Panel Recommends Parent Classes, Stickers on Teens' Cars

[TurboDan]

Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of the recommendations of the commission.  I'm not a fan of singling out any group of people, specifically, and I don't think placing a sticker on someone's vehicle will stop them from driving poorly.  Additionally, teen drivers account for 12% of accidents in NJ - that means 88% of accidents are caused by others.  The group of people I see driving most dangerously is young men (20s and 30s) in large pickup trucks, but they won't have a sticker on their vehicles.  The elderly are a huge risk, but they won't have stickers either.

I also don't like the idea of points being added to teens' licenses for certain infractions.  Lining the pockets of insurance companies and dooming teens to high rates for years does not seem fair to me.  Neither does taking their licenses away for a year - what does that do but restrict them from getting more driving experience?  I think that a teens' first ticket should not be added to a driving record and their license should be taken away for 30 days.  Then, if they get the same infraction again, both should be added.

I believe that if someone is driving dangerously, they deserve a citation or a warning, depending on what the officer feels the best consequence is.  I don't think people should be wearing 'scarlet letters' on their vehicles. 

[dazzleman]

Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of the recommendations of the commission.  I'm not a fan of singling out any group of people, specifically, and I don't think placing a sticker on someone's vehicle will stop them from driving poorly.  Additionally, teen drivers account for 12% of accidents in NJ - that means 88% of accidents are caused by others.  The group of people I see driving most dangerously is young men (20s and 30s) in large pickup trucks, but they won't have a sticker on their vehicles.  The elderly are a huge risk, but they won't have stickers either.

I also don't like the idea of points being added to teens' licenses for certain infractions.  Lining the pockets of insurance companies and dooming teens to high rates for years does not seem fair to me.  Neither does taking their licenses away for a year - what does that do but restrict them from getting more driving experience?  I think that a teens' first ticket should not be added to a driving record and their license should be taken away for 30 days.  Then, if they get the same infraction again, both should be added.

I believe that if someone is driving dangerously, they deserve a citation or a warning, depending on what the officer feels the best consequence is.  I don't think people should be wearing 'scarlet letters' on their vehicles. 

I think the sticker idea is stupid.  It's unenforceable, and there are too many situations where people who would require a sticker share a car with somebody who doesn't.  I don't really understand what the sticker would do other than warn people that they're dealing with a possibly dangerous driver.  I think this is bad precedent -- people usually live up or down to the expectations others have for them.

And as you said, many people who are involved in bad driving wouldn't have to have a sticker.  And let's face it, aggressive driving doesn't stop when you're no longer a teenager.  As you said, some of the most aggressive drivers are men in their 20s.  Women are also becoming more aggressive, and they like to drive with a lot of distractions, which most men don't.

I like the idea of the parent classes.  I think this is important for teenagers, but the effectiveness will wear off once they get into their 20s and are no longer under their parents' control.

[omicron]

We've had Learner and Provisional plates for years. Six months on L-plates, followed by a year on P1, and then another year on P2 without the need to show the P-plate.




In most instances, displaying an L-plate tends to cause other road-users to give that car a bit more room than usual.

[CALL_911]

I'll be getting my permit in a little less than 2 months. My parents will have to accompany me driving. So they'll have to put these stupid things on their cars?

[dazzleman]

I'll be getting my permit in a little less than 2 months. My parents will have to accompany me driving. So they'll have to put these stupid things on their cars?

With you driving their cars, a sticker will be the least of their problems....

[hounddog]

I have stayed out of this one so that I had some time to think about the sticker debate.

Personally, as a parent of an approaching teen, I have no problem with labeling him (and my car) so that others know who is behind the wheel much the same way I have no problem labeling drunk drivers. 

I think the sticker should be some type of static sticker about 8X10 bright blue with white letters stating "Learner Permit." 

Drunks (ones which have been convicted of two or more offenses) should have a bright pink with white letters stating "Asshole drunk behind the wheel.  Feel free to throw stones at his car."

I believe in public humiliation of children as often as we can possibly make it happen.  If you want to get that sticker out of your window, drive for a year with NO issues.

[Soup DeVille]

I have stayed out of this one so that I had some time to think about the sticker debate.

Personally, as a parent of an approaching teen, I have no problem with labeling him (and my car) so that others know who is behind the wheel much the same way I have no problem labeling drunk drivers. 

I think the sticker should be some type of static sticker about 8X10 bright blue with white letters stating "Learner Permit." 

