Home  ·   News  ·   Weather  ·   Sports  ·   Jobs  ·   Community  ·   Pics N Videos  ·   Station  ·   Marketplace  ·   6 on Your Side  ·   Contests  ·   Get Connected  ·   Blogs
Health Check · Lottery · DTV · Seasonal · Mom to Mom · Traffic · The Omaha Buzz · CityCAMS · My Weather · School Closings · HS Cribs · Restaurants · McKnight Investigates
WOWT.com on Demand
6 On Your Cell
News, Sports & Weather
Information On Your Cell
Text ALERTS
Breaking News Alerts
Direct to Your Cell Phone
Daily e-News
News & Weather Updates
delivered via email
You Cast
Submit Your Pics
and Video
What's on 6
Your Guide to NBC
& WOWT Programming
Proposal Would Raise Driving Age Save Email Print
Goal is improved safety
Posted: 6:01 PM Sep 9, 2008
Last Updated: 9:09 PM Sep 9, 2008

A | A | A

There's a push on to improve the safety of teens on the roadways. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety wants all states to raise the driving age to 17 or 18.

The safety organization says there is no escaping the fact that car crashes are the leading cause of teen deaths and in New Jersey, where the age is 17, the death rate is lower.

Sixteen-year-old Emily Arnold is ready to hit the road for her Driver's Ed class. She can't get her driver's license until she learns the rules of the road.

Emily says, "I've been looking forward to it because I'm tired of asking my parents to drive me around and having to ask my friends for rides. So I'm hoping to get my license pretty soon."

But if the Insurance Institute gets its way, Emily will have to wait another year or two.

Emily doesn't think it's fair to target 16-year-olds.

"Some people are not responsible for driving but that could be any age," she said.

But a 17-year-old Driver's Ed student sees it differently.

Ada Gulizia tells us, "I think kids would be more responsible as they get older and my mom thinks that also. She definitely thinks that kids, if they're older and they get it, that they'll be more responsible."

That's why she's decided to wait until age 17.

Driver's Ed instructor Harv Van Norstraend agrees that older teens are better suited to driving.

He says, "I think it's extremely important that we have safe young drivers in the community and if we start with safe young drivers they grow up then and help everybody drive safely."

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety admits that raising the legal driving age is a tough sell but looking at the research it would save lives.

According to Nebraska Highway Safety office, drivers in the youngest age group, 15 to 19, reflect the most fatalities. In 2007, 41 in that age group died in traffic accidents.

More Stories
Pre-teen Burglars ?

Attempted Armed Robbery

Lawsuit Filed Over Teddy Bear Spying

Man Eligible for Parole after 1-year on his tenth D.W.I. Conviction

Pension Spiking Revealed Again

Hearing Held In Attempted Murder Case

Parking Rage Incident

Flag Theft Arrest

Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 16, 2008 at 08:23 PM
ok im 15 and have my learners permit. if they change the driving age to 17 then i wont be able to drive till my senior year! how am i ever going to get to games, parties, and anything else that a high school kid should do? I also agree with Bee. there are many older people causing accidents than old people, i think they should take drivers ed again now that laws have changed.

Posted by: Bee on Sep 15, 2008 at 08:55 PM
okay so i don't get why people are saying the driving age should be raised to 17. people drive just fine. i'm 16 and drive the speed limit. i find it that it is the 30-40 year olds cutting me off going 60 in a 40 zone.i think its mainly based on how well you educated on driving. drivers Ed should be put back into schools instead of paying 300 bucks for a 2 week course.if you call anything ridiculous its the price of drivers Ed.

Posted by: Chcukie Bee on Sep 15, 2008 at 08:49 PM
changing the driving age to 17 wont stop 16 year olds from driving. they will take their parents cars for cruises. and what about those with learners permits?

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 15, 2008 at 04:37 PM
Instead of raising the driving age, the state should require drivers ed classes or even change the law so that a driving test is needed for all licenses, even the ones to and from school or with a legal driver over 21 (this would be exempt from drivers ed, when they have to drive to learn to drive). As a student, I'd rather be able to earn my right to drive through responsible learning than have it taken away simply because some people my age make bad decisions while driving, or aren't prepared to do it. Car crashes are not a fair or accurate description of the way more responsible drivers would handle themselves on the roads.

