Provisional Licenses Difficult to Enforce

[TurboDan]

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A.../NEWS/608140338

Provisional licenses difficult to enforce
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 08/14/06

BY MARGARET F. BONAFIDE
TOMS RIVER BUREAU

Joseph Delbuono Jr. would have turned 16 on Saturday. His mother, Gina Delbuono, 38, remains inconsolable.

Her son died April 8, in a crash minutes after Central Regional High School students began spring break. He had jumped into the back seat of a car driven by 17-year-old Thomas Tierney of Berkeley.

Tierney was driving with a provisional license and had three passengers. That is not allowed under a law enacted in 2001, said David Weinstein, spokesman for the state Motor Vehicle Commission.

A driver with a provisional license may have just "one person beyond your family or household . . . in the car during the times you are allowed to drive by law," Weinstein said.

The provisional license is the second step in the state's Graduated Driver License Program, coming between the learner's permit and full driver's license.

Police said Tierney was driving a Mazda MX6 recklessly and was speeding. He lost control of the Mazda, which slid sideways and in front of a Dodge Caravan carrying two women and a 5-year-old girl, police said. Joseph's life was left hanging by a thread and two other Central Regional High School students, also passengers in the Mazda, were critically injured, police said.

Gina Delbuono wants every mother and father to know how important it is to tell their children to never get in the car with an inexperienced driver ? especially one with a provisional license. Not enough is being done to stress the urgency of the message, she said.

"The graduated license is not working and it is not being enforced," Delbuono said.

"I don't know what they are teaching them in school but they have to show them what can happen," she said. "This is one of the most important things for children to learn. You get the subjects ? English, history, math ? but this is the most important thing."

Assistant Ocean County Prosecutor Steven Janosko said the graduated license program is difficult to enforce.

"The implementation of the idea was overdue for many years," Janosko said. "There is no question that if it was fully implemented it would save many lives. Not only teens," but other drivers who are involved in the crashes with the inexperienced drivers.

"There are a lot of laws . . . and they are enforced at the level of local ability," Janosko said. "It is not easy to enforce something like a graduated license."

Seaside Heights Police Chief Thomas Boyd said enforcing a graduated license is not a high priority for his officers who deal with thousands of teens heading to the beach and boardwalk each day during the summer.

"It is a tough situation," Boyd said. "Especially in a resort town. We have nothing but 17- and 18-year-old kids in cars. It would completely strain our resources if we had to check every car" to see how old the occupants are.

Anthony Shecton, 16, and Permont Tolbert, 18, both of Seaside Heights, were classmates of Joseph Delbuono, who they said was a lot of fun to be around. But even knowing what happened to their friend, the peer pressure of being with friends in a car is almost impossible to resist, they said.

"I know I am not supposed to get in a car with a kid" who has a provisional license "but if a friend pulls up and says "you want to go for a ride?' I am going to go," Tolbert said.

Tolbert does not have a driver's license and is going into his senior year at Central Regional High School, he said.

"It is almost like it makes it more fun because you know you are not supposed to do it," Shecton said.

Janosko said young, inexperienced drivers should have a longer period of time before they get free rein to ride around unsupervised.

"It is an effective program, but I would like to see it go further than it does requiring more behind-the-wheel experience than they do now," Janosko said.

Christie Huddle, 21, of Binghamton, N.Y., said she got a driver's permit at 16 and her license at 18. She was able to drive without a licensed driver in the car at 16 but only at certain times.

"The New York (graduated license) program is good," Christie said.

Her mother, Debra Huddle, disagrees. The former emergency room nurse turned administrator said teenagers should not drive at all until they are 18.

"If they crash, they should pull their license," Debra Huddle said. "One crash, that's it."

Cars today are faster and made for high performance. They should not be in the hands of young, inexperienced drivers, Janosko said.

Gina Delbuono said parents need to know they can't put their kids in cars that are made for speed.

But that message is hard to get across to parents, Janosko said.

Injuries to Tierney, the driver of the Mazda in which Joseph Delbuono was killed, were not life-threatening, said Robert A. Gasser, executive assistant Ocean County prosecutor. Gina Delbuono said she did not know Tierney and that he was a new friend of her son's.

