Teen safety program now illegal

[MarkS]

Sorry meamemg but I believe you are incorrect. GDL programs do not increase the risk of older drivers having an accident. They address inexperience COMBINED with risk-taking behaviors that are unique to teenage drivers. I haven't found statistics comparing accident rates of novice teen drivers vs. novice older drivers but what I've read published by the NTSB and NHTSA implies that older novice drivers do not exhibit the same accident rates as novice teen drivers on a miles-driven basis. If you can, please substantiate your claim with stats. I don't need a link, just the name of your source and the numbers.

 

I'm not even remotely sure why you're bringing up drinking age. That's a different topic and has nothing to do with GDL programs.

 

I'm kind of surprised that folks here would be opposed to a graduated driver's license program. Aren't we all volunteers in a program that teaches skills to youth in a graduated manner ensuring they are age appropriate and increasing the challenge of their activites as the youth mature and gain more experience?(This message has been edited by MarkS)

[OldGreyEagle]

If it's illegal to drink under 21 then having a program that allows those who have broken the law "safely" implies that it is ok to break the law. Stealing is against the law, if I steal more than I can carry, can I call the safe ride number to get my loot back home?

 

I think we established that teens were going to have sex no matter what the law says, so why dont we open a safe sex parlour? Clean sheets, plenty of condoms, no responsibility for actions, the whole nine yards

[hops_scout]

I gotta go with OGE on this one. This program does provide a "safety net" for breaking the law. If the kids weren't drinking in the first place, there'd be no need for this program.

[John-in-KC]

My duty as a parent is to provide an appropriate environment for my son, and when he has them, his guests.

 

Sadly, not every parent sees the world that way.

 

How can a group of caring folk compensate for inappropriate behaviors?

 

Safe Rides is one compensating tool. As long as we have parents who don't/won't provide proper environments for their kids, we need something like Safe Rides.

 

Since IL has chosen a law which has a second order consequence of driving Safe Rides into the ground, I'll be sad for the 3d order consequences.

 

Sure makes the issue of who sponsored this Venturing Crew moot, doesn't it?

 

 

[Beavah]

Graduated driving privileges save a significant number of young lives by reducing teen crash fatalities--ranging from 11 to 32 percent for novice drivers in states implementing them according to insurance industry studies. We're not talking about a single life nor are we talking about liberties here at all.

 

Nah, let's get back to the point, eh?

 

Restricting male drivers of all ages would save a significant number of lives. Many, many! According to all kinds of professional studies.

 

Restricting driving to only those adults with a college degree, or limiting the driving privileges of those adults who don't have a college degree would save a significant number of lives. Many, many. According to all kinds of insurance industry and professional studies.

 

You're outlinin' only one half of the argument - benefits. Almost every dumb idea on the planet has some benefits. But in order to make a case, yeh also have to look at costs. Economic costs, costs to families who aren't well-off suburbanites, costs to liberty and whether we want to set precedents of restricting individuals because the demographic group they are a part of shows a moderately higher risk in some area.

 

That's a scary precedent, eh? Cause I guarantee you that each of us is part of a demographic group that has higher risks than others in some area.

 

Beavah

 

 

 

[Beavah]

I gotta go with OGE on this one. This program does provide a "safety net" for breaking the law. If the kids weren't drinking in the first place, there'd be no need for this program.

 

Maybe.

 

But we all try to live by the Golden Rule, eh? And to Help Other People at all Times.

 

What would you want if that were your son or daughter who were stuck somewhere dangerous, and couldn't reach you or was scared to because she'd be grounded?

 

How many people's sons and daughters are you gonna put at risk of dying (and takin' our own families with them) because we say it's their fault the guy who drove 'em to the party got smashed?

 

B

 

[OldGreyEagle]

So, we help all people at all times? Even those carrying off my neighbors goods? Here, let me help you get that stuff out of Bob's house, I know you aer stealing it, but I am helpful.

 

We talk about mixed signals, having such a program is a huge mixed signal. What will stop drunk driving? Life sentences when you are caught first time would be a start. Too severe? OK, maybe it needs work, but there are ways to deal with a problem other than setting in place a safety net for those who choose to break the law. We are supposed to be campassionate, but how much money do I give the neighborhood heroin addict before I am enabling his state of being?

 

How long do I help the crack whore take care of her ever expanding brood before I stop helping?

[FScouter]

No mixed signals here. If you give kids condoms, what do you think is going through their heads??? What do you think he's going to do with it? If you offer to give a kid a ride home when he's loaded, the only message is "cool, go ahead and get wasted, you're expected to do so."

 

If we faciltate bad behaviors, expect to get same. If you want to stop bad behaviors, then do your job as a parent. Teaching your kids is harder to do, but way more effective than picking up the pieces after you failed.

