🚀 go-pugleaf

Saad Mir <mirs@ix.netcom.com> writes...

>I am not really sure what your take is. 
>Do you think kids should be trained in driver's ed to handle high speed?  

Yep.  The drivers test should comprehensive.  If someone can't demonstrate
the ability to handle a situation, they shouldn't be licensed to legally
be in that situation.  It would be like selling physician's licenses,
and revoking them only after gross violation of the rules that apply to
being a doctor.  You wouldn't put your life in the hands of these people,
but you do when you get on the road with all the incompetent drivers.

I got the M endorcement added to my license recently.  The test was
"pull out, take four rights, pull back in the lot."  I got the license.
That was the first day I had ever ridden a motorcycle on a street (I
rode around a parking lot a few times to get ready for the test).

That is just one example of the incompetent people on the road (I have
since taken rider training).

>Do you think kids should be trained to drive the posted limits, even if
>they have learners and hardships and so on with their limited experience,
>youthful exhuberance, and so on?  

Yep.  My driving has gotten consistently worse as I've gotten older.
I drove better at 16 than I do at 23.  As people get older, they get
more confident.  Just because someone has been driving for years doesn't
mean they ever learned to do it right.

The most dangerous driver are the young and the old.  The older drivers 
actually have more accidents than the younger drivers.

>I still think about a really bad wreck that happened not far from 
>my childhood home, where 4 teens met a concrete retainer at 40mph 
>in a brand-new mustang just presented to the driver hours before.  
>The driver was "unimpaired" by anything other than sheer excitement.  
>Oh, they all died.  Sorry if that's really depressing. 

Was that the prom night thing, where the people in the back seat were
alive when the FD got there, but they couldn't get them out?

Marc