Tierney has been charged as a juvenile with vehicular manslaughter, which has a different penalty than if it were an adult charge.

The Ocean County Prosecutor's Office is expected to decide soon whether to seek to charge Tierney as an adult, in which case it would be presented to a grand jury. Anthony Pierro, supervisor of the prosecutor's juvenile division, said the decision will be based on the ongoing investigation.

[850CSi]

Not only that, but a lot of young drivers don't even know the laws and regulations.


I think getting a license in this country needs to be a lot harder than it is. I'm lucky I didn't kill myself or hurt someone else when I nearly totaled the A4 (granted I think something was wrong with the tires).

The problem is that so many 16 year-olds don't understand that they have lives in their hands when they have passengers.


My driving behavior changes completely when I have others with me in the car.

[dazzleman]

This is a perfect example of why more and more laws are not the answer.

I agree with Farris -- that getting a license in the first place should be a lot harder.  If we set the initial bar higher, there will be fewer incidents.

I also get tired of hearing that kids are supposed to be learning all this stuff at school.  What about the parents?

[Raza]

So having other people in the car caused the accident?  

It's funny, though, what Faris said.  I've had my license for four years, and just recently I picked up the PA Drivers' Manual to brush up on the laws, in case there have been any changes or minor laws that I overlooked.  

What about the parents indeed, David.  Their role is overlooked since so many of them are so inept that they think it's the school's role to be the parents.  

And the MX6 is hardly a Lamborghini.  Parents are idiots and are always so quick to pass the blame to autos.  The truth that they are the ones that don't do the proper teaching.  Cars are 3000 pound missiles and when used incorrectly they can cause tragedy.  I'm probably the most adventurous driver on the boards, and you'll never, never, never, never see me do any crazy shit when there are other people in the car, unless they know what they're in store for and want it to happen.  I've also driven the shit out of many different cars and know how my car acts at the limit.  Increased driver training is absolutely necessary, because the drivers' test only tests driving legally, which no one fucking does.  Once the lawmakers realize this and decide that it's something other than a cash cow, we can actually take steps to make the roads safer.

So, this, fellows, is your moment of Zen:

"
Her mother, Debra Huddle, disagrees. The former emergency room nurse turned administrator said teenagers should not drive at all until they are 18.

"If they crash, they should pull their license," Debra Huddle said. "One crash, that's it."

Cars today are faster and made for high performance. They should not be in the hands of young, inexperienced drivers, Janosko said.

Gina Delbuono said parents need to know they can't put their kids in cars that are made for speed.
"

Paraphrased, "This is someone else's fault, and the best thing is more restriction."

[850CSi]

Increased driver training is absolutely necessary

Yes.


What always confused me in driving school was that they'd teach us to steer into skids and whatnot and verbally school us on how to recover loss of control. And I always thought... "If it was simple enough to be taught like this, there would never be an accident of any kind on our roads".


Driver's education should at least involve a skid pad.

[Raza]

Increased driver training is absolutely necessary

Yes.


What always confused me in driving school was that they'd teach us to steer into skids and whatnot and verbally school us on how to recover loss of control. And I always thought... "If it was simple enough to be taught like this, there would never be an accident of any kind on our roads".


Driver's education should at least involve a skid pad.

Or a maniac with a gun to your head, since that's what it feels like when you're on the brink of losing control, pass it, and then have to bring it back.  At least that's how it is the first ten times.  After that, you don't even panic.

[TBR]

No duh...of course it is hard to re-enforce. They can't pull over everyone that looks to be under 18, it just isn't practical. I am generally a rule abiding guy (other than speed limits :P), but even I have carried as many as 7 under 21, non family members at a time while my restrictions were still in place.

Better testing is absolutely essential, a strict federal standard should be put in place. Here in TX you can get a license without ever stepping into a car.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Something like this should be mandatory:
http://www.jimrussellusa.com/drivingcourse...waysurvival.php
Yeah its expensive, but so is everything else with cars.
I've been autocrossing for 5 years, and now I can't even imagine that some people drive around their entire lives without learning the basic car control skills that I have now. It's also scary to think about the way I drove before I took up autox.

