Category: Driving

Introduction

This essay considers arguments by Debra Leach in her article “Drunken Driving”.

The debate on the acceptable level of alcoholic content that a driver should take has been an intriguing one in the past decades. In most countries, the governments have imposed restriction on the amount of alcohol that an individual can consume and still be allowed to drive. The restriction is aimed at reducing the exacerbating road carnage that has been claiming thousands lives each year.

Due to the high death rates, most states in the US have restricted the amount of alcohol drivers should consume to 0.08 BAC. This limit surpass the set limit the victim is liable for heft penalty. However, antagonists of belief have been quick to nullify imposition of tough penalties on drunk drivers as well as restricting the amount of alcohol a driver should take and drive. Since the topic has attracted diverse opinion, this essay attempts to evaluate the arguments of both sides of the divide.

Argument for Tough Drinking Laws

Following the steady increase in drunken driving associated accidents, Christie Wright- the then New Jersey Governor, imposed strict penalties for drunken driving in her state. She helped to enforce the “Teri’s Law”, which stipulated the legal amount of alcohol a driver should taken and be allowed to drive. The law set 0.08 Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) and any excess intake would attract penalties such as imprisonment, fines or even confiscation of the driving license.

Her decision was supported by the traffic police reports that asserted that up to 55.3 percent of all the accidents that were experienced in the previous decade originated from drivers under alcohol influence. Further field, similar decisions have been adopted by authorities to restrict drunk drivers from taking to the roads. The penalty that have been imposed in different countries, some have imposed the maximum amount of alcohol one can consume while other have opted to confiscated victims driving Licenses.

Imposition of Teri’s Law has resulted to a drastic reduction in the road accidents. The traffic report has revealed that up to 7000 people have been saved from road carnage in the previous decade. Regulating alcohol consumption does not only help drivers decision making but also it helps their visibility. It has also been understood that drunk drivers are often victim of losing their control as their vision is impaired by the alcohol content beyond the 0.08 level.

Investigation done by the police on exact of the death that claimed 3 people revealed that the driver had more than twice the amount of alcohol thereby exceeding the legal intake. The report revealed that the vehicle was over speeding and as a result, the driver lost control. Most of the road accidents are of similar nature and the loss of people can be mitigated by imposing the rule.

The adoption of strict driving penalties has not only helped reduce the amount of accidents but also it has promoted morally accepted behaviors amongst people. Most people have refrained from drinking excessively, especially from social palaces. However, they prefer to indulge excessively from the confines of their houses. The tough rules have discouraged the young and practicing addicts from indulging in alcohol while others have been forced to fully refrain from the addiction.

From this point of view, the tough rules have done much good to the entire state. The endeavor to uphold the sanctity of life remains one of the key aims of imposition such strict laws. Majority of the victims are innocent family members driven by a drunken man. The foundation of this argument is stemmed from the point many innocent people should be saved from the action of a single person.

All the states, which have adopted the tough rules, have been counting much progress in curbing unwanted deaths. New Jersey, Alabama and thirteen other states have successively set the maximum alcohol level in the blood that a person should have and drive. All these states are experiencing huge gains from reduction of death resulting from the road accidents. According to the highway traffic, excess of 0.08 alcohol content in the body makes the driver to be a potential killer.

Hence, the need to restrict alcohol consumption need not to be overemphasized because the result of these measure have been encouraging. Although, some section of the government are crying fault due to decrease in revenue as a result is reduced sales, the public good achieved is of more importance. It is evident that the annual revenue generated by the saved lives by far outweighs that of reduced sales and therefore it is imperative to impose the law.

Argument against Tough Drinking Laws

Although the decision to impose the strict law seems beneficial and acceptable, it also has its darker side. A critical assessment of the impacts that Teri’s law generates reveals that there is much inherent social harm than it meets the eye. Imposition of 0.08 alcohol level would shift the attention of the police to dealing with innocent people rather dealing with the main terror problem that has worse impact.

