For a drivers license, should we raise standards, raise the age of getting one, or both for getting a license?

I strongly think that the standards need to be raised, leave the age part alone. I'm a professional driver with a Commercial Drivers License (CDL). On a daily basis I have to be the best driver that I can be, because my job requires me to transport the elderly, disabled, and chronically ill clients and residents that make up the population of the nursing/retirement home I work for. I'm not gonna sit here patting myself on the back, I realize that I'm lucky having had some GREAT instructors teach me what they know about driving, and I do my best to apply what I've learned. Spending my day on the road increases my chances of being involved in accidents more than commuters and soccer moms, and in 20+ years I've seen more stupidity (and done some in my younger days) behind the wheel than space will allow me here.

Here in NY, all you have to do is answer 15 multiple choice questions (that any 10 yr old can answer blindfolded) and identify 5 road signs -- duhhh (uhhh what's the RED sign for again???). That's just to get your learner's permit. Then you sit through a 5-hr class that's supposed to teach you the hazards, etc. of driving. Before you dare to show up for your road test you'd better have at least 20-25 hours of practice under your belt. You get to drive around a neighborhood making a few left and right turns, do a broken U-turn, and then FINALLY parallel park into a spot (this for some reason causes the most trepidation among newbie drivers, I think they need better teachers). Once you've pleased the the DMV god seated next to you, YOU'RE A DRIVER!!!

When I started to study for my CDL, I saw there was a big difference in learning for a heavy vehicle. Don't get me wrong, my driving instructor was the best, but let me tell you if everybody in NY state had to take the CDL driving test to get licensed, the streets would be EMPTY. To drive buses and trucks in the US, when you take the CDL road test you have to know and identify certain items (brakes, suspension parts, etc), know the weight and height of the vehicle you're driving, perform braking system checks, call out height clearances before you drive underneath them, perform a pre-trip inspection... that's just the tip of the iceberg, it goes on and on. I'm not even going to describe the test for the CDL permit, that test can be like the SAT's depending on what class license you were shooting for) The amount of money I had to spend to get my CDL makes me drive like I want to keep it (and I passed on the first try-whew). The test wasn't grueling or anything like that, but I don't think a lot of folks could pass it.

We also have Defensive Driving courses available (I think they should be mandated in place of that crummy 5 hour class) that really show the benefits of being a safe defensive driver. People only take this class when they get too many points on their license or want an insurance discount, maybe a handful will take it for self-improvement.

If you work hard to get it, you'll treasure it and fight to keep it. Besides, the more you put into education, the more you "usually" get out of it. I'm with you, SOMETHING has to change, I just don't think it should be the age thing, and maybe not the money thing either. Money's tight enough as it is. My two cents.

I think that they should give restricted licenses starting at 17 and a half, for the use of driving to or from school and work, only. They should be issued their unrestricted license when they either turn 18 or finish high school, whatever comes first.

During the first year of your unrestricted license, the driver will be placed on probation, and if caught with two moving violations, the license will be suspended for 6 months, and the probation will start all over again at the license renewal.

I think something like that sounds good. But there is still nothing we can do about those drivers from ages 19 to 23 who unfortunately still never grew up and started to drive normally and safely. Something needs to be done, but I don't know exactly what. Maybe an insurance discount for cars invented with a cell phone "jam" (whether the windows are opened or not) and a "speed capture" so that at the end of the month, logs are automatically sent to the insurance company and they will be able to see how fast you drive. Of course, this device must be inspected every 6 to 12 months to make sure that it is giving the insurance company the correct speed.

If only things like this existed.

Kenneth,

The standards should be drastically raised in order to get a driver's license but not the age. I think it's interesting that everybody focuses on the 5000 teens that are killed each year while ignoring the fact that 38,000 non-teen drivers get killed every year along with the 5000 teens.

Everyone thinks they are the "good driver" and the other guy is the "bad driver". The truth is, the general public doesn't really know true defensive driving strategies because if they did, we wouldn't have approximately 43,000 driving related deaths each year here in the US. I am an expert in the field of driver training with over 40,000 of behind-the-wheel driver training and I can take virtually anyone out on the road (licensed or unlicensed) and teach them driving strategies that they are completely unaware of. I'm not saying that I know everything but I have gained a lot of knowledge and I do know that the general driving public is suffering from a severe lack of driving knowledge.

One of the main culprits are the state governments that makes public policy for driver training requirements. In 2004 here in California, the DMV eliminated the requirement for a driving instructor applicant to take a driving test. If you eliminate the standards for driving instructors, exactly what do they expect the results to be? In California we currently have a 12 minute drive test for new drivers....12 minutes? It's insanity!!!

The tests and training should be very rigorous because after all, driving is the #1 killer of teenagers in this country. The age should remain the same.

I can't recall where I saw this so maybe somebody in the UK can give some input, but they offered advanced driving courses and more "show boating" resulted due to people thinking they are good drivers. My thought is that the only way to be a good driver is to drive. Teenagers tend to have more wrecks because they don't have the experience of older drivers. To some extent age is an issue but I don't think it's a big one. Now, I'm not saying we should lower the driving age. What would help is a longer probational period. As an example, for the first year you can't drive with anyone who isn't licensed (that would mean people with permits couldn't be in the car) and no driving at night. Simply reducing the risk factors allowed with the beginning driver would do the most good in my opinion. After a year of driving experience the beginner would be off to a better start and should have already developed better practices. As far as drivers education hours go I think it's a waste of time and a scam to require it. Scare tactics and lectures only work when they are fresh in the mind. If you don't have anyone to help you when your first leaning then I can see drivers ed as being a way to facilitate getting the initial on the road time so that you can get started and get a probationary license. Stiffer fines/suspensions might help some, but again those kind of things only work at keeping a driver "safe" for a short time in my opinion.