Drunks (ones which have been convicted of two or more offenses) should have a bright pink with white letters stating "Asshole drunk behind the wheel.  Feel free to throw stones at his car."

I believe in public humiliation of children as often as we can possibly make it happen.  If you want to get that sticker out of your window, drive for a year with NO issues.

I've stated before that convicted drunk drivers (maybe second offenders) should be required to not only have a tag, but to have their entire car painted a vibrant metallic candy pink color.

[CALL_911]

With you driving their cars, a sticker will be the least of their problems....

[hounddog]

I've stated before that convicted drunk drivers (maybe second offenders) should be required to not only have a tag, but to have their entire car painted a vibrant metallic candy pink color.

It seems to me that I read about a judge somewhere who ordered a convicted drunks car destroyed.  I have no problem with that.

[bing_oh]

But I really do think there has been a generational shift in parenting.  Baby boomers are the generation that never grew up.  Many are still rebelling against their own parents at 50 years old, so they're often loathe to discipline their own kids when they need it.  And they do try to insulate their kids from all things negative, including negative consequences for unacceptable behavior.  They tend to act as their kids' ally against school authorities, police, or anybody who tries to impose appropriate negative consequences on their kids.  Essentially, while earlier generations of parents thought it was their job to prepare their kids to stand on their own two feet, and deal with the negative things that life may bring, boomer parents think it's their job to provide only the best for their kids, and insulate them from any unhappiness or negativity.

You've hit on a major pet peeve of mine. I can't count the number of times that I've caught a kid dead-bang in a criminal violation (anything from petty traffic to felonies) and the parents attack ME when I bring the kid to their front door. The big bad police officer is picking on poor little Johnny...AWWWW! What are you picking on my kid for over this little stuff? Don't you have REAL criminals to arrest? Etc, etc, ad nauseum. It seems to be even worse in my area where the community is very small, very insulated, and very cliquish.

I know that the LAST thing I wanted was to get busted for something when I was a kid. It's not because I was afraid of what the cops or the courts would do to me, I didn't want to face my parents! They weren't my best friends, they were mom and dad...beings of immense power who loved me unconditionally but never hesitated to lay into my shit when I screwed up. What a judge would do to me paled in comparison to what dad could do.

It just seems like that's not the way it is anymore. It's totally possible that the Boomers never grew up and that's a part of the problem with their parenting techniques (I read an article the other day about how the financial downturn has led to a spike in people in their 50's moving back in with mom and dad because they're our of work, so that seems to support your theory about them never really growing up themselves). Parents seem to have the worst time letting their children take responability or administering discipline...it seems some days that I do nothing but take flack from parents about "picking on" their kids or getting called to raise their children for them because they can't do it themselves.

[hounddog]

Don't you have REAL criminals to arrest?

I have no doubt in my mind you know how to handle yourself, and neither want or need MY advice, but I just can not resist!

My honest to goodness suggestion to all officers with all joking aside, when they make this snide remark (because it is not meant as a question) they are showing their little angel that you are wrong and he is right. 

Look them square in the eye and tell them, "Yes, I do have real criminals to arrest.  And tonight it is your son."  And then before they can react tell them what he was "arrested" for, even if he is not in cuffs, what catagory it falls into (misd or fel) not what he "did."

It tells the boy you are not afraid of his parents, and since you were only answering their question honestly you will be good with policy.

[Tave]

Parents have enough responsibilities without this garbage. I feel very sorry for the kid whose single parent works two jobs. That poor little fucker is going to have to wait FFFOOOORRREEVVEERR for his license.

[hounddog]

Parents have enough responsibilities without this garbage. I feel very sorry for the kid whose single parent works two jobs. That poor little fucker is going to have to wait FFFOOOORRREEVVEERR for his license.

Disagree.  This is one of our biggest responsibilities, and most parents fail miserably.  We have one chance to impress on our kids how dangerous getting behind the wheel is. 

[Tave]

Disagree.  This is one of our biggest responsibilities, and most parents fail miserably.  We have one chance to impress on our kids how dangerous getting behind the wheel is. 

It's a parent's job to teach their kid. It's not their job to attend classes on how to teach their kid.



Before I go any further, can you show me something that says teens today are any less safes as drivers than teens of the past?

[hounddog]

It's a parent's job to teach their kid. It's not their job to attend classes on how to teach their kid.



Before I go any further, can you show me something that says teens today are any less safes as drivers than teens of the past?