The rule would mean that American jail would be filled up by the alcoholics and there will be no room for real state offenders. According to the FBI, more than 1.4 million people were arrested in 1994 for impaired driving. This figure arise the question should more people be jailed for excessive drinking. Biased resource allocation means that the country attracts more trouble that it is necessary. The only way to address the issue is to have a holistic perspective of what the country wants and then distributing resources according the need.

On the other hand, allocation of more resources in dealing with alcohol problem would mean that overlooking other crimes that are rampant in the country. Historically, the US has always been a terror target and therefore substantial effort should be put in place to curb the problem.

It is discouraging to note that in US more than 40 percent of murder cases and about 80 per cent of property crimes go unnoticed. Hence, the biased attention to alcoholic drivers paves room for more dangerous crimes to thrive in the country, which is unacceptable. In fact, the country should consider lifting the law to allow the police resources to be utilized for a nobler course. Unless, the government decides to without the alcohol law other crimes will continue to thrive and the public security will be at stake.

According to the study which was carried out by the Harvard Injury control Centre about 67 and 41 per cent of males females who succumbed to road accidents had more than twice the legal amount of 0.08 Blood Alcohol Content (BAC). This implies that setting the BAC at 0.08 misses out the actual killers.

Similarly, some people vision is impaired by overworking, lack of enough sleep or due to poor eyesight. Hence, generalizing that road accidents are only caused by drunken drivers is an erroneous idea. Therefore, the law should either be amended to Increase BAC to target the main victims or be abolished. Whatever the action that is taken some problems are associated and thus the government should be vigilant in dealing the issue without generating more troubles.

The decline in death from road accidents does not justify tightening of the law or increasing the penalty. The government should look for other ways of dealing with the impeding problem rather than witch-hunting drunk drivers. A diversified approach to the problem would provide a better solution while putting into consideration the other aspects, which are affecting the wider population.

Campaign to enhance people to engage in responsible practices can effectively deal with the problem at hand. It should also be borne in that imposing tough penalties will lead to some related issues such as unemployment alcohol related fields. Worse still is the strife that tough penalties would generate, as people will be forced to rebel restriction. Such a situation would aggravate the whole issue.

Conclusion

Although this debate has attracted sharp divisions, the imposition of strict penalties to drunken drivers does not provide sufficient solution to the exact problem. The evidence presented by the police has revealed a strong correlation between fatal accidents and excessive alcohol consumption. However, different researches associate the more fatalities with excessive drinking beyond the legal 0.08 BAC. The conflicting opinions have left this issue with much controversy and more differences are expected to emerge in the future.

Having analyzed the ensuing argument I am convicted that the government should withhold the 0.08 rule and concentrate on the more severe issues such as insecurity and property crimes. Nonetheless, this does not me I encourage drunk driving but all individuals should practice restraint from indulgence of excessive alcohol consumption. An overwhelming adoption of the self-control would save the country much agony and struggles. Eventually, the country will be in position to distribute its resource equally.

Driving under the influence is a serious issue, which affects not only the driver but also puts other vehicles and their passengers at risk. Aside from the fact that consuming alcohol for teens is illegal in the first place, moreover deciding to drive while impaired puts them in four times bigger risk of getting into the car accident than adults (Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia). Alcohol seems tempting for adolescents, and it is no secret that most teenagers consume alcohol while in high school; thus, some neglect being responsible and end up driving cars when drunk.

According to the statistics, the leading cause of death among teenagers in the United States is motor vehicle crashes, with one in three deaths caused by impaired driving (Hafner et al.). Therefore, because of such high rates of fatal accidents, there is a vital need to find a way to decrease the number of car crashes involving drunk teenagers. In this proposal, I would like to reach out to the local school principal with an offer to conduct a unique program that should influence teenagers regarding the topic of adolescent driving under the influence (DUI).