Posted by: anon on Sep 14, 2008 at 08:54 PM
My parents wouldn't let me drive until I drove with them for a certian amount of time. I didn't get to drive until like 6-8 months after my 16th birthday. I don't think it will matter if you change the driving age there are still dumb drivers out there wether they are 16 or 68. It really doesn't matter.

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 14, 2008 at 07:59 PM
Wow, Jarbeau. So it was okay for YOUR kids to drive at 16, but others shouldn't be allowed to? Do your kids realize you hate them and callously risked their lives? Why do you care so much more about other people' kids'?

Posted by: Scott on Sep 14, 2008 at 07:22 PM
The driving age is fine, but they need to come out with a device that disables thier cell phones while driving! I believe that's a major factor in teenage wrecks...

Posted by: Keith on Sep 14, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Jarbeau, That's right. Although you didn't realized it at the time, now you know that much of your kids' success relied on being able to drive at 16. Let's not handicap future generations with arbitrary driving laws.

Posted by: Jarbeau on Sep 13, 2008 at 08:58 AM
To put your mind at ease, Keith, my children made the transition to "the real world" just fine. And, they're alive! I never realized that my kids' success relied so much on being able to drive at 16.

Posted by: Mike on Sep 13, 2008 at 07:37 AM
Make it mandatory for the first driving lesson to be "entering the Interstate during rush hour, merging PROPERLY, NOT coming to a complete stop, AND not having or causing an accident". One other mandatory item: A parent MUST be in the car and not say ONE word. Mom or Dad should take a clean change of underwear. I hope the parents have their own health, life, and auto insurance premiums up to date.

Posted by: Keith on Sep 12, 2008 at 11:05 PM
Jarbeau, I can only presume, if you have children, that you coddle and shield and build a wall around them so that, when you actually let them move out, they are unprepared to face the world outside of your overly protective nest. Don't let them grow up and accept responsibilities; they might get hurt!

Posted by: Kent on Sep 12, 2008 at 10:53 PM
While we're at it, let's raise the age to vote to 30. An 18 year old has no practical experience to pick a president! They're straight out of high school after being fed a biased view of history intended to influence their voting. That's much more dangerous than a kid with a car.

Posted by: The Truth on Sep 12, 2008 at 06:21 PM
It's not the age, but the experience! I investigate accidents over and over, and I have found that it's not the age, but the experience of the driver is the true factor is statistics. All this will do will make a bunch of inexperienced older drivers getting into accidents.

Posted by: SAVANNAH on Sep 12, 2008 at 11:13 AM
LETS JUST SAY! THE WORLDS LAWS THAT ARE NOW BEING MADE TO GOVERN THE PEOPLE CONSIST OF ONE MATTER AND ITS NOT TO HELP THE CITZEN OUT ITS INTENDED FOR! ( IF ITS CONSIST OF MAKING THE RICH RICHER INCLUDING THE WAGES OF STATE AND FEDEARL CEO BILLFOLRDS PADDED FROM THE POOR AND HONEST MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE. THEN IT WILL BE MADE INTO A A NEW UPDATED LAW! ) FOR WHAT EVER REASON THEY FEEL THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH! THEY DONT CARE ABOUT THE KIDS! THEY JUST CARE ABOUT HOW THEY CAN GET THE MONEY TO COME THERE WAY INSTEAD OF BILLS TO KEEP US SAFER FOR EVERY ONE. MAN! TEACH THE KIDS IN DRIVERS ED LONGER . GIVE THEM MORE INCENTIVES WHEN THEY DRIVE SAFE. STOP PUNSIHING THE GOOD BECAUSE OF A FEW BAD APPLES! NO WONDER KIDS DONT WANT TO DO RIGHT! THEY GET PUNSIHED ANYWAY IN THE END. ARE WORLD IS COMING TO A END AS WE KNOW IT AND WE ARE KILLING OURSSELFS OFF BY STUPITY AND GREEDYNESS!!

