Drivers education

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Salty, May 25, 2007.

  1. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,134
    Likes Received:
    221
    On another thread about weapons it was asked if weapons training is required prior to issue of a permit.

    I submit there should be required drivers training prior to A) issuance of a permit and B) taking a road test

    Here are my basic recommendations:

    Prior to issuance of a permit ALL applicants would be required to attend a ten hour classroom instruction in at least 2 seperate sessions. A passing grade would be required on a 50/50* test at the end of the course.

    A teen could receive a permit at age 15

    A teen under the age of 19 would be required to have a permit for a minimum of 12 months prior to taking the road test

    A teen age 16 and under would be required at least 10** professional driving lessons ( PDL) .

    A teen 17-18 would be required at least 8 hours of PDL
    A person 19-20 would be required at least 6 hours of PDL
    A person 21-24 would be required at least 4 hours of PDL
    A person 25 and over would be required at least 2 hours of PDL

    A license would be valid for 5 yrs (expiring on the 5th anniversary of birth)

    To renew a license you would have to have at lest 2 hours of PDL or take an abbreviated road test (no parallel parking, or nonsense like that) just basic driving - turns, traffic lights, changing lanes, ect

    * 50 written questions
    50 road sign questions

    ** Each lesson would be at least 1 hour in length, with at least 3 full days between lessons

    So what do you think

    Salty

    PS
    Driving lessons are required in Germany. I undersand it cost 2-3,ooo dollars to obtain a license. And their death rate is less than ours
     
  2. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    I also think there should be a political awareness test for voting, as well intentioned idiots are pretty dangerous.
     
  3. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    The freedom of travel and the right to bear arms is already licensed by the constitution. There should be no licenses, no registrations, no fees required for someone to exercise these rights. To require such is not freedom.
     
  4. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,264
    Likes Received:
    4
    The idiots have as much right to vote as anyone else. This is dangerous. Who would decide who gets to vote, and what questions gat asked ?
     
  5. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hence why I stated what I did. It always brings outrage.

    Well, not always, and to me, that's alarming when someone actually agrees with the statement.

    Driving is not necessary to freely travel.

    However, bearing arms is necessary to keep and bear arms. (However, I do think you can lose this right if you prove yourself irresponsible or dangerous.)

    I think the person who goes down and votes for the worst possible candidate because "you all deserve it!" has the same right to vote as anyone else. (Although I highly support revocation of non-profit status for any group that goes to housing projects to give free rides but only if you vote for a certain candidate.)
     
  6. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,659
    Likes Received:
    190
    Everyone is free to travel without a license. However, if you want to operate potentially dangerous equipment on public roads where you easily have the potential of injuring or killing other persons if you are not competent, you need to maintain certain standards (good vision, knowledge of traffic laws, proven ability to operate the equipment, equipment in safe operating condition, etc.) for the public good.

    I took the train from Fort Worth to Dallas and back again yesterday afternoon for a business meeting. No one asked me to see a license or registration. I paid a very minor fee to travel on the train system (an all day pass to any point in the DFW Metroplex that the system reaches) which was a pittance compared to the cost of gasoline to make that trip.

    When I arrived in Dallas, I decided to walk the 3/4 mile to and from the building where I had my meeting instead of riding the DART light rail train because I had the time and wanted to walk through Dealey Plaza (the site where Kennedy was assasinated). No one asked me for a license or registration or for a fee (although a guy asked me for money to buy "a sandwich").

    But if I wanted to drive the train myself, or drive me pickup back and forth on I-30 and other roads, I would expect there to be some standards for the public good. Traveling within our nation is certainly a right granted by the Constitution. Driving an automobile on public roads is not.

    Hardly. We are way too lax with our automotive licensing as it is. I have know of senior citizens who are legally blind who drove every day. They are a danger to themselves and everyone else on the road. And there are way too many teenagers who obviously don't have the maturity to drive that endanger everyone because they think the interstate highway system is the latest racing videogame.
     

Share This Page

Loading...