Team-BHP - Minimum driving age: Is 18 too long a wait?

I voted for 21 years as the minimum driving age as young folks needs to be mature to handle responsibilities on the road. Sometimes its just not worth giving them a car which is gonna slam around and kill/maime anyone.

That said doesnt mean those below 21 are immature but we've all read about so many incidents involving underage drivers. I feel its worth the wait for them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue_pulsar (Post 681708)

Also, since you become a major at 18, you will be responsible for your actions.

How I wish !!! That's not true mostly, although it is our biggest expectation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue_pulsar (Post 681708)

But I suggest one improvement to the RTO. Whatever age it is, make the driving test very very strict.

That agree: totally my friend. No greasing palms etc. Clean and fair process is required.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LandCruiser (Post 681630)

A 30 minute documentary on road safety and some real life incidents where people got affected due to lack of awareness of road safety and rules must be mandatory to view for everyone who applies for a license!

Terrific point LC, this is absolutely necessary for the aam junta that takes to the road not forgetting the sons of big rich men who drive mercs etc like they are higher than God Almighty.

Riding or driving safely comes with maturity and understanding. Unfortunately maturity and understanding do not always come with age. Therefore to say that the right time / age limit is 18 or 21 is incorrect. Ofcourse there must be a point of reference as a minimum age. but more important to consider is that there are 1000's of people applying for licences all across the country with no clue nor understanding of road ethics, driving safety, pedestrian safety, or any other form of safety training that will help them become better drivers. The government policy of providing license is a total farce. It therefore is meaningless to talk about age limits when there is no driver safety program pre license. So you or i can be a lunatic or a drunkard or a total illiterate( in terms of driving safety & procedures) , but i can easily procure a license by greasing a few palms of even by sitting at home. We all know it still happens. So there maybe Mr.Suddenly Rich Uncle who decided to start driving at 30 cause he made a windfall from the stock exchange or somwhere buys a Scorpio and zips across with new pride cutting lanes jumping signals and all kinds of unsafe driving stunts he can think off. But since hes got the cash and the age to back him... should he get a license.

Solution:
Make the procuring of a license an event in life. So when you get one there is atleast a chance that you know something about other road users,roads, Driving skills, etc.
it should take atleast 6 months to get a license and the procedure of elimination should be greulling. This will ensure road safety. Also, due to the high dropout rate there will be fewer drivers acquiring licenses in both commercial and the private form. The implications of such a policy are endless and so there will be many to dispute its benifits.
But we have to start somewhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue_pulsar (Post 681708)

But I suggest one improvement to the RTO. Whatever age it is, make the driving test very very strict.

agree: I believe that a person should be a little mature before they take the wheels. But maturity doesn't always comes when you turn 17,18 or 21....

We should make sure the written and driving tests are done properly, it will take a big effort though to get rid of the corruption in our RTO's though.

Apart from making these tests stricter we should also restrict the validity of our licenses to around 5 years, and make people take refresher courses at then end of those 5 years and their licenses can be renewed once that is done...

I agree with the current law though I too had learnt driving when I was 13yrs old.
The problem with driving when you are too young is that you barely are barely mature .
When you are driving you are actually putting your life and others life at risk .
So accordingly if a person is mature at the age of 10 its okay if he drives but there are many who arent mature even at the age of 20 .
In that case I suppose its safer for the government to restrict it at a safer limit.
More over when you attain the age of 18 you are responsible for any criminal act(am not saying 16-year old can justbang the car and walk away) , so that should make a person more careful whilesk he is driving fearing of the aftermaths for being reckless

This is one law that I respect ......but the thing which i dont respect is that even at the age of 20 I have seen many who can barely understand driving ethics or the meaning of responsible driver but they too are issued a license.

If only there had been some kinda mind read and maturity sensor test am sure age neednt be taken in consideration but to my knwoledge there is no such machicne LOL ! so better stick to 18. Thats what I'd recommend.

I voted for 21, and there's a reason for that. From what I understand, guys/gals usually complete their post-secondary studies by the time they are 20 and begin working (if not studying further) when they reach 21. So, the vehicle they buy will have some investment coming out of their pocket. And then they are likely to try and drive more carefully if they don't want to hurt themselves or their cars.

Disclaimer: Some guys may have reached 40 and still not be eligible to have a license based on how they drive!:D

I voted for 21 even though i have been driving(with supervision on empty roads) since i was 13.please dont flame me! i was young and stupid!

I look back on the kind of driving that I did immediately after I got my license and i'm horrified at how reckless I was. its no use saying that there are responsible drivers at all ages, but at 16 or even 18 when your hormones are on free flow and you think you're invincible, even the most mature teenager will succumb.