Why should it be imbumbent on me to prove anything?  You are the one arguing against this, can you show me something which says they are not? 

[bing_oh]

It's a parent's job to teach their kid. It's not their job to attend classes on how to teach their kid.

Before I go any further, can you show me something that says teens today are any less safes as drivers than teens of the past?

If they can't teach their children, maybe giving them classes on HOW to do it is a good idea, hmmm?

Let's say, just for argument's sake, that you find statistics that say that kids in the past were worse drivers than kids are now. How would that statistic nullify the benefit behind something that may make young drivers even safer and better drivers? It wouldn't. So, why do we care about what that statistic does or doesn't say?

Everybody around here wants statistics that prove or disprove an argument. Sometimes, statistics just don't mean jack shit.

[Soup DeVille]

It seems to me that I read about a judge somewhere who ordered a convicted drunks car destroyed.  I have no problem with that.

They'll just get another one, under someone else's registration if need be. I say let them keep their car (if they in fact can keep their license at all), but make them obvious.

[Byteme]

From the Asbury Park Press today..

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080321/NEWS/80321012

TRENTON ? Parents in New Jersey might have to attend a teen-driving program before their children can apply for a driver's permit.

That's one of the 47 recommendations in the final report of the Governor's Teen Driver
Study Commission that will be released Wednesday. A copy was obtained by The Star-Ledger of Newark.

The report outlines ways to improve safety for teen drivers, who are involved in 12 percent of the state's motor vehicle accidents.

Members say teenagers with provisional driver's licenses should display a placard or sticker on the outside of their cars to identify them to police and other motorists.

The panel also says young motorists should log 50 hours behind the wheel before qualifying for a provisional license

Overall I think it's a good idea, except for one point.

What if the car is used by the teen and adults?

[Tave]

Why should it be imbumbent on me to prove anything?  You are the one arguing against this, can you show me something which says they are not? 

That's not how arguments work. When you say something like, "most parents fail miserably," you need to be prepared to back that up. When you support new legislation, you need to have concrete reasons for doing so.

Let's say, just for argument's sake, that you find statistics that say that kids in the past were worse drivers than kids are now. How would that statistic nullify the benefit behind something that may make young drivers even safer and better drivers? It wouldn't. So, why do we care about what that statistic does or doesn't say?

If it ain't broke...

Where does it stop? Do we make parents take swimming lessons too?


If the licensing exam isn't an adequate filter, then by all means, reform it. Don't heap additional crap onto the plates of parents who already have enough responsibilities to attend to.

[hounddog]

That's not how arguments work. When you say something like, "most parents fail miserably," you need to be prepared to back that up. When you support new legislation, you need to have concrete reasons for doing so.

Concrete reasons?  I think not.  All I need are beliefs, and some evidence.  What ever happened to debates based on logic and reason?

But if you want reasons for doings so, fine, how about life experience of 17 years as a police officer dealing with parents failures on an hourly basis?  Both as an inner city officer in one of the worst cities in America, and in a suburban township department where the median income was in the area of $250,000 and the median home prices were right about $350,000.  Will that do, or do you need some fancy graph chart to illustrate it more clearly?  Let me save you the trouble, yes we saw the worst of society.  Yes, I might have a slightly skewed perception of people.  But, a huge amount of the people I dealt with are people for whom their parents failed them in some way or another.  If my experiences aren't good enough for you, then there will never be any evidence which is.

Where does it stop? Do we make parents take swimming lessons too?

There is a significant difference between swimming lessons, and state required education for parents whos kids are driving two ton missles in public.  In the issue of public safety as it pertains to driving the state does, and should, have the right to require education for both parents and children.  Otherwise, why even issue licenses at all? 

If the licensing exam isn't an adequate filter, then by all means, reform it. Don't heap additional crap onto the plates of parents who already have enough responsibilities to attend to.

Well, both my wife and I are parents and you are not.  I think your opinion here is limited severely by the fact that you do not know what you are talking about regarding parenthood.  (that is a specific statement relative to this debate, and not a general slam against you)

What about parental responsibility?  In many places now, if the kid gets a ticket for something like, uh say, curfew violation the parent also gets a parental responsibility ticket. 

The problem with our society is that parents do not want to take the time to properly educate their kids, or take responsibility for their actions.  They pass this down to their kids by bullying authority when their kids get into trouble.  This bubbles into every crevace of this society, and it has to stop. 

No one required anyone to have kids.  They took that upon themselves, and all responsibilities therein. 

