Arguments Against Teenage Driving Laws
Teenage Driving Laws.
Does shuttling teens around until they are 18 sound appealing? The answer is no. Despite the maturity level of teenagers, the driving age should remain the same because any driver could be reckless, kids could rely less on their parents, and teens could learn responsibilities that they need for future references.
If the driving age stays the same many teenagers could rely less on their parents. Some teens have parents who work constantly so that could limit them from doing after school activities such as practices and other things if they do not have a license. With little siblings teens could help parents shuttle little siblings around - or help with chores such as grocery shopping. Most teens like going places with
their friends and that may clash with their parents work schedules, so having a licence will benefit the whole family.
Within life many responsibilities are presented one of those are driving. Some kids do not have a lot of responsibilities as teenagers so even a simple thing like having a license could help a child out. With a license teens can get jobs and shuttle themselves back and forth without having to rely on their parents to pick up and drop off. Having a car and licence will also teach teens how to be prompt and on time for things.
It is true that some teens are not mature enough to handle a license and they may end up taking advantage of the luxury. Sometimes teens need traumatic experiences to learn from their mistakes. A teen in Staunton got into a minor accident due to reckless teenage driving and now he drives cautiously to avoid getting into another careless wreck.
Without using maturity level as a factor in the decision to change the driving age, the age should stay 16 because it can help teens rely less on parents and learn their responsibility. In conclusion driving age should remain the same.
Does shuttling teens around until they are 18 sound appealing? The answer is no. Despite the maturity level of teenagers, the driving age should remain the same because any driver could be reckless, kids could rely less on their parents, and teens could learn responsibilities that they need for future references.
If the driving age stays the same many teenagers could rely less on their parents. Some teens have parents who work constantly so that could limit them from doing after school activities such as practices and other things if they do not have a license. With little siblings teens could help parents shuttle little siblings around - or help with chores such as grocery shopping. Most teens like going places with
their friends and that may clash with their parents work schedules, so having a licence will benefit the whole family.
Within life many responsibilities are presented one of those are driving. Some kids do not have a lot of responsibilities as teenagers so even a simple thing like having a license could help a child out. With a license teens can get jobs and shuttle themselves back and forth without having to rely on their parents to pick up and drop off. Having a car and licence will also teach teens how to be prompt and on time for things.
It is true that some teens are not mature enough to handle a license and they may end up taking advantage of the luxury. Sometimes teens need traumatic experiences to learn from their mistakes. A teen in Staunton got into a minor accident due to reckless teenage driving and now he drives cautiously to avoid getting into another careless wreck.
Without using maturity level as a factor in the decision to change the driving age, the age should stay 16 because it can help teens rely less on parents and learn their responsibility. In conclusion driving age should remain the same.