But I do agree that in the US at least, a license is wrongfully considered a "right" as opposed to a privilege my a large percent of people and especially by teenagers.

This is a tough one as there are a lot of variables.

I live in Northern Ireland which is part of the Uk but has slightly different rules. Basically here we can get a provisional licence at 17 which entitles us to drive a car under supervision (must be over 21 and have held a full licence for a least 2 or 3 years). We still need to insure the car for that driver. Learners are restricted to 45 mpd and cannot go on motorways and must display "L" plates. Before sitiing their practical test they must do a theory test which is a computer based test with both theory questions and a video hazard perception test.

Once we past our test, we are restricted to 45 mph and cannot drive on a motorway and must display "R" plates on the car. This is in place for 1 year after passing. This is not applied in the rest of the Uk.

Despite this, the accident rate here is 40% higher than in the rest of the Uk (basically with the "troubles" money was not spent on improving infrastructure and our road network is terrible)

I have a friend who is just back from Florida and he says the standard of driving there is terrible (and not just from teenagers but everyone). The road system in America is far superior to what we have here (most of our roads are "B" roads which are narrow and twisty and very few journeys are on dual carriage ways or motorways) yet America is only two places above the UK in number of deaths per capita (I know this as I was having a debate with my American uncle and I checked it out)

A harder exam would probably be the only answer. At the moment from what I have read it seems that most states exams are far too easy. When I did my test we had to drive about town, negotiate things like lights, roundabouts, be able to drive on different roads, be able to change lanes safely and be be able to do manoeuvres such as emergency stop, parallel park, reverse around a corner and 3 point turn.

People here want the test to be made even more difficult. I have a friend from Germany and the test there is even harder as they have to have spent so many hours driving on the autobahn (no speed limit), driving at night, etc before they can even sit their test.

There is a problem with perception. If you ask 100 people whether they are good, average or bad drivers the majority will say they are good. Since this is statistically impossible, there are a lot of people deluding themselves.

A lot of those ideas like limiting the time a new driver can be out at and where they can drive are great in theory, but unless they are enforced rigorously then they are useless. Here, we have people not bothering to stick their "R" plate on and driving whatever speed they like the moment they pass. The police cannot catch them unless they happen to pull them over. Parents can not be expected to enforce the rules either unless they are in the car with their kids.

I think that the only way is to make the test more difficult and train more police officers to pick up on dangerous driving and weed out the motorists who are not good drivers.

One thing that does puzzle me about America though is why cops there still pull people over for speeding. Here they stand with their radar gun, and take photographs of speeding vehicles and send people a letter saying their car was speeding and to inform them who was driving it. If they refuse to do so they are punished instead of the person who was speeding. Some people have challenged it in court, but this decision was upheld. Also points are added to the licence of the person committing the offence. For minor speeding, you get three points, but you can get more based on the severity of the offence. Once you reach 12 points you are disqualified from driving. Points are added not just for speeding, but for talking on a mobile, poor condition of the car, not wearing glasses or contacts, etc. so covers all possible offences.

Also, here is you are caught over the legal limit for alcohol consumption, you loose your licence straight away. I don't know if this is the same in America as I hear about people saying they were pulled over for DUI as if it was no big deal.

I think that the whole system may need a shake up. Here things are bad. I drive a motorcycle so I have no choice but to drive as well as possible. I think that is also an area where America should tighten up. I saw in the motorcycle forums where 16 year old Americans with no experience are asking if they should get 600 cc racing bikes. That is suicide!

Make it harder to get a license, or increase the grades of license. It should take more hours of experience to drive at interstate speeds and driving on dirt (or gravel) also takes special skills. So why not a restriction by road type and speed.

I am against raising the age limit to obtain a DL. We need better drivers and age does not guarantee it will happen.

Amount of accessories for entertainment/communication needs to be limited also.

Some one operating a lap top, a cell phone and driving at the same time should be illegal!

Stupid asses: It's already almost impossible for an experienced truck-driver to pass the CDL pre-trip inspection test without doing a crash course in DOT lingo and proceedures that he will forget within 2 weeks. Furthermore, you have to pay about $300 to rent a truck for the exam, so if you flunk once then you are out $600...and most CDL testees are unemployed, so why do you want to kick them in the teeth with even more bureaucratic, bull-****?

Raise standards and increase the penalties for killing or injuring another driver after running a stop or yield, or if there is a cell phone in the car.

Driving age 18 and 50 hours of in class driving testing along with 50 hours of on the road driving with an adult from your family for 1 year and stiffer penalties if they are broken.....

Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death among 15- to 20-year olds.

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, 3,490 drivers in this age group died in motor vehicle crashes in 2006 and an additional 272,000 were injured.

Drivers age 15- to 20-years old accounted for 12.9 percent of all the drivers involved in fatal crashes and 16 percent of all the drivers involved in police-reported crashes.

Twenty-five percent of teen drivers killed were intoxicated. In 2006 (latest data available) crashes involving 15 to 17 year olds cost more than $34 billion nationwide, in medical costs, property damage and other costs, according to an AAA analysis.

Among licensed drivers, young people between the ages of 15 and 20 have the highest rate of fatal crashes relative to other age groups, including the elderly. In fact, the risk of being involved in a fatal crash for teens is three times greater than for drivers age 65 to 69.

Immaturity and lack of driving experience are the two main factors leading to the high crash rate among teens.

I don't think the age or standards need to be raised, i think there needs to be tougher penalties for messing up. I get sick of seeing people who have lost their license and then continue to drive and get ticket after ticket for driving on a suspended license and still nothing more is done to them. Plus you hear all the time on the news how people have their 5th drunk driving ticket and they're still out driving. We need to have tougher penalties for idiots.