If people do not want to take responsibility perhaps they should not have kids.  Otherwise, the state WILL tell the masses how to do things and the few good parents will suffer for the non-actions of the bad majority.

[hounddog]

If it ain't broke...

That is the problem, it is "broke."
The system is quite old, and behind the times.  These are attempts to brign the system up to modern era, with modern solutions.  There are WAY more kids driving, and way way more cars on the road than only twenty years ago. 

[Tave]

That is the problem, it is "broke."
The system is quite old, and behind the times.  These are attempts to brign the system up to modern era, with modern solutions.  There are WAY more kids driving, and way way more cars on the road than only twenty years ago. 

Yes, but are they more of a problem? As I said before, I don't want to continue this discussion until you can answer that.

All I need are beliefs, and some evidence.

By all means, show us this evidence. That's what I'm asking for.

[bing_oh]

Yes, but are they more of a problem? As I said before, I don't want to continue this discussion until you can answer that.

Does it matter if they're more of a problem? Isn't just the fact that a problem exists...a problem that costs us the lives of young, inexperienced drivers...enough to try to find a better way? Or, is it your opinion that, because the problem isn't getting worse, we can just ignore it?

[Tave]

Does it matter if they're more of a problem? Isn't just the fact that a problem exists...a problem that costs us the lives of young, inexperienced drivers...enough to try to find a better way? Or, is it your opinion that, because the problem isn't getting worse, we can just ignore it?

In so many words, yes.

Hounddog's position (as well as others' in this thread) is based on the assumption that parents today aren't doing their job teaching their kids how do drive (but parents in the past did), and as a consequence, the state needs to step in.

If we want kids to be better drivers, then let's make the licensing tests more difficult. Put KIDS back into Driver's Ed. programs, not parents.

[Byteme]

In so many words, yes.

Hounddog's position (as well as others' in this thread) is based on the assumption that parents today aren't doing their job teaching their kids how do drive (but parents in the past did), and as a consequence, the state needs to step in.

If we want kids to be better drivers, then let's make the licensing tests more difficult. Put KIDS back into Driver's Ed. programs, not parents.

The article a read had little content so I am guessing a bit here, but.............................

I assumed they were writing about a system similar to the one in place in Texas where a parent can teach driver training in lieu of the public school or a private driving school teaching it.  The parent certifies the course of instruction has been given and the kid doesn't even have to take a driving test with a state examiner on board; he takes the written exam and get's his license.  The state recognizes no difference in the qulity of teaching by either the parents or schools.  I would imagine there are many cases where the parents falsely claim to complete the instruction.

Personally I'd like to see more intensive training, tougher licensing requirements and graduated licenses.  That won't happen though.

[rohan]

Yes, but are they more of a problem? As I said before, I don't want to continue this discussion until you can answer that.

By all means, show us this evidence. That's what I'm asking for.

It's pretty fucking convenient he's the only one who apparently needs to provide concrete evidence and you don't.  If you'bve got a position here you should show some evidence to show he's wrong.

[TurboDan]

Perhaps a middle ground on the parent classes could be an exemption for families where both parents have gone a certain number of years without getting tickets or being considered at fault in an accident.  I consider my driving skills, personally, to have been better than most of my peers because of how I observed my parents driving over the years.  In my opinion, if a parent is an irresponsible driver, the child will be too.

[Tave]

It's pretty fucking convenient he's the only one who apparently needs to provide concrete evidence and you don't.  If you'bve got a position here you should show some evidence to show he's wrong.

You don't prove a negative, and he's the one who made the statement.

Ask me to back up anything I've said. I will try my best to do so.

[Byteme]

Perhaps a middle ground on the parent classes could be an exemption for families where both parents have gone a certain number of years without getting tickets or being considered at fault in an accident. 
Not a bad idea but not every set of parents have the same driving experiences.  For example, my wife and I drive about 40,000 miles a year combined, We have neighbors who work very close to home and they put about 10,000 miles a year on their cars.  All else being equal their chances of having an accident or getting a ticket are much less than ours because they drive less, not because they might have better driving skills.

I consider my driving skills, personally, to have been better than most of my peers because of how I observed my parents driving over the years.  In my opinion, if a parent is an irresponsible driver, the child will be too.  Yup, kids learn from parents.  That's why I pretty much drive by the book when my son is in the car.

[sparkplug]

I think they should paint the rear bumper yellow like in nascar.