[dazzleman]

No duh...of course it is hard to re-enforce. They can't pull over everyone that looks to be under 18, it just isn't practical. I am generally a rule abiding guy (other than speed limits :P), but even I have carried as many as 7 under 21, non family members at a time while my restrictions were still in place.

Better testing is absolutely essential, a strict federal standard should be put in place. Here in TX you can get a license without ever stepping into a car.

You can get a license in Texas without a road test?  Unbelievable.

Higher licensing standards are essential, in my opinion.  But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.  Anything that seems so obvious, but never seems to happen, obviously has powerful opposition.

I can only imagine what it would have been like if all these restrictions had been in place when I started driving.  I took multiple friends in my car all the time when I was 16-17.  

One time, I even took 9 kids in my car at the same time -- very stupid and unsafe, and I didn't do it again.  But they were all stranded after school without a ride, so it was hard to say no...  

[Eye of the Tiger]

Ok, so who would oppose such a thing? Let's find them and take em out...




... to lunch...



...to a Chinese restaurant in the mall, haha , that'll learn them a thing or two. People drive like maniacs at the mall.

[Eye of the Tiger]

How about less restrictions... and more training. Oh wait, that costs more money. boo hoo

[dazzleman]

How about less restrictions... and more training. Oh wait, that costs more money. boo hoo

How about a tougher test, and let people figure out the training on their own?

Most training doesn't really cost money; it's just practice with a competent person in many cases.  The best driver training I got didn't cost anything.

[saxonyron]

No duh...of course it is hard to re-enforce. They can't pull over everyone that looks to be under 18, it just isn't practical. I am generally a rule abiding guy (other than speed limits :P), but even I have carried as many as 7 under 21, non family members at a time while my restrictions were still in place.

Better testing is absolutely essential, a strict federal standard should be put in place. Here in TX you can get a license without ever stepping into a car.

You can get a license in Texas without a road test?  Unbelievable.

Higher licensing standards are essential, in my opinion.  But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.  Anything that seems so obvious, but never seems to happen, obviously has powerful opposition.

I can only imagine what it would have been like if all these restrictions had been in place when I started driving.  I took multiple friends in my car all the time when I was 16-17.  

One time, I even took 9 kids in my car at the same time -- very stupid and unsafe, and I didn't do it again.  But they were all stranded after school without a ride, so it was hard to say no...

Put in this context, it's obvious how pointless driving restrictions are.  I'd guess 50% of kids wouldn't give a damn what the law says, 45% would care, but would still violate it fairly frequently (feeling guilty the whole time), and 5% would actually obey the regulation. OK, so how do we institute tougher requirements?  I suppose all driving ed schools should be shut down and replaced with legitimate driving schools.  I think most people will opt for the feel-good approach of more restrictions.  This is a tough sale, because it'll cost parents more money for useful classes, and might even require mom or dad to spend some time with their kids teaching them.  Horrors!!

I never took driver's ed, nor will my kids (unless the insurance nazis require it) because from what I've been told, I'm pretty sure it's useless and insulting to anyone's intelligence.  I'll get my kids their learner's permits as soon as possible, and then my wife and I will let them drive as often as is practical with us riding shotgun.  I want them to learn correctly.  And I like the idea of using a skid pad, Faris.  I'd at least take them to an empty snow-filled parking lot and let them rip it up.

[dazzleman]

No duh...of course it is hard to re-enforce. They can't pull over everyone that looks to be under 18, it just isn't practical. I am generally a rule abiding guy (other than speed limits :P), but even I have carried as many as 7 under 21, non family members at a time while my restrictions were still in place.

Better testing is absolutely essential, a strict federal standard should be put in place. Here in TX you can get a license without ever stepping into a car.

You can get a license in Texas without a road test?  Unbelievable.

Higher licensing standards are essential, in my opinion.  But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.  Anything that seems so obvious, but never seems to happen, obviously has powerful opposition.