Posted by: Savannah on Sep 11, 2008 at 08:20 PM
Is the military going to issue their licence along with their ceromony to fight for their country. 18 to drive and die! 21 to enjoy life alittle, that is if you get the chance too!

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 11, 2008 at 03:01 PM
The reason the "incapable-of-driving" people over 65 will never be off the road until they kill someone is because they vote. Legislators don't want to tick off the people who could vote them out of office. Much easier to rile up the oldies and get the kids off the road than to face the potential of losing your fat-cat position in the legislature. And before anyone accuses me of being a teen, I'm in my 40s. Anyone who is afraid of driving over 30mph in a 45 zone shouldn't have a license. Last I saw, the accident rate for those over 65 was very similar to those under 18. And yes, I hope, and may very well ask, to be road-tested when I hit 65.

Posted by: Jarbeau on Sep 11, 2008 at 01:28 PM
The government is only trying to save young lives. Look at the statistics. By your comments, I see many of you parents value your time and wallets more than your precious offspring .

Posted by: JJ on Sep 11, 2008 at 10:45 AM
HOW ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO OLD? AND REPT DWI'S,THEY CAUSE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT THIS.

Posted by: Serious on Sep 11, 2008 at 10:24 AM
The age has nothing to do with the driving hazards. Inexperience and distractions are the biggest factors in accidents. If you make people wait until they are 20 they will still be inexperienced and have problem, responsibility has nothing to do with it. If you want people who have diminished reations and a higher likely hood of causing accidents than you need to make people over 60 start taking the same driving tests to see if they can still operate a vehicle. I can not remember the last time I heard of a 17 year old forgetting the brake was the pedal on the left, not right, and then drove through a crouded market killing or injuring dozens of people. I grew up on a farm and I started driving farm equipment and vehicles when I was 11. If I can handle a $500,000 combine I think I can handle a $2000 Mustang (yes the combine moves very slow but it is much more dangerous)

Posted by: Mom on Sep 10, 2008 at 10:05 PM
For those of you who can't follow Keith's logic, here it goes. Until my son turned 16 I drove him the 6 or 7 miles to high school, drove home, took my other kids to school and then drove back to the high school that afternoon to pick him up and bring him home. Same thing for practices, a trip to school, back home, back to school, back home. Now that he is 16 he makes one trip to school and one trip home. Half the gas. If his sports practices are at 5pm, he goes to a friend's house closer to school and uses even less gas.

Posted by: Driving on Sep 10, 2008 at 09:21 PM
Keep the punks off the road. If a kid is 16 and has grades of at least 3.0 and they have no criminal issues, and do things like perform volunteer work to better the community, then they should be allowed to drive. Its the punks, and gang bangers with the music cranked, breaking laws, with no concern for the community that should be banned until it can be proven that they are responsible. The dumb punks give a bad rap to all kids that age, even though some of kids are good people.

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 10, 2008 at 04:49 PM
I waited til 17 to drive. I took a driver's ed class with a friend, who happens to be 16. She's had a tire blown out and she's backed into someone since our class (which was in July.) Nothing's happened to my car. 17 year olds are by FAR more responsible drivers. They realize consequences and don't drive to have fun and do something when they're bored, they drive to get to places.

Posted by: Savannah on Sep 10, 2008 at 04:43 PM
Here is a fact for Neb!!! My step son who's mother lives in Neb has taught her young son who lost his right to drive on a Iowa Licence due to several tickets and recks, That she loves her son so much, she showed him that he could live with her and get a Neb licence and drive with out High insurence and have a clean record. Guess what folks!! IT WORKED! and so you maybe will RUN into him sometime!! MOTHERS LIKE THIS ARE THE ONES WHO BLAME EVERYTHING ELSE ON EVERBODY ELSE AND OVIOULY DONT CARE WHO GETS KILLED, NOT EVEN HER OWN SON! she gets " HERE YOUR SIGN AWARD FROM IOWA PARENTS" GLAD SHE DOESNT LIVE HERE ANY MORE