[scoutingagain]

"What would you want if that were your son or daughter who were stuck somewhere dangerous, and couldn't reach you or was scared to because she'd be grounded? "

 

Well I go pick up my own kid in this circumstance and usually end up providing taxi services to several of his friends because we're one of the few parents willing to go get them. But please don't ask my son to volunteer to drive your drunk son home late at night, or your daughter home because she decided to go out with someone elses drunk son. She can get a ride home with my son and be home by 11:00 if she wants. If she wants to hang out with the "cool" kids that drink into the night and then is afraid to ride home, she can call her own parents or a taxi. At some point folks are responsible for the consequences of their own decisions.

 

AS far as restricting liberties go, society, through legislation restricts the privileges of children all the time. That's why there are so few 11 year olds involved in vehicle accidents where they're at fault. That's why the sale of alcohol and cigaretts is restricted based on age. That's why children are not working in factories in this country for 60 hours a week. (Unless you count summer camp staff ) Passing legislation to protect children is not the same as restricting liberties of other groups.

 

SA

 

 

[Beavah]

Passing legislation to protect children is not the same as restricting liberties of other groups.

 

Yah, that's always the claim, eh?

 

Passing legislation to restrict young adults 18-21 from drinking is not the same as restricting liberties of other groups. It's "protecting young adults."

 

It does mean that a 19-year-old can be trusted with an M-16 doin' convoy duty in Iraq, but can't buy a beer with his fellow soldiers when he gets home. As long as it doesn't stop us folks in "other groups" from buyin' a glass of wine with our meal, it's OK.

 

Passin' legislation to restrict liberties of gun owners ain't the same as restricting liberties of "other groups", as long as we're not in the group that is bein' legislated against.

 

Folks always use the same excuses for passin' laws that restrict the liberty of others.

 

Parents should be free to decide whether their kid can volunteer for and serve in a Safe Rides program. No reason for the government to take that liberty away from parents, which is da real effect of the legislation. Not restrictin' the liberty of kids. Restricting the liberty of adult parents.

 

Beavah

 

[Beavah]

If you offer to give a kid a ride home when he's loaded, the only message is "cool, go ahead and get wasted, you're expected to do so."

 

Really??

 

So if I give a co-worker a ride home when he's had "one too many", that's the wrong thing to do? Wrong to take the keys away from the guy at the company picnic who is slurrin' his speech?

 

Better to tell 'em they're on their own, and free to go make orphans of some kids when they run head-on into a parent's car on their way home?

 

Or is it only helpin' young people that's a problem? Helpin' a friend who got stranded because his car broke down or because his designated driver got sloshed is OK. Just don't help a kid.

 

A guy I really like was well known for helpin' out folks like corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes. He was also pretty strongly opposed to authority figures who would put "burdens on other men's backs and lift not a finger to help them."

 

Beavah

 

[hops_scout]

Beavah, your example of the co-worker having one too many and getting a ride is different than these teens providing a ride for other teens who consumed alcohol. Your co-worker (I'm assuming of course) is allowed to have alcohol. The teen, by law, is not.

 

As for your 19 year old soldier example-- in several states (not sure which) I have been told it is legal for that 19 year old soldier to drink alcohol with his fellow soldiers ON BASE. Like I said, I don't know particulars for this, but I have heard of it.

[FScouter]

"Better to tell 'em they're on their own, and free to go make orphans of some kids when they run head-on into a parent's car on their way home?"

 

Now you're talking crazy. You teach them BEFOREHAND that booze is dangerous and they run a big risk of killing someone by doing so. Time, energy, and resources spent with a ride program for drunk teenagers is a typical example of addressing the results of a problem instead of fixing the problem - teenage drunkenness. Yeah maybe it helps a little, but mainly it just gives people a warm fuzzy feeling.

 

Let's get real and FIX the real problem.

[John-in-KC]

OK, I'll speak as a soldier...

 

I can say categorically here in the United States, a 17-20 year old soldier of the US Army cannot have a beer, let alone stronger drink, on a military installation... unless he wants to see his company commander and get non-judicial punishment.

 

There are a very few exceptions to this, usually involving the anniversary of the units founding (Organization Day). It usually requires a battalion commander to go see his commanding general.

 

I do not know the current policy for the Sister Services, nor do I know policy in Korea or Germany. The last time I checked, the CENTCOM AOR was dry for all ages.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What EagleSon does is my business, and his moms. I pray I've raised him right, and that when the time comes, he'll enjoy the pleasures of adulthood, including physical love and alcohol, responsibly.

 

I am not allowed to be responsible for someone eles' child, unless I see them where I can call 911 and ask for assistance. If I can get a drunken teen off the road, be it voluntarily (calling parents/peers/Safe Ride) or calling 911, I will. The object is to remove a hazard for the rest of us.

[hops_scout]

John, here is an article talking about the Marines allowing it on certain bases for special events such as the Marine Corps' Birthday.

 

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/05/18/news/top_stories/1_04_525_17_07.txt

 

This appears to probably fall under what you stated. With a quick search, that was all I could find. Like I said, I had heard about it but didn't know details.

 

Here is an article about a Wisconsin bill that would allow for it. This article does not have much information.

 

http://www.wisopinion.com/blogs/2005/11/drink-up-soldier-under-age-no-problem.html