I can only imagine what it would have been like if all these restrictions had been in place when I started driving.  I took multiple friends in my car all the time when I was 16-17.  

One time, I even took 9 kids in my car at the same time -- very stupid and unsafe, and I didn't do it again.  But they were all stranded after school without a ride, so it was hard to say no...

Put in this context, it's obvious how pointless driving restrictions are.  I'd guess 50% of kids wouldn't give a damn what the law says, 45% would care, but would still violate it fairly frequently (feeling guilty the whole time), and 5% would actually obey the regulation. OK, so how do we institute tougher requirements?  I suppose all driving ed schools should be shut down and replaced with legitimate driving schools.  I think most people will opt for the feel-good approach of more restrictions.  This is a tough sale, because it'll cost parents more money for useful classes, and might even require mom or dad to spend some time with their kids teaching them.  Horrors!!

I never took driver's ed, nor will my kids (unless the insurance nazis require it) because from what I've been told, I'm pretty sure it's useless and insulting to anyone's intelligence.  I'll get my kids their learner's permits as soon as possible, and then my wife and I will let them drive as often as is practical with us riding shotgun.  I want them to learn correctly.  And I like the idea of using a skid pad, Faris.  I'd at least take them to an empty snow-filled parking lot and let them rip it up.

Ron, I have to say, I don't share your opposition to driver's ed.  It helped me learn to perfect my driving skills.  I think the mistake is when parents think that driver's ed alone is enough to teach their kids to drive.  That is wrong.

[saxonyron]

Ron, I have to say, I don't share your opposition to driver's ed.  It helped me learn to perfect my driving skills.  I think the mistake is when parents think that driver's ed alone is enough to teach their kids to drive.  That is wrong.

I'm basing my opinion on my sister's experience and friends from 20 yrs ago, but also from my Business Manager who  used to run the office of the local driver's ed school in town.  She basically admitted the teachers took it as a joke and one of them was a drunk.  Not a very inspiring picture did she draw!  I figured I could get loaded up on Vodka and Tonics and let the kids drive me around and it wouldn't cost me a cent!     I'm sure some schools and teachers are decent - I just haven't seen one yet.

[Eye of the Tiger]

How about less restrictions... and more training. Oh wait, that costs more money. boo hoo

How about a tougher test, and let people figure out the training on their own?

Most training doesn't really cost money; it's just practice with a competent person in many cases.  The best driver training I got didn't cost anything.

The problem is, most people don't have a competent person to help them learn properly. I didn't, that's why I read everything article and book I could on car contorol, and eventually took up autox. I wanted to take a performance driving school, but my parents wouldn't pay for that.

Most kids would probably think such training is fun (and maybe scare away some who shouldn't be driving in the first place), and if only the parents would realize it's not just fun, but that it could save their kid's lives someday.

The problems are cost, and opponents who say that if the kids learn proper car control in "extreme" situations, they will go try it out on the streets and kill themselves. But that is up to the judgement of the individual. Trained or not, they are still young kids and will do stupid things. The actual issue is the training of valuable, life-saving skills.

[saxonyron]

Eh, you know how I think, though.  That's why we homeschool the kids.  I'm not sure when I developed this know-it-all complex, but it does get annoying sometimes - even for me!  :P  

[Eye of the Tiger]

I'm sure all of us could learn a few things from a true, professional driving instructor (not Bob's driver's ed).  

[saxonyron]

I'm sure all of us could learn a few things from a true, professional driving instructor (not Bob's driver's ed).

Hell, even Tiger Woods has a coach.  I'd love to take a class like Pommes-T did last week.  

[giant_mtb]

My personal opinion is that if we gave new drivers courses in how to control vehicles at their limits and how to drive them safely at high speeds...that's all they'll be doing is driving like maniacs because they think they know what they're doing.


"Yeah, well I took a course and they let me do fast turns and spins and stuff...I know how to handle it"

[Tom]

Something like this should be mandatory:
http://www.jimrussellusa.com/drivingcourse...waysurvival.php
Yeah its expensive, but so is everything else with cars.
I've been autocrossing for 5 years, and now I can't even imagine that some people drive around their entire lives without learning the basic car control skills that I have now. It's also scary to think about the way I drove before I took up autox.