Posted by: Bernard on Sep 10, 2008 at 03:27 PM
I have to disagree wiht raising the driving. We were involved in an accident two years ago by a 16 year old driver. She hit our parked car at a high rate of speed while driving drunk. This was as her father stated her third accident in 5 months. Her parents enabled her to continue driving even after 3 accidents. My suggestion would be to let them drive at 16. Any infractions during their first year of driving would suspend their permit until their 18th birthday and then only after they completed a Driving class. I aslo must mention the fact that these inexperienced drivers get their permit then mommy and daddy hand them a new cell phone to talk on while they are driving. The parents argument is that they need it for emergencies. That works fine until they are a block from home. They should also be restricted to no passengers except for parents or siblings. Nightly I see car loads of young people who are too busy to pay attention to their driving due to 3 or 4 passengers in their car.

Posted by: Reality Check on Sep 10, 2008 at 02:19 PM
I can see it now; get your license at eighteen, then hop to the bar and start drinking. Why don't you let teens gamble while you're at it? Keep it at 16, and lower the drinking age to 19. Give kids at least 3 years before drinking and driving (which some do anyway).

Posted by: To Biff from another parent on Sep 10, 2008 at 01:56 PM
I agree completely! So far this week (and it's only Wednesday) I have had one parent cut me off, one drive around me while I was waiting for five kids to cross the street in front of me, and of course the plethora of parents whose little Timmy can't walk an extra 20 feet, so they have to stop right in front of the door instead of pulling all the way to the end of the drop off lane, thereby backing up traffic. Not once have I had a high school student pull any of this garbage when I have dropped off my kids -- it's ALWAYS the parents. Maybe we should ALL have random driver testing, rather than singling out the kids.

Posted by: LSB on Sep 10, 2008 at 01:09 PM
Maybe put drivers ed back in the schools so all kids get a chance at it. It is so expensive to send your kids to drivers ed many do not get the chance. More education equal better drivers. More experience equal better drivers. I dont think age, at least not mearly a total of one year, makes any difference. No experience at 16 is the same as no experience at 17.

Posted by: A Mom on Sep 10, 2008 at 01:06 PM
First of all, when did the drinking age enter this? Secondly, I truly would love to laugh at the "dream world" people live in that if kids take Driver's Ed classes, they are safer drivers. My Dad (who did road test exams for DOD), taught me to drive. I had to do things Driver's Ed never imagined. I taught my 3 kids the same way. Unfortunately, 17 year old daughter has friends who can't drive safely if you paid them after taking Driver's Ed. What happened to parents? Even with those classes, they need more supervision. "Here's the keys to your new car, Johnny, have a ball." No way! And, thankfully, all 3 of my kids are safe drivers. I think it's experience, not age. And, yes, high schools need to crack down on parking lot antics, too. It's not the Indy 500 when you get out of school! I hope all teens realize life is precious, and it's gone in an instant if you make a poor judgment call.

Posted by: TLZ on Sep 10, 2008 at 12:29 PM
I would like to see the driving age raised to 18, WITH A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA, lets take care of a a couple of issues. Keep drivers ED for 2 years in high school, when students graduate they can get their license. This will keep kids in school, get experience drive, and allow them to understand driving is a responsibility not a privilege. RAISING THE DRINKING AGE IS INSANE, INSANE, INSANE. We have enough problems without new drivers, who are able to drink. Does anyone know how to make such a proposal to get it passed. ANY SUPPORTERS???

Posted by: Becky on Sep 10, 2008 at 12:28 PM
I really find it very concerning that they are wanting to raise the driving age and lower the drinking age. I think raising the driving age AND raising the drinking age would be a better idea. As they did with cigarettes, they need to stop glamorizing drinking, no matter what you watch or what what you do, you see ads for liquer. Why is the danger of becomming an alcoholic not a concern to people. Do they not realize how many people die per year and suffer from this disease? Something has got to change! If they get their way, we will be giving teenagers a license and the ability to buy alcohol at the same time at 18. Not to smart..

Posted by: CM on Sep 10, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Well, I really don't know if more teens are getting killed now than when I learned to drive (in the 60's) but I think just enforcing the laws we have would go a long ways to lowering the death rate. Speed limit 60? Then ticket for 65. Unsafe lane change? Ticket. At some point, the ones (young AND old) who are causing the problems will lose their driving priviledges and others will start getting the hint.

