Should the driving age be raised above 17?

[Slowpoke]

This topic is brought up all the time. Many news sites have reported over the past few years that it will be going up, though it's never actually happened and no official, clear statement on the matter has been made. Some states in America permit teenagers to drive at ages as low as 14 whilst some countries require you to be 21. So what do you think? Is it fine how it is, should be lowered or should it be raised?

Discuss!

[Ardemax]

To start off the debate; in my opinion it doesn't matter when a young person starts driving, the first lesson and their first few years as a driver will be pretty dreadful, as in they're still starting out.

Whether they're 17 or 21, maybe even 25 the affects will still be the same so imho there's no reason or worry to change the limit yet.

[Alkaz]

I agree ^, just because you've passed your test doesnt mean your a fully fleged professional driver. They normally do say that and that passing your test means youve learned all the basics of driving so you can carry on learning and become more skilled as a driver. Good drivers dont have instructors for 3 or 4 years. So I dont think their really is a need for the law to be changed, and when you think 17 is a good age as it allows people around a year to learn before they go into the big bad world and it will normally be easier for them to have a car.

[Black_Apalachi]

No I most certainly do not. I waited all my life for the day I turned 18 so I could drive (realised when I got older that it's 17 but yeah ).

I don't see what the point would be in raising the age, it won't make a difference to your experience. The only thing you can say is that you'll learn better the younger you are and I like to think even in the short time I've been driving, I've definitely gained a lot of experience by learning from mistakes.

Older people would probably be worse at getting going in fact. My mum is about 50 and she never learned to drive. I can't imagine her driving, even for a second and if she suddenly decided to pursue the idea, it would make me so nervous and uncomfortable and I'd probably even try and dissuade her from it tbh.

[GommeInc]

To start off the debate; in my opinion it doesn't matter when a young person starts driving, the first lesson and their first few years as a driver will be pretty dreadful, as in they're still starting out.

Whether they're 17 or 21, maybe even 25 the affects will still be the same so imho there's no reason or worry to change the limit yet.

Agreed The only reason for putting it up reported by alot of people is to drive down on young/new drivers having accidents. It's kinda obvious any new driver is likely to have accidents, just look at any other activity where a first time might not necessarily be perfect, and alot of the times it's just being in the wrong place at the wrong time :/ 17 is the right time to learn, you don't have anything else that takes up that much time in that part of your life - college is usually filled with loads of free time. Quite alot of new drivers I know of are very cautious, which is good. The only ones you have to worry about are the minority of imbesiles who find it fun to race other people and generally be a nuisance.

[Yoshimitsui]

I am in separate minds, as i was desperate to get driving and couldn't imagine still wiating now if the age limit was higher. Although i think in the long run it could reduce problems but then it may cause even more illegal driving. But i think you should have some form of 'aptitude test' in some cases.

[Nixt]

I am in separate minds, as i was desperate to get driving and couldn't imagine still wiating now if the age limit was higher. Although i think in the long run it could reduce problems but then it may cause even more illegal driving. But i think you should have some form of 'aptitude test' in some cases.

Isn't that essentially what the theory test is? It requires a certain amount of aptitude (not much, I know...).

[Slowpoke]

Isn't that essentially what the theory test is? It requires a certain amount of aptitude (not much, I know...).

A lot of the theory test is general common sense which is a good thing in my opinion. I have friends who have attempted it six or seven times and are still failing it, mainly because they treat like they would treat a school test and don't revise for it. It's those people that are wasting £38 everytime they fail though.

[Tash.]

I don't think it should. Like others have said, essentially no matter when you learn to drive (within reason obviously) you aren't likely to be excellent at it. With that in mind, I don't think it matters whether you are 17, 18, 25, 30 or even 40 because you still start off with similar skill sets. The only reason you could argue for raising it is that with age supposedly comes maturity (although that is debatable with some people). But really, raising the age limit from 17 - 18/19 is not going to make much of a difference in maturity in a lot of people so it might aswell just stay as it is. However, I do think that there should be a minimum amount of driving lesson a person should have before they can take their practical test. That should improve a persons abilities and make them less dangerous.

[Yoshimitsui]

Isn't that essentially what the theory test is? It requires a certain amount of aptitude (not much, I know...).

Yes, but as stated above the theory was pretty much common sense for me whereas the hazard perception was like a game, master it and you have passed it.
What i speak of is something that could be referred to as an 'idiot' test, to basically test those who have inhibitions to go and drive like they own the road and have no care in the world.