I believe that by increasing the driving age teens would have more time to learn how to drive. However, there are many who oppose for raising the driving age to eighteen. One argument on this is that it would not be fair to teenagers who could have been able to drive, but due to raising the age of driving they have to rely on parents or other family member to go anywhere. Another reason they argue with this is, at the age of eighteen teenagers are ready to move foe college or job. So, if they got license before then parents do not have to worry about their kids.
Should high school students be able to drive themselves? Many people have argued that the driving age is too young. Some say that there is a larger risk when teens are behind the wheel. No,the driving age should not be raised . Imagine parents that have a full time job trying to get their kids back and forth to school and work and home.
Because of safety concerns, many states have increased the age at which teens can begin to drive. Teens need to have their own experiences. Driving at sixteen is a great way for teens to indulge in experiences and start a more independent life. The driving age should not be raised because driving gives one freedom, driving allows teens to work, and driving teaches responsibility. Driving allows one to have more freedom.
Driving is not seen as an obligation, but a privilege that many do not recognize. Driving could be deadly if not taken solely seriously. This is why to make this possible, the legal driving age should be raised over the age of 21; as citizens begin to mature mentally. It would cut the amount of deaths, reduce obesity, and would restrict their freedom in travelling to unnecessary locations. Driving has become just like a game,
Many legislations are limiting the number of passengers teens can carry in the car at a time or excluding them from being able to take late night drives. Many of these rules have already been imposed in Nebraska has implemented in their three stage process. Some states such as New Jersey have completely eliminated the chance of 16 year olds driving without a parent (New York Times, 3). Most states have focused their state representatives on giving teens more driving experience before granting them unrestricted licenses. The new brain research suggests that maturity in a 17 or 18 year old driver is considered safer than a new 16 year old driver due to the fact that, Scientists at the NIH campus in Bethesda, Md., have found that this vital area develops through the teenage years and isn't fully mature until age 25.Even some teens are acknowledging that 16-year-olds are generally not ready to face the life-threatening risks that drivers can encounter behind the
The legal age should be changed because young drivers are irresponsible, teenagers need more practice driving, and they are too easily distracted. Teens are irresponsible because they haven 't fully matured at the age of sixteen. They don 't know how to act responsibly on their own at that age. Minors also don 't take their driving privilege seriously. Most teens don 't have jobs so they won 't be able to pay for their own gas and it would put more stress on the parents.
People who are 18 and older are more mature and make better decisions and know what 's best for them and for others. First, 16 and 17 year old should not be allowed to vote because they are not mature enough to make big decisions in their life’s. The article “ Takoma Park 16-year old savor his history- making moment at the polls”” by “Annys shin” says “..... county community the nation’s first to lower the voting age from 18 to 16”. This is a bad idea because some students make bad choices and if they vote their going to do the same thing. The same article writes “but Miller doesn 't have his driver 's license yet”(Shin 2).
Parents can teach their children how to drink responsibly. Normalizing alcohol consumption as something done responsibly in moderation will make drinking alcohol less of a taboo for young adults entering college. By lowering the drinking age, adults could openly model responsible drinking in establishments and at parties and irresponsible behavior would be discouraged. If the risks of alcohol were advertised more, it would remind people to drink responsibly. In the 1960s and 1970s there may have been an increased number of alcohol related car accidents but if the minimum legal drinking age was lowered today, there is a thing called uber where people won’t have to drink and drive, they can just order a ride home.
Additionally, a curfew would be to restrict teens from doing illegal activities after those times. This logic is flawed, however, because if they are already showing an apathetic attitude about the laws they are breaking, they won 't care about breaking the curfew law either. Another argument for the implementation of curfews is that curfews would encourage teenagers to go to bed earlier, so that they are more rested for school the next day. Although a nice thought, teenagers will go to bed at whatever time they want, whether they are out of the house or not. With the technology we have today, two friends can just get into a video call, and have it be just like being in
A 16 year may not have to take voting serious as an 18 year would because they are still ome being taking of there parents, voting for them has no big effect in there lives. Lest compare and contrast this situation. A 18 year is an a higher grade therefore more information recored in there minds. A 16 year old is more into having a good time and might not take it as serious and probabbly wont go and vote at all.