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 10, 2008 at 11:58 AM
Raise the driving age...should we look into maybe not giving licenses to people over...say...???

Posted by: Chris on Sep 10, 2008 at 10:45 AM
I think raising the driving age is a good idea only if the kids have to have a driving permit for two years. They really need more than a year to drive with parents. I don't know if age is the factor as much as inexperience.

Posted by: NATE on Sep 10, 2008 at 10:44 AM
OF COURSE THE DEATH RATE IS LOWER IN NEW JERSEY. THEY HAVE LESS DRIVERS ON THE ROAD SINCE THE DRIVING AGE IS 17. I SEE HORRIBLE DRIVERS IN EVERY AGE GROUP. WHAT WE SHOULD BE CONCENTRATING ON IS DRIVER'S WITH 2,3,4 OR MORE DUI'S. THEY ARE THE KILLERS.

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 10, 2008 at 10:11 AM
There shouldn't be a nationwide mandate on the age for driving. It is the state's decision. Allow states to make that decision. Encouraging states to increase the restrictions isn't necessarily a bad thing. In Iowa the first year is probationary and limited as to the times you can drive. When you're 17 and have had a clear record, you can have a full license. No need to add more.

Posted by: Dean on Sep 10, 2008 at 09:33 AM
Put driver education back in schools and make it mandatory to pass for a license. This gives them more hours behind the wheel and education. If a student drops out, no license until 18 as in most cases not smart enough to drive.

Posted by: Biff on Sep 10, 2008 at 09:28 AM
I'm struggling with this one. I have a 16 year-old who drives - so far, he's doing well. I'm a little more concerned about the others in the HS parking lot - not only the other teen drivers, but the PARENTS. Maybe they need re-educated first, or at least fined and ticketed.

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 10, 2008 at 09:02 AM
Raise it to 19, then there won't be an issue with some kids driving to (high) school and some not. But then you'll have ot be willing to bus everyone...

Posted by: What? on Sep 10, 2008 at 09:01 AM
To Keith: Your comment doesn't make any sense.. If you are out there driving your teens around to events "wasting gas" are you saying that if your kid had his/her own car that it wouldn't run on gas if they were driving it themselves??? I guess I thought that all cars ran on gas no matter who was behind the wheel.

Posted by: Becky on Sep 10, 2008 at 08:50 AM
My son received his license at 16, he is now 21, and has not been in and accident or received a ticket. He drove from 96 and Blondo to Gross High School every class day for 2 1/2 years. Not all kids are bad drivers. My daughter, 26, just had her first accident a couple of months ago. It's very possible for good drivers, but unfortunately they see horrible habits from adults driving on our streets.

Posted by: Iago on Sep 10, 2008 at 08:42 AM
Keith, your math is backwards. If you drive a car to work and your kids drive one or more cars to school, that will consume more gas. One car on the road verses two. What you are losing is your personal time, not gas. I drive my son to High School each morning. I have told him that he needs to pay for his own gas if he wants to drive. If you have a huge SUV, and your kids drive a Hybred there might be a net loss, but that is your choice to drive the SUV.

Posted by: BS on Sep 10, 2008 at 08:42 AM
I think they should raise the age to 18 for driving. The only reason I think that is so they can be charged as adults if their careless driving causes a death or personal injury. This would allow them to think of penalties of going to jail or being sued. Mommy and Dabby can't help you then.

Posted by: Anonymous on Sep 10, 2008 at 08:36 AM
The minute after my kids have their permits and their first lesson in an empty housing area, they are my personal chauffeur for one year. They also attend one of the exorbitantly priced Driver's Ed classes. Thirdly, they are taught to assume everyone else on the road is going to drive like an imbecile, so they should be ready for anything. I'm not sure how raising the age by one year would change any of those things, but it would definitely raise my gasoline bill, as I would have to either sit for two hours at a practice or lesson while ignoring my other children, or drive back and forth, and I choose to pay attention to my other children. I am quite certain it wouldn't lower my insurance rates...the insurance companies would have to make up the high rates they charge for 16 year olds somewhere else.

