

If you need experience to know the latter two, then something else is the issue.

To me, it seems like my state is basically handing out drivers licenses. You turn 15 1/2 and then you're automatically allowed to drive with a parent, as long as you have you birth certificate with you; thats it, no tests, no prior driving experience needed, just a parent. Then, once you're birthday is near, you take a driver's ed course, which is nothing that difficult or extensive, which lasts about 3 weeks, 3 days a week. You then go down to the DMV, complete a little test (no parallel parking tests) where you drive around a big circle with 2 traffic lights, and you get a license. And then the state wonders why there are so many accidents.

Personally, i dont think that the driving age should be moved from 16 to 18, because i dont think that age/maturity has anything to do with it- it has to do with what they teach us. I just think that such a big responsibility as driving shouldnt be taken as lightly as it is.



mm... Thats really weird and sounds unsafe. I live in NY and we can take our written test for a permit at 16, but can only drive (w/a parent) if we pass it.

Also, I really can't tell, but you come off as though you were offended or that I put you on the defensive.

No, she's just a total bitch, that's all.

I dont think it should be changed, even though when i get my car i will probably wanna drive as fast as shit, but then again, there are some older people that may like driving fast, most of the time my dad goes about 15-30 mph over the speed limit. I think it just depends on how the friver is brought up, not their age.

I say we let all the 16 year olds ride around on little go-carts till they are 22 or something, then we can try them out on the real road. It's a win-win solution, really.

No, she's just a total bitch, that's all.And you're an asshole, point?

I got my TN license after taking a computerized test (all questions are common sense) and driving around the block.

Here in Russia u can get a driving licence at 16 years old but can drive only with adults but that's not a problem if you have money :D But legally you can drive your own car only when you're 18. And to get a driving licence here isn't a problem at all too and that doesn't mean that you have to know how to drive a car or know road rules-)) again give some money (150$) and even your old half blind grandmother will get her licence :D
and guys you there have so strict rules about drinkin' only after 21! here again if you have money to buy a drink, no problem go and buy it even if you're 14 :) the same thing for smoking! of course there are some few exceptions, but anyway :p

Wow, that's hard, umm, I haven't got my licence yet, I think it should stay at 16 or whatever. I don't want to have to wait forever for my "Driving Freedom". Yet the jerks-idiots who go drink then drive, etc, make it hard for young kids to get their licence! :mad:

Wow, that's hard, umm, I haven't got my licence yet, I think it should stay at 16 or whatever. I don't want to have to wait forever for my "Driving Freedom". Yet the jerks-idiots who go drink then drive, etc, make it hard for young kids to get their licence! :mad:
Of course you probably don't want to have to wait.

But are you only basing your decision of whether or not the driving age should be upped because of the fact that you'd have to wait longer?

I hear all these ages being thrown around in this debate. . 15 1/2, 16, 18, 21 even. Maybe it should be 25? 30 perhaps? Maybe 12-14 as it used to be in many farming states where teenagers drove farm trucks and tractors on the road (these kids are some of the most responsible out there, probably).

I'm in agreement with some of the posters that it's not really a matter of age, but maturity, that should be the guide as to whether you have a license. I used to drive a car (My daily driver, BTW) that HORRIFIED the local police, because of its performance capabilities. Did I flex the right foot and use those capabilities? You bet I did!! Was it intelligent? HELL NO!! Would I have another car like that?? Hmm, I'll have get back to you on that one. :D

The thing is, people have always viewed their cars as an extension of their own ego, their freedom, and as a "Right of Passage" into the realm of adulthood. But to be perfectly honest about it, a lot of older adults (40-50's) should NOT be driving, simply because of their ineptitude behind the wheel. They've been driving for 30+ years, and still can't practice crash avoidance, do not have patience in a tight traffic situation, are always trying to "Get ahead" of the other drivers (whatever that means), or cannot hang up the damned cell phone long enough to pay attention to the road.

