washingtonpost.com  > Metro > Columnists > Dr. Gridlock > Pr. William

Driving Age Should Be Raised to 18

By Ron Shaffer
Thursday, November 4, 2004; Page PW01

Dear Dr. Gridlock:

My heart is again saddened by the loss of another teenager in an automobile accident. This is getting harder and harder to accept.

Parents need to realize that these kids are not grown up and should not be given freedom at the age of 16 to take control of an automobile (especially an SUV). Children are not equipped to handle these vehicles, which are hard for even an experienced, adult driver to handle.

Dr. Gridlock can be reached at (703) 279-3200 or by e-mail at drgridlock@washpost.com.

Add Dr. Gridlock to your personal home page.

Because the parents are not taking responsibility for these children, it is time for the states to take action and stop issuing driver's licenses to children under age 18. At least that would possibly give these children another two years on their life. Hello, senators and congressmen. Are you listening?

I might be considered an outdated parent, but I was a single and divorced parent when both my children took driver's education and other student-driver training courses. When they turned 16, I did not buy them a car, nor did I turn my car over to them to drive as they pleased. They are both over 30 years old, and still alive.

Parents need to wake up and see what is going on. What's with this hurry to get rid of the responsibility of taking your children places and instead of pushing them to their deaths before they become adults?

Rosalie Goosby

Dale City

No licenses until age 18. I support that. What you went through was certainly time-consuming, and maybe even inconvenient for you, but you didn't have to worry about your 16- and 17-year-old children driving into a tree.

Resist Rubbernecking

Dear Dr. Gridlock:

Recently, I sat in stop-and-go traffic (maximum speed 10 mph) for approximately 20 minutes in the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes traveling north on Interstate 395. Why? A major accident in the regular lanes of I-395 north near the Washington Boulevard exit triggered yet another outrageous example of mass rubbernecking.

So, although there were no blockages in the HOV lanes, HOV traffic was backed up several miles because of my fellow commuters' inability to keep their eyes focused on the road ahead of them.

A rubbernecker is defined by my dictionary as an "overly inquisitive person" who "looks about, stares, or listens with exaggerated curiosity." As much as we hate to admit it, many of us fit that description.

We endanger ourselves and others by recklessly exceeding the speed limit en route to our destination, but are more than willing to slow down to catch a fleeting glimpse of the goings-on in another lane.


CONTINUED    1 2 3 4 5    Next >

© 2004 The Washington Post Company