Such devastating statistics about deadly vehicle crashes that involve drunk teenagers’ urges to serious actions for prevention of adolescents from sitting behind the wheel while under the influence. In 2016, 2,433 Americans died from getting into a car accident in 2016; among them, a quarter of the fatal incidents occurred because of driving under the influence (Hafner, et al.). A school is a place where teenagers spend most of their time during the weekdays, where it is easy to influence them. I encourage the principle to join the initiative with a goal to prevent teenage DUI as much as possible because it is an important issue that has to be addressed. With creative and innovative methods, it is possible to influence the high schoolers and show them the correct models of behavior.

Various methods are used for the prevention of teenage drunk driving; they vary from strict administrative laws to psychological influence. In the article by Perri Klass, it is stated that adopting more restriction policies for DUI overall is generally associated with less fatal incidents (Klass). Undeniably, that restrictive policies must exist, and violating them must have an according punishment; however, it is not that simple.

Such policies must be individual to not only each state but also every town due to their specific characteristic: like lengthy highways, amount of vehicles, etc. Adding a single policy to the regulation would not change the overall situation drastically; it may decrease a small percentage of the accidents, and thus, will not show a significant result in the general picture. Klass said, “It’s really the collection of them all that seems to be effective”. Therefore, creating more restriction policies is individual to every town and would not make a significant impact on the problem as a whole.

One more proposed solution to the problem of teenage drinking and driving is stricter parent control. Yale University’s article states that strong parenting can act as a great form of prevention and may be able to eliminate the problem at its beginning (Belli). The writer says that protective parenthood and stricter teenage control can be useful even after a few years when children leave for college. No doubt, that good parenting, in most cases, has a good influence on children, but in the position of total control, it can bring more harm than good behavior.

One more reason for its ineffectiveness is each parent has his or her own methods of upbringing, which has a significant influence too. Therefore, such a way of fighting teenage drunk driving has many nuances; thus, we cannot talk about its universal effectiveness for all teenagers.

One more suggested solution is having much stricter policies referring to selling alcohol. The author of the referenced article, Katherine Du, believes that creating new policies, which are aimed at the more general audience, would have more influence than targeting only the teenage population. Du suggests limiting hours when alcohol can be sold, raising taxes for alcohol, and even eliminating some stores that sell alcohol.

The author and the pediatrician she interviewed say that because of the age, the adolescents become a sensitive group when it comes to the price, therefore, raising the bar on alcohol sells should reduce the consumption of alcohol among teenagers, which consequently will reduce drinking and driving car accidents among them (Du). Undoubtedly, the adoption of such policies would have an impact on teenagers and their choice when it comes to buying alcohol; however, it may not work that way. Looking from the perspective of being a teenager, after adopting such policies, adolescents would still find a way to buy alcohol; however, it might be a worse version of it, which could influence the organism in a harmful way. Moreover, in theory, such a method might even raise the probability of a drunk teenager to sit behind the wheel.

The solution, which would work the best, in my opinion, must be based on influencing the mindset of teenagers. Visualization is always a great way to show and make people feel certain emotions. That is why mock crashes held in schools have shown higher effectiveness than any other suggested method of fighting teenage drinking and driving. The majority of simulated crashes events target teenagers and seek a goal of raising awareness concerning fatal drinking and driving. Such re-enactments show student’s actual staged car accidents involving the police and ambulance who show the victims and their death right in front of the students. After the act high schoolers face a serious talk where the effect of fatal DUI on the close people is explained.

In Houston, a program called “Shattered Dreams” that focuses explicitly on organizing such 2-days events exists. After their first mock crash in one of the high schools, students were stunt and not only were genuinely influenced by it.

Teenagers wrote numerous thank-you letters to the hospital, saying that this re-enactment changed their mindset about drinking and driving (Bare and Garza). In the state of Illinois, a similar mock-crash program was conducted by the Red Cross organization, which was called “Operation Prom Night.” Logically the program took place around prom season for high schoolers, which main goal was to promote alcohol abstinence and safe behavior during this time and after-prom (Hafner, et al.). Such an event became an every-year activity.