Yes, people need to do just that.  I plan to learn how to drive a car soon, and maybe a school is the answer.  I'd say the far majority of drivers don't know how to drive, and right now I'm one.

[Phillip]

Many excellent points in this thread.  Many people think that solely being accident free makes them a good driver.  That doesn't mean shit; many people haven't been in an accident simply because they haven't been in the wrong place at the wrong time yet.  

On a personal note, I'm going to my first autox in two weeks.  Yes, I want to start autoxing for the fun aspect, but my real motivation is because I want to be prepared for when I have to make an split second decision about how to control my car in x situation.  Because I know there is going to be a time where knowing what to do will possibly save my life and someone else's.

[Tom]

I hear that.  On the road my #1 goal is to not to kill anyone and to not be killed.  After that comes fun.

[ChrisV]

How about a tougher test, and let people figure out the training on their own?

Most training doesn't really cost money; it's just practice with a competent person in many cases.  The best driver training I got didn't cost anything.
The problem is, most people don't have a competent person to help them learn properly. I didn't, that's why I read everything article and book I could on car contorol, and eventually took up autox. I wanted to take a performance driving school, but my parents wouldn't pay for that.

Most kids would probably think such training is fun (and maybe scare away some who shouldn't be driving in the first place), and if only the parents would realize it's not just fun, but that it could save their kid's lives someday.

The problems are cost, and opponents who say that if the kids learn proper car control in "extreme" situations, they will go try it out on the streets and kill themselves. But that is up to the judgement of the individual. Trained or not, they are still young kids and will do stupid things. The actual issue is the training of valuable, life-saving skills.

That last is the single biggest reason you won't see real driver training for kids. Just like sex education, fearful, ignorant parents feel teaching them the dangers AND the responsible way to deal with it encourages kids to be reckless.

Kids will be reckless anyhow, it's part of growing up. Being responsible parents is TEACHING them properly, not hiding it from them "until they are older."

Thinking that making them wait until they are 18 to drive will make them safer is retarded. It will only make a group of older inexperienced drivers. Hell, we all see older full adults with years of driving experience that are idiots behind the wheel. proof that simply waiting until you're older won't make you any better.

I agree with you that autocross has been one of the single best teachers of car control and kept me out of situations when I was younger twofold: one, I had a place to let my competetive spirit run free legally, in a safe environment, and two, when an emergency situation occured on the street, I had the muscle memory and instincts developed to remain in control of the car. A basic autocross type course should be a staple of driver's ed for ANYONE. And in fact, it should be used both dry and wet. it would cost pretty much nothing to impliment even in a high school situation.

We should also lobby insurance companies to not call autocross "racing" as there is a slim to zero chance of an insurance claim being made fo rit. If it was considered driver training AND keeping racing off the streets, there should be a financial incentive to do it, at least a couple times in your life.

And I've also been harping for years that graduated and specialty licenses are generally worthless from an enforcement perspective. How many 18 year olds are you going to pull over looking for that 16-17 year old that is driving without the proper license? How many motorcycles are you going to pul over loking for teh guy without the motorcycle endorsement? (I rode a number of motorcycles for years without an endorsement.) How would you tell if the person driving the car was the one in the family with the "performance" license? Or the one rated for that large vehicle (like the proposed SUV license people keep talking about...) The only enforcement can come after the fact, like the case this thread is about. And by then, it's too late.

[ChrisV]

My personal opinion is that if we gave new drivers courses in how to control vehicles at their limits and how to drive them safely at high speeds...that's all they'll be doing is driving like maniacs because they think they know what they're doing.


"Yeah, well I took a course and they let me do fast turns and spins and stuff...I know how to handle it"

And here is my point personified.

Without that training, then people are driving past their limits every time they get behind the wheel.

Yeah, let's not teach anyone any skills, because we are ignorantly afraid they might USE it. No wonder we have a nation of morons behind the wheel.

if you're that scared to be on the road, stay off it. 