Posted by: Mom on Sep 10, 2008 at 08:30 AM
I am all for it 17 or 18 is great with me. A Mom of two boys....I hope it passes!

Posted by: Aaron on Sep 10, 2008 at 08:30 AM
Driving is based on experience. The reason teens have so many accidents is lack of EXPERIENCE, not AGE. 16 is old enough to drive, parents just need to make sure they have enough experience to drive safely. If the driving age was raised to 30, the new 30 year old drivers would be just as bad as the new 16 year old drivers today, because they would have no experience. The reason adults have fewer accidents is because of the experience they had driving as a teen. My point is, raising the age would make older drivers worse because they would have less experience. No one is good at anything when they do it for the first time. For example, learning guitar or sports. When you practice, you get better. 16 year olds are mature enough to drive. Many world class olympic athletes are teenagers. They are skilled at the sport because of practice. Practice makes perfect at any age. What we need to do is LOWER the age for a permit, so teens have more experience by the time they are 16.

Posted by: Jamie on Sep 10, 2008 at 08:01 AM
Odd.... I was in a 5 car accident caused by a 19 year old who had only been driving for a year... she waited until she was 18 to drive and still caused a large wreck by rear ending all of us at a red stop light.

Posted by: Chris on Sep 10, 2008 at 07:56 AM
Lets me see...inexperienced drivers are getting into more accidents. We raise the age to 17 and we have 17 year olds with no experience getting into the same accidents the 16 year olds had been. Great plan morons.

Posted by: Nikki on Sep 10, 2008 at 07:40 AM
So everyone is quick to point fingers as usual. Targeting teenagers now....take a moment to think about when you are driving and who the bad drivers really are? Is it really the AGE of the person OR just the person. I'm not saying teenagers are perfect drivers but I see people all the time between the ages of 20-40 and they drive worse then teenagers! Just this morning some lady probably 30 years old almost caused a HUGE wreck on the interstate because she wasnt paying attention and was talking on her cell phone. I think we all need to take a look at the people and not target an age group!!

Posted by: BJ on Sep 10, 2008 at 07:38 AM
Many kids do wait until 17 or 18 before getting their license. But dont change it to that, teens look forward to this, always have always will. Its part of the American way!

Posted by: Gary on Sep 10, 2008 at 07:34 AM
The problem isn't with the age of the person, it's with the maturity. We didn't have cell phones and other distractions back in the 80's when I learned to drive. Now it seems that people, both young and old, can't function without a cell phone stuck to their ears or texting every chance they get. I can't count how many times I've been stuck behind some moron (yound AND old) that couldn't drive in a straight line or keep up with traffic because they were too busy carrying on a conversation on the phone. Fines for these actions need to be higher for adults and teens that are caught should lose their license until 18 and pass another drivers education course. Raising the age limit is strictly for the insurance companies and their bottom line. They still want to raise our premiums so their CEO's, etc. can have their multiple houses and private jets. They don't care about our well-being at all, -just keep the premiums coming and don't file claims!

Posted by: Jerry on Sep 10, 2008 at 06:50 AM
Why don't we put a cap on insurance premiums instead? This is just another ploy by insurance companies to try and confuse the issue with phony statistics, much like MADD has done for years.

Posted by: Jerry on Sep 10, 2008 at 05:59 AM
While this may be appropriate in more urban states it makes no sense here in rural Nebraska and Iowa. Parents must make the decision on when their kids are mature enough to start driving. I am a senior and I am more concerned about my peers.Retesting seniors is a good idea. Adult children should be given some level of input with licensing authorities to retest seniors at anytime if they feel their senior parents are unable to continue to drive.

Posted by: Me on Sep 10, 2008 at 03:40 AM
I think it should be left up to the parents to decide if and when their child is "mature" enough to drive. Some 16 year olds are, others are not. Plus, the added cost of insurance on a teen driver puts a big dent in the family budget. I don't think we need some sort of proposal to do this. Parents and their children need to work together. Discuss the situation and the costs. If the child wants to drive so badly at 16, then they need to be mature enough to get a part time job to help defray the costs of the insurance and buying a used vehicle and learning how to do basic maintenance on the vehicle. It's how I grew up and my kids will too.