It is a community-sponsored with the help of grants from the Illinois Department of Transportation, so it does not require any budgeting directly from the school. After the event, “students were 1.39 times (95%) less likely to report drinking and driving or get into a car with someone a drunk person. In addition, they reported they were 1.7 times more likely (95%) to often think of the risks associated with drinking and driving” (Hafner, et al., 86). Such a method of raising awareness about teenage DUI would be the most effective and could be implemented with the help of the town and the community; therefore, all that is needed from a principal is his/her approval and an active participation in it.

Though, contradicting audience might have arguments that such crashes require too much effort, time, people’s input, and money, it is possible to refute. Participation for the program is voluntary, and by doing so, for example, the police department will increase the rate of social responsibility and show that it supports community projects. Moreover, the crash re-enactment program should be funded by the community and the city; such initiatives must be recognized as essential for teenagers because they show tremendous success, as stated above.

Concluding, the adolescent DUI problem is not one to avoid, as 1 in 4 teenage fatal vehicle crashes occur with a drunk driver. There are many possible methods of fighting with it; however, physiologically influencing teenagers shows the most effectiveness. Crash re-enactment programs visually show high schoolers the tragic consequences of impaired driving, which affects their mindset. Local governments, as well as health and police departments must support such an initiative. I urge the principal to review this proposal and implement it in the school, as it can help save the lives of adolescents.

Works Cited

Bare, Katherine, and Robin Garza. “Shattered Dreams: A County Hospital’s Commitment to Preventing Teenage Drinking and Driving.” Journal of Emergency Nursing, vol. 45, no. 5, 2019, pp. 579–581. Web.

Belli, Brita. “Yale-Led Team Finds Parents Can Curb Teen Drinking and Driving.” YaleNews. 2020. Web.

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “Teen Dui Statistics and Impaired Driving.” Teen Driver Source. Web.

Du, Katherine. “Tighter Alcohol Curbs For All Help Reduce Teen Motor Vehicle Deaths.” NPR. 2016. Web.

Hafner, John W., et al. “The Effect of a Community Crash Reenactment Program on Teen Alcohol Awareness and Behavior.” Adolescent Health, Medicine and Therapeutics, vol. 10, 2019, pp. 83–90. Web.

Klass, Perri. “When Teenagers Drink, Avoiding the Risks From Driving.” The New York Times. 2017. Web.

Introduction

Prelude

In the summer of 2005, a driving accident took the life of sixteen year old Alicia when she was out with her sixteen year old boy friend. What was most shocking was that Alicia was wearing her seatbelt, but when her boy friend lost control of the car and the car rammed into a utility pole, the sixteen year old daughter of Dr. Arturo Betancourt was killed instantly (Stafford). One cannot help but feel that perhaps there is much more to driving regulations than the abiding of speed restrictions, seatbelt obligations and traffic signals. The driver was sixteen year old as was the passenger. In the very same regard, numerous arguments have been made in the debate of whether or not the minimum driving age for teenagers should be increased from sixteen to eighteen.

Common ground

A large number of teenagers agree with the fact that the number of increasing accidents involving teenagers is largely because of the submission to adolescent influences on the part of the teenagers (The Standard Times). In a survey performed by The Standard Times that shall be referred to later on in the paper as well, teenagers tend to consider the driving license as a sign of freedom and a key to a carefree world. They begin to see speed and risk as instruments from which they can derive thrill.

Destabilization

There have been speculations that the origin of the increasing number of teenage casualties has been because of the tendency that teenagers have to accelerate to precarious speeds without using the seat belts. By violating basic rules such as speed limits and driving instructions, teenagers put themselves in positions where their decisions become threats to their own lives.

Cost and Consequence

This motion has also been seconded by the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety in the United States which has shown a considerable amount of doubt regarding whether or not 16 remains an age suitable enough to allow teenagers to drive (Dawson College). This statement was given by the institute only after extensive research had been carried out on the subject. The minimum driving age has become the subject of debate in Canada in light of recent accident trends pertaining to young drivers in the region. It is estimated that road accidents take away five thousand (5000) teenagers from their parents every year.