I have a proposal, it will never be enacted, but it would cull out BAD drivers and take licenses, or award them, based on a persons maturity, good judgement, and ability to handle stressful situations. It would require a simple 25 question mini-psych profile test, 15 minutes in a crash-avoidance simulator, and classes into stress-free driving and how to NOT use that stupid phone all the time. I'd require it every 2 years for people under age 25, every 3 from 25-50, and every year from then on, and also directly after a moving violation or accident (and YOU pay for it in the latter cases). Failure of any of the parameters would result in termination on the spot, and a 6-month cooling off period before re-applying for a license. No driving. . period.

Draconian? perhaps. Extreme? Not really when you consider the lives and money that would be saved in the long run. Fair, very much so. Would I take it? yup. Would 16-year olds think it was a good idea? I'm sure they would, since their parents and grand parents would have the same possibility of not driving. How would the "older folks" view it? It would NEVER pass, because they think they have "earned the right" to drive. They forget that every time they get behind the wheel they have to earn their safe arrival wherever they are going, and that if they make a mistake someone may die. Then you get the Grannies out there, putting along slowly, unable to react quickly, and beginning to be afflicted by loss of clear sight and hearing. . well, you KNOW how they would react (No young whippersnapper is gonna take MY car. . ). And you know what. .all those people who SHOULD be tested and then taken off the road. . well, they VOTE. Unlike 16-year olds. :)

At 16 I was a better driver than my mother who was 48. At 21 I was a much WORSE driver than she was. I'm a lot better now. :) Driving should not be a "Right of Passage" . it should be a constant reminder of our Freedoms, and how it takes responsibility and maturity to maintain those Freedoms.

Kris^
Mediocrity is doing it THEIR way.

Of course you probably don't want to have to wait.

But are you only basing your decision of whether or not the driving age should be upped because of the fact that you'd have to wait longer?

That's only part of it, It shouldn't be upped up, unless things start to change, 18 is only two years older then 16 most kids still aren't as mature at 18, my brother was more mature at 16, then he is now, at 18, he could keep a job then, but now, ha. :o

That's only part of it, It shouldn't be upped up, unless things start to change, 18 is only two years older then 16 most kids still aren't as mature at 18, my brother was more mature at 16, then he is now, at 18, he could keep a job then, but now, ha. :o
Unless what things change?

Two years may make a big difference for the majority.

But I never said it should be upped to the age of 18, now did I? :)

Unless what things change?

Two years may make a big difference for the majority.

But I never said it should be upped to the age of 18, now did I? :)

Nope :).. sure didn't.

I have a proposal, it will never be enacted, but it would cull out BAD drivers and take licenses, or award them, based on a persons maturity, good judgement, and ability to handle stressful situations. It would require a simple 25 question mini-psych profile test, 15 minutes in a crash-avoidance simulator, and classes into stress-free driving and how to NOT use that stupid phone all the time. I'd require it every 2 years for people under age 25, every 3 from 25-50, and every year from then on, and also directly after a moving violation or accident (and YOU pay for it in the latter cases). Failure of any of the parameters would result in termination on the spot, and a 6-month cooling off period before re-applying for a license. No driving. . period.

I like the idea. It'd cut out on a lot of dumb hot-headed people on the roads, and there are a good deal of those.
But of course, that's not going to cut the problem out completely, it never does...there's going to be those like my hot-headed asshole ex who doesn't give true responses, he responses to how he believes the right answers should be...and that'll get him by...Target gave him a test kinda similar, and he passed that, not based on his real responses, but on the responses Target would like to here...and surprise! He got a job there...and I'd be surprised if he hasn't wrecked his car again since we broke up...he drives like a maniac, he's an asshole...he streetraces, he tries to make his car top out on the highway...it's people like him that we need to take licenses away from.

I think the current proposal is by far the most fair. However, at what age would people be allowed to start taking the test?

<3 Mary

huh...THAT's interesting...