Posted by: rules of the road? on Sep 10, 2008 at 02:21 AM
Leave late and drive your car like it's stolen! The Nebraska way!

Posted by: David on Sep 10, 2008 at 01:54 AM
I think more states need to follow how Iowa handles the situation. In Iowa if a teenager wants to obtain thier liscence before they turn 18, they must pass a drivers education course. To me this is another example of sterotyping. Sure teenagers are more likly to have an accident becasue they are new drivers but it doesn't mean they will. I started driving when I was 16 after I completed a drivers education course. I have never been the cause of an accident and have no moving violation tickets on my record. (I have had my liscence since 1993). It is bad enough that teenagers have to pay a higwer insuracne rate before they get beind the wheel, now the insurance industry wants to punish them again by making them wait to obtain the liscence. I beleive if a 16 year old has a job and is paying taxes they should be able to obtain a licensce as long as they have completed a drivers education course.

Posted by: No on Sep 10, 2008 at 12:22 AM
The key word in the people pushinng for this is the INSURANCE company. They are trying to cut there losses and not have to pay out death benifits.So they are not worried about deaths ,just their money

Posted by: jordan on Sep 9, 2008 at 11:37 PM
I think this is terrible honestly a year isnt gonna make much difference plus every 16 year old i know drives better than half the people in omaha! Target the old people they drive like morons! On the other hand I agree with lowering the drinking age!

Posted by: Charlie on Sep 9, 2008 at 11:27 PM
If more parents would take the time and teach their kids to drive this wouldn't be a problem. When I turned 15 my parents made me drive everywhere, it didn't matter what it was for I drove I didn't have a choice. If I wanted to go, they made me drive, PERIOD. I admit there were some tense moments and yelling between my mom and I, but I learned to drive defensively. I know to many people who turn 16 and some how get their license and have barely driven. Or maybe the DMV should make these first time drivers on their drivers test do something else besides drive through a neighborhood. How and another great thing by Earl, that is good thinking make a kid wait until 18 to drive and tell them that it is no legal for them to drink at the same time. Good thinking on that one, you might as well just give them a loaded gun while you are at it.

Posted by: Keith on Sep 9, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Raising the driver's license age will increase our gas usage. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety needs to get together with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Global Warming folks). Before my two teens started driving, I used a lot more gas driving back and forth to drop them off and pick them up. Now, the Insurance Institute wants us to waste gas by chauffeuring teens for even longer. To raise the age for a driver's license will substantially increase our dependence on foreign oil.

Posted by: Jennifer on Sep 9, 2008 at 10:42 PM
I got my license at the age of 17. I was in a group home when i turned 16 and coulndn't get my license. But I don't agree with this proposal. By 16 teens are ready for jobs and other activities outside the home. There are some parents who can't drive or pick up their teens from work. It would be different in a small town like where i grew up you wouldn't need to drive to work, everything is a 15 minute walk away, however that is very hard to do in Omaha or larger NE cities.

Posted by: Alan on Sep 9, 2008 at 09:42 PM
I had my license and was driving when I was 16. I had long hair, wore heavy medal t-shirts, and I had a job...and never got in an accident. This was back in the late 80's. These safety freaks need to get a life and stop generalizing everybody.

Posted by: howie on Sep 9, 2008 at 09:36 PM
I'll say it again, raise it to 25 and lower it to 75, not popular but if you'd definitely save lives, make the drunks take the bus and ban texting

Posted by: jj on Sep 9, 2008 at 09:22 PM
except that the insurance companies have to pay, why di we want to have them dictate what age our drivers are? Will they soon say you cant drive after you reach 60?

Posted by: Amos on Sep 9, 2008 at 09:11 PM
Why don't we also require them to get a high school diploma before they can get a drivers license. It would make as much or more sense.

Posted by: llr on Sep 9, 2008 at 08:51 PM
Raise it to THIRTY. And raise the drinking age to FORTY.

Posted by: Savannah on Sep 9, 2008 at 08:50 PM
Why dont you worry about the schools wanting 14yr olds drive to school and sports on permits to drive alone! dont you think that would help in saving lives. then tell them that sense parents work ( alot) that they need to change their policys of paractice and game times. Then drivers Ed must be taken, make it available up to 3 times a yr and affordable at all times. curfew for driving till they are 17 with restrictions and consquences if they receive tickets. plus child and parents attend classes if said child receive tickets , that would cure those parents who dont care what, when or who and take extra precaution on letting the child drive when ever they feel like it. Fine the parent of they dont attend the classes! some may say! the child may steel the car. then that child will need to go to jail and lose licence till 18. and ride a bike to work!

Posted by: Todd on Sep 9, 2008 at 08:31 PM
This is a great idea! How many fatalities did Nebraska have this year with 16 year old drivers anyway? I can remember about 5 or 6 at least. The other major factor is teens using cell phones and trying to text while driving. Talking or dialing on a cell phone is very distracting but texting is ten times more distracting! Extremely dangerous!

Posted by: Alisha on Sep 9, 2008 at 08:30 PM
raising the age will not change anything, it is all on how the kids are taught how to drive and it is within experience. it has nothing to do with the age. You can be 23 and just learning to drive and still do the things a 16 year old would do. It is all with experience and how they are taught to drive.

Posted by: Brian on Sep 9, 2008 at 07:47 PM
I agree raise it. I have been driving for the past 4 years and I am not one of the young threats on the road like some new drivers. I don't mind if they raise it now since I would legally be able to drive no matter what. I am a very safe driver and have been. I was in an accident but it wasn't my fault I just follow the rules of the road. Also I am afraid to die and get tickets so solves that problem.

Posted by: mTm on Sep 9, 2008 at 07:34 PM
As an acident investigator - I think it would be a good idea as I have investigated to any fatalities with a 16 or 17 year old driver who was unfortunatey at fault and lost their lives.

Posted by: Huh? on Sep 9, 2008 at 07:22 PM
They want to lower the drinking age but raise the driving age? Okay.....I don't understand this logic

Posted by: Older on Sep 9, 2008 at 07:11 PM
Let the flood of young people's complaints begin...

Posted by: Dan on Sep 9, 2008 at 07:08 PM
My mother would not allow me or my brothers to get our license till we were 17. I must say it did not help me at all. I still got into several acccidents, DUI's, and tickets. I probably should be dead. I think kids should instead be limited on how many others kids are allowed in the car with them and there really should be a curfew.

Posted by: Millard on Sep 9, 2008 at 07:06 PM
I have two teenage drivers. While the statistics noted are disheartening, it all falls back onto driver's education. That education begins when the child is first old enough to be aware of the driving patterns of parents. Most importantly we have to do the impossible, teach all drivers that texting and talking on a cell phone are just not safe!

Posted by: Dave on Sep 9, 2008 at 06:52 PM
I have a better idea. Why not if the the person is under 18,and they are ticketed for going 5mph over the limit or ticket for any at fault accident or other moving violation,i.e. seatbelt violation,talking on cell phone,etc...they loose their liscense until they are 19 or 20? Maybe that would fix the problem.

Posted by: John Q on Sep 9, 2008 at 06:50 PM
Age is a factor, and the girl is right, anyone of any age can be irresponsible. I see more adults chatting on cell phones than teens. More adults are arrested for DWI/DUIs than teens (granted its legal and easier to access). Old drivers cause a ton of accidents, too (just a part of getting old). But with teens the stats are there...so, I propose to throw in other stipulations. If you get good grades and have a job...you get your license at 16 (good grades and a job require responsibility) and have that monitored every six months or so to make sure they're maintaining both. Other than that you get your license at 17. Just a thought...

Posted by: Mike Honcho on Sep 9, 2008 at 06:40 PM
Raise it! 18 is fine with me.

Posted by: Earl on Sep 9, 2008 at 06:19 PM
I AGREE that the driving age should be raised to 17 or 18! They just do not care and are not mature enough to safely drive any younger! At the same time, I AGREE that the drinking age should be lowered to 18. 'Adults' should be able to vote, serve in the military, sign contracts, drive, and drink. Logical.

AP Online Network
YOU CAST - YOUR PICS N VIDEOS
Media Partners