Problem/ Thesis

In light of the facts stated above, the thesis statement of this paper is that the minimum driving age should most certainly be raised from sixteen to eighteen years of age in Canada since it is the only remaining option to decrease the increasing number of teenage road accident casualties.

Opposition claim

However, there is criticism that the solution of the problem does not lie in increasing the minimum driving age but in improving the standards of education of driving education. Teenagers are of the opinion that by increasing the minimum driving age from what it is now, the number of problems created will be more than the number of problems solved.

Reason for opposition claim

In a survey performed by The Standard Times, it was observed that teenagers are of the opinion that having attained their driver’s license they have become free of all obligations related to their transport issues (The Standard Times). They begin to consider and rely upon the option of over speeding to carry out strenuous daily schedules.

Transition based on contrast

However, this does not change the fact that road based driving accidents have now reached a point where they are regarded as the number one killer of teenagers. The graduating license system appears to be doing its job in the regulation of deciding who gets to drive and who does not, but it appears that the system requires assistance, in the form of an increase in the minimum age of the people who are allowed to take the test.

Thesis evaluation claim

Just as was discussed in the last report, this report also chose to draw the reader’s attention to violent, rash and irrational nature that youngsters choose to adopt when they are driving unsupervised (Kelly and Nielson). The report states that in times when youngsters are unsupervised, the chances that excessive speed will be complimented by drinking and a desire to drive without seat belts begins to dominate.

Reason for thesis evaluation claim

At this point, we can draw a significant inference that there is another deeper element that causes youngsters to drive precariously. This element is the fact that youngsters choose to regard the vehicle as an object that is meant to provide them a means of entertainment rather than one that is meant to provide them a means of transport. In this perspective, the subjects choose to concentrate more on their personal selves than on the environment in which their vehicle is moving. The strengthening of this perception through peer pressure and the like causes the focus to move from driving the vehicle to using it as an instrument. However, the fact that the changing of the perception does not change the rapidly moving environment around them causes a clash of actions to take place. This clash of actions is when the accident occurs and damage is suffered by more than one party in most cases.

Supporting evidence

However, this is not the only research study that has revealed complications in the current driving license regulation of the system. Another study by Mary Kelly and Norma Nielson has revealed that merely passing the testing procedures that have been put into place for giving licenses are not enough to evaluate precisely whether or not a person can be a responsible driver when on the road. The report evaluated the driving trends of aged drivers as well as young drivers (OECD/ECMT Transport Research Centre, OECD, European Conference of Ministers of Transport, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations. Economic Commission for Europe). In relation with younger drivers, the analysts found that there was an element that could not be replaced with practice in the case of teenage drivers. This element was experience. The analysts found that if there was a similarity in the driving accidents in cases of teenage drivers, it was the lack of driving experience that the young drivers had. The report showed that experience allowed drivers to exercise a better understanding of the road signs and serves to allow the drivers to exercise more practical techniques when compared to novice drivers who choose to rely on tips and techniques that they have recently learned of or have only read about before.

The report highlights that novice drivers are able to manage physical and mental tests in controlled driving conditions during driving tests and practices but the complete change in surroundings that they come across when they have to drive on actual terrain puts them into a position to which they have not been exposed to before let alone hold any experience in (Brown, Larson and Saraswati). The report stresses on the point that in times like these, a task as simple as that of changing lanes can become one that can be seriously misjudged and may lead to an otherwise avoidable accident.

Logic behind support

Even though every province in Canada has adopted varying procedural systems to implement a sound system that ensures that only fully trained people are allowed to drive, we can infer from the accident toll that there appears to be a chink in the system that is being overseen by the process that is implemented in the training of drivers.

Needless to say, the move to increase the minimum driving age comes as a revision of a previous decision to allow teenagers to drive at the age of sixteen, but it appears from the casualty counts that the decision has been one that has been taken undue advantage of and the level of sophistication that was expected was not something that can be expected from the mind of a sixteen year old of the modern day world.