I don't think it's the age that matters. When people turn 21, and are handed their first legal drinks, they still go and get plastered and do stupid shit. No, what matters is the fact that they're getting something they've never had, so they test the limits. Age really isn't a factor. No, I'd say start training them sooner for a longer period of time until the thrill of driving will wear thin by the time they get their own keys...it's not the fact that they're "kids," it's the fact that they're inexperienced.
100% agree. Here in Canada you have to go though 2 licences in order to get your full one. G1 is your Temp. you have that for a year...G2 you can have up to 5 years...but you must have it over a year before doing the test. and your G is your full licence. So by the time they have their G they are 18. Oh and you must have a licenced driver with their G for at least 5 years when driving with your G1.

In Canada the system is a tad different..

On your 16th birthday you can go and do a written driving test. If you pass, you're granted your G1. This allows the driver to drive on the streets only if an adult is in the passenger seat. The driver cannot drive on the highways, and there are a few more time rules..

IF the driver with their G1 takes and completes their driving lessons, they can go for a driving test to get their G2 after 8 months of getting their G1. If the driver with their G1 does not take driving lessons, they have to wait a full year after getting their G1 to get their G2. The G2 allows you to drive alone in the car, also with certain time rules..

After at least a year of having your G2, you can get your full lisence called your G.

complicated?....yes. annoying?...yes

I agree with the whole system though, and by the time you get your full license, you will be prepared and qualified enough to be a good driver.

Have I seen that last post somewhere? Oh yes, two posts ago.

In Missouri we have a graduating Liscence. I didn't actually get my liscense until I was 18 because everything I needed to go to was close to my home and I didn't see a point in it until I started to work at my current job. When I first got my car and was relieved of my parents what did I do? Drove like a maniac. If I had ever thought it was dangerous to someone besides myself, I didn't take the risk. The worst of it was probably my first month of driving. After that the novelity wore off.

Here in Denmark, we can start the lessons for our drivers licence three months before you turn 18. You got to take some theori lessons... i believe its 14 hours of theori total, and then about 14 hours of driving on the road... then after you hae taken the 14 hours of theori, you have to take a theori test.. its 25 pictures with 3-4 yes/no questions. you can have mistakes in max 5 of the pictures, and if you have more, you fail and you gotta pay again.. and their very expensive. Then after that, you gotta go to a drivers test when you sit with your teacher and police man of some sort.. dont know what its called in english, but its a man who see how you drive and then fail/pass you... im done with the theori and just need a few more drivers lessons and then im ready for the tests..
it can be very hard to get it, but atleast you learn it and can drive properly in the traffic.

But speaking about drinking, denmark is known for the european country where young people drinks the most... We just had a rule made, that people under 16 have to show legimentation, but you can always find a little kiosk that got some booze and smókes he wanna sell to everyone... i remember when my mom send me for cigarettes and i was very young.. no problem there, but now, its really hard for young people thank god..
At clubs, you have to be at least 18 to get in, and therefore 18 to drink at those places, but its easy to get fake ID or borrow someones ID...
Im lucky that im 18, because its the best age in Copenhagen for sure :cool:

Two words: Graduated Licensing.
Here they have passed a bill that basically nulls your license as soon as you recieve it.
As in, you are allowed the priveleges of a driving permit. A full 6 months must pass before the restriction is removed.
Which translates to a kid being forced to drive with their parents (hopefully) for a full year before they go on their own.

That does help a bit of the experience issue, and once a child develops the habit of driving with an adult in the car, at least some of that sticks when they go out with friends.

Making the driver's test a tad more difficult might help as well.
I mean, the thing is a joke, any imbecile with the common sense of a sheep could pass it with flying colors.

I'd point out the large factors here are, as already mentioned, inexperience, immaturity, and simple ignorance.

Maybe add this tiny little class, one time, that a teen has to take to get their license.
This class being the students going to 5 actual crash scenes, going to the hospital and seeing what the patients look like afterwards, and then going to a funeral of someone killed in a car accident, a teen.

Somehow, I think that might sober a few of them up just a tad. ;)

Otherwise, I think 17 is a better age.
Mainly because a plethora of other things become legal at 16 and 18, and the teen will want to explore them...usually at the same time. And with driving...that is a very bad thing.


I'm sure some of that has been said already..but it didn't register on my mind fully when I read through. So if this post is a repeat, I apologize.