[GoCougs]

I'm not sure why people are harping on stricter testing and more advanced training. It's irrelevant in this case, and in general, too. The vast majority of the public knows what it takes to drive safetly. As in this case and with the vast majority of accidents and fatalities, it's willfully negligent if not intentional wrecklessness that is the cause.

IMO it's myopic to believe that more testing and training mitigates this situation. The only notion the human animal understands is consequences. Laws have become stricter, and penatlies harsher in recent times, but there's a fair ways to go IMO.

And yes, a 16 or 17 year old driver will always be a disaster waiting to happen IMO. Driving at such a young age ingrains the entitlement notion of driving that is the underlying factor in many of the problems on our roadways today. The age for licensure should be 18.

[ChrisV]

I'm not sure why people are harping on stricter testing and more advanced training. It's irrelevant in this case, and in general, too. The vast majority of the public knows what it takes to drive safetly. As in this case and with the vast majority of accidents and fatalities, it's willfully negligent if not intentional wrecklessness that is the cause.

IMO it's myopic to believe that more testing and training mitigates this situation.

Hmm. Lost of control or no loss of control. Which is this situation talking about? So you don't think actually having driving skills would mitigate this? What do driving skills mitigate? Are you saying there's no difference in car control from someone who's trained vs someone who isnt'? okaaaay....

And yes, a 16 or 17 year old driver will always be a disaster waiting to happen IMO. Driving at such a young age ingrains the entitlement notion of driving that is the underlying factor in many of the problems on our roadways today. The age for licensure should be 18.

And then you just shift the unskilled driver up a year or two. As has been proven by untrained drivers already on our roads, the age has zero to do with it. And 18 year old isn't magically able to control a car any better if untrained than a 16 year old. Nor do they have any easier time grasping laws and consequences at 18 than they do at 16. Or are you saying that no one over the age of 18 gets into accidents due to bad judgement or loss of control?

*I* started drving on the roads at 15 1/2, and got my license at 16. I never had an accident and I had powerful cars. of course, I also started autorossing at 16. Maybe that level of skill had something to do with it. Oh, that's right, actual training and experience doesn't mean squat does it. 

[850CSi]

What I've noticed though is that most accidents that happen to the 16-18 group have more to do with driving like jackasses as opposed to a lack of skill in general. I don't know the statistics, but that's what I've seen.

I live in a college town now, and college students drive a lot more like human beings than high-schoolers do.

[MX793]

What I've noticed though is that most accidents that happen to the 16-18 group have more to do with driving like jackasses as opposed to a lack of skill in general. I don't know the statistics, but that's what I've seen.

I live in a college town now, and college students drive a lot more like human beings than high-schoolers do.

I saw plenty of college aged kids pulling high schoolish jackassery on the roads when I was in college.  Including an impromptu drag race from a traffic light right outside a dormatory where there was heavy pedestrian crossing traffic at 4 in the afternoon (right about the start of afternoon rush hour).  I saw countless individuals blow through stop signs at pedestrian crossings without hardly slowing down even when there were pedestrians actually on the cross walk (I nearly got clipped myself one day).  Somebody, while driving hammered, came flying up the road to my dorm, jumped the curb in a curve where a stop sign was and smashed into a covered walkway that led from the dorm to the academic buildings at campus when I was a freshman.  College aged drivers aren't that much more mature than high school aged drivers.

[ChrisV]

What I've noticed though is that most accidents that happen to the 16-18 group have more to do with driving like jackasses as opposed to a lack of skill in general. I don't know the statistics, but that's what I've seen.

Some of them are going to drive like jackasses no matter what, and they probably will in college. But theres a differnce in driving like a jackass with no skills to counter teh ineveitable, or having the skills to control a car that woudl otherwise end up out of control.

I really cant believe anyone can, in good conscious, argue against teaching people how to control their car in adverse conditions... it certainly can't make things worse, and has been proven to make peopel less likely to lose control in the first place...

I live in a college town now, and college students drive a lot more like human beings than high-schoolers do.

Whole lot more drunk college age students driving than high school aged ones.