Conclusion

Recalling of thesis statement

This brings us back to the thesis statement of the paper about the concern for the fact that the minimum driving age in Canada should be increased if the thousands of lives being lost every year are to be saved.

Benefits

Should the minimum driving age be increased, it will be a measure that will allow for the purpose of saving lives to be achieved.

The increase in the minimum driving age will allow for teenagers to be kept under adult supervision for the period of their ages that they are most vulnerable to the quips of adolescence and submission to peer pressure.

Negative implications

However, if the minimum driving age is increased and the measure is implemented, we must be wary of the fact that teenagers will not comply with the altered law almost instantly but will have to be taught to do so and that violations of the altered law can be expected for which traffic regulation enforcement agencies should be trained as well.

Prelude in light of consequences

Had the minimum driving age been already increased, countless lives would have been saved. Perhaps had Alicia’s boyfriend chosen to drive the car at a low speed, Alicia’s parents would have had the opportunity to be blessed with the sight of seeing their daughter graduate.

Warrant for conclusion

Therefore, we can conclude from the discussion in the paper that the claim to increase the minimum driving age is indeed well justified and is a measure that should be taken if thousands of lives are to be prevented from being lost every year.

Works Cited

Brown, Benson Bradford, Reed Larson and T. S. Saraswati. The world’s youth: adolescence in eight regions of the globe. Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Dawson College. “Is 16 too young to be driving?; Insurance Institute wants age raised.” The Gazette (2008): E. 5.

Kelly, Mary and Norma Nielson. “Why Age Matters.” CBCA Complete (2006).

OECD/ECMT Transport Research Centre, OECD, European Conference of Ministers of Transport, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations. Economic Commission for Europe. Young drivers: the road to safety. OECD Publishing, 2006.

Stafford, Rob. The perils of teen driving. 2005. Web.

The Standard Times. Teens speak out on speeding. 1999. Web.

Introduction

Today’s world is quite different from that of the past, especially with regards to the amount of freedom that children are allowed. In the past, one would be required to work hard in school, graduate, find a job then perhaps afford to buy oneself a car. This is not the case today. With today’s children, parents are all about making them happy as well as making up for a lost time, considering the fact that most parents are absentees due to their work schedules (Fleming, 54).

Children as young as 16 years can now afford driving permits in some states within the United States. For instance, according to Phoenix laws in Arizona, children under the age of 18 years can obtain Graduated Driver License but need to have completed 20 hours of supervised, behind-the-wheel daytime driving practice (Copeland, 1). With the Class G Driver License, the teenager is not allowed to drive between midnight and 5 am unless accompanied by a legal guardian or parent who also has a valid driving license. Anyone found going against these laws is liable to conviction (Winters, 77).

Personally, I do not think that 16-year-old children should be allowed to drive or be given driving permits; this is what my claim will argue. In this day and age, we have seen a lot of children driving cars without driving licenses. Such children are mostly taught by their peers and, therefore, do not necessarily pass through the legal requirements of obtaining driving permits (Fahlberg, 20). These children are also potentially at risk and also tend to put others at risk of accidents or even death as well. Children under the age of 18 years should not be allowed to get driving permits unless they are well trained in an authorized place.

Discussion

There are those who may argue that children under the age of 16 years should be allowed driving permits since today’s children tend to mature rather quickly and are therefore more responsible and capable of handling themselves (Wanberge, 64). One thing that has not changed in the course of the years is the excitement that a driver’s license tends to bring to a teenager. Acquiring a driver’s license has been observed to be some sort of a rite of passage for the majority of teenagers, even though the minimum age for an unlimited license is slowly creeping up in a few states (Fleming, 55).

Those who are in support of teenagers obtaining driving permits say that to such children, getting a driver’s license is more than just freedom and independence. It usually means that the 16-year-old is one step closer to affording his/her own car (Copeland, 1). It also means that they do not have to ask for their parent’s permission in order to be driven to their friend’s house or go to the mall. Grown-ups were once teenagers, and the fact is, teenagers do not like it when they are treated as young children. Having a driving permit allows the 16-year-old to feel adult-like and responsible (Winters, 79).

Those arguing for teenagers to be allowed driving permits also suggest that having a car gives the 16-year-old a sense of pride and self-esteem. Despite the fact that some may have different opinions regarding their driving skills and still wince at the notion of handing them the keys, they will still feel great about themselves (Fahlberg, 21).

The Issue at Hand

Another reason as to why some may support 16-year-old children having driving permits is because behind the wheel practice has been observed to be the leading factor that contributes to less driving accidents (Wanberge, 69). In spite of the various advantages associated with allowing 16-year-old children to have driving permits, I still think that they should not be allowed the same. Recent studies have shown that among the main leading causes of loss of life of numerous teenagers are car accidents (Fleming, 56). According to recent statistics, 16-year-old children are far more likely to lose their lives in car accidents as compared to other drivers (Copeland, 1).

As soon as teenagers acquire their driving permits, their parents are not usually able to direct them. This is because the majority of these children are still in high school or in college and are therefore looking for self-rule and lack of restrictions (Winters, 81).

This, in turn, results in more self-confidence than necessary, making their parents lose control over their children in the process. In addition, children aged between 15 years and 16 years are still quite inexperienced in regards to life, and without their parents’ guidance, they can easily make the wrong choices or decisions. An example is given of one Alicia Betancourt, a 16-year-old high school teenager who, after obtaining her driving permit, started going out without her parents’ knowledge (Fahlberg, 22). After a while, she was found among a crowd of other young teenagers engaging in drugs.

I believe that 16-year-old children should not be given driving permits because they are generally not good drivers. The majority of them also tend to be rather self-indulgent and less mature (Wanberge, 73). Teenagers are quite audacious, and once they are behind the wheel, they mechanically want to show off by speeding up. This has been observed as being true of young teenage males. 16-year-old children are not only vulnerable because of the need for more experience behind the wheel but also due to the distinct makeup of their adolescent brain (Fleming, 57). This means that for a 16-year-old, the brain is at its peak with regard to the acquisition and retention of new information.

Areas needed for mediating emotional responses as well as impulse control are usually the very last to develop and may therefore not reach full maturing until one reaches the age of 20 years (Copeland, 1). 16-year-old drivers are also more vulnerable to distractions than other older drivers; for instance, they can be easily distracted by sending text messages to their friends. According to recent studies, drivers under the age of 18 years are more likely to utilize the phone while driving as compared to older drivers, and this is a key resultant of many accidents in the United States (Winters, 83).

Sixteen-year-old children should not be given driving permits due to the high number of accidents as well as deaths of young drivers as a result of driving. In the 1990s, an estimated 63,000 teenage drivers lost their lives in traffic accidents, meaning that more than 100 children tend to lose their lives every week. It is also unfortunate to learn that the number of 16-year-old children who lose their lives due to car accidents is rapidly increasing (Wanberge, 75).

Despite the fact that there may be those teenagers who are actually responsible behind the wheel, 16-year-olds generally have some rather depressing statistics with regards to driving. Teenage drivers, particularly males, are more likely to underestimate dangerous conditions, become distracted by their passengers, and drive too fast (Fleming, 58). Studies have also indicated that such young drivers are also less likely to wear safety belts and tend to drive while under the influence.

As we have seen earlier on, some parents argue that allowing 16-year-old children to have driving permits allows them to have the freedom and independence to drive themselves to school, thus saving their parents a lot of activity and time. However, such parents also need to remember that allowing their teenagers to drive to school can encourage truancy (Copeland, 1). Eighteen states have so far connected teenage student drivers to habitual school absence since owning a car makes it easier for them to meet up with their peers who are also skipping school.

Proposed Solutions

16-year-old children should not be allowed driving permits because they would not only cause more accidents on the road but also because they are not as mature or responsible as some people might assume them to be. Fortunately, all is not lost regarding the current problem that is being debated in most states. In the state of Arizona and specifically Phoenix, grants are driving permits to those under the age of 16 years (Fleming, 59).

A proposed solution would be to limit the circumstances under which such children should be allowed to drive. The majority of states have laws granting privileges to new drivers but in various steps referred to as Graduated Licensing Programs (Winters, 85). This program is currently being used in Phoenix, Arizona, where in order for one to apply for the license, they must have held an Arizona instruction permit, which also needs to be valid during the application period (Fahlberg, 23). Those who do not reside within the state are required to bring with them their current identification cards and driver’s license, where they will then be required to take written and driving tests (Wanberge, 80).

Another solution that would help minimize the number of car accidents caused by teenage drivers would be parents riding along with their under-aged children as much as possible, especially when they are practicing. The Phoenix community discovered that distractions such as passengers and cell phones were the leading contributors to teen accidents and decided to propose some solutions that may be effective in curbing the current problem.

As mentioned earlier, one of the distractions is other passengers, especially those who are not adults. Statistics have indicated that young drivers tend to cause more accidents when in the company of their peers in their vehicles (Copeland, 1). The best solution would therefore be not to allow those under the age of 18 years to drive their peers unless they have had a year’s experience after receiving their driver’s permit (Fleming, 60).

Another major cause of teen accidents is the use of cell phones while driving. Irrespective of one’s state laws, parents need to limit or ban their children from making use of their cell phones while driving (Winters, 87). If they really have to use the phones, teens should be encouraged to park their car in a safe location first and ensure that they are done with the call or texting before driving again; such are the laws currently being implemented in Phoenix, Arizona.

Although it is not often mentioned as being a distraction, music is also another contributor to teen accidents in most states issuing permits to those under 18 years. Loud music tends to distract the concentration of the teen driver, and they should therefore be encouraged to choose one CD, listen to songs on their iPods or one radio station, as opposed to switching from one station to the next (Fahlberg, 24). 16-year-old drivers should constantly be reminded of the importance of keeping the volume at a realistic level to enable them to hear emergency vehicles or car horns (Wanberge, 85).

Justification of the Solutions

By taking into consideration the proposed solutions, states which allow 16-year-olds to have a driver’s license will be able to minimize the number of deaths and accidents caused by these young drivers. However, if the states ignore the proposed solutions, more and more teenagers are bound to be injured or even lose their lives as a result of being given driving permits too early (Copeland, 1).

Conclusion

High schools, particularly those in Phoenix, Arizona, often allow 16-year-old children to drive to school as long as they have a driving permit and have obtained permission from their parents or legal guardians. Looking at what has been discussed above, those who support teenagers having driving permits argue that such children are old enough to be responsible and are no longer looked upon as children.

Even though such arguments are quite valid, they are still only a portion of the whole story. I believe that after looking at the research studies, reasons, and statistics, no intelligent individual would agree with the positive arguments. The majority of people’s lives may be in danger simply because 16-year-old children have been allowed to have driving permits. That is why the government needs to seriously take into consideration what it will be encouraging by giving these young individuals driving permits.

Works Cited

Copeland, Larry. Simulator Shows Young Drivers the Risk of Distraction. USA TODAY. 2012. Web.

Fahlberg, Vera I. A Child’s Journey Through Placement. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2012. Print.

Fleming, Susan. Teen Driver Safety: Additional Research Could Help States Strengthen Graduated Driver Licensing Systems. Rockville, MD: DIANE Publishing, 2010. Print.

Wanberge, Kenneth W., Timken, David S., and Milkman, Harvey B. Treatment of the Underage Impaired Driving Offender: An Adjunct Provider’s Guide to Driving with Care. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2010. Print.

Winters, Adam. Everything You Need to Know about Being a Teen Driver. New York, NY: The Rosen Publishing Group, 2000. Print.

Introduction

In a 2019 overview of the fatality rates in the United States, while teenagers drove less compared to all but the oldest people, the number of deaths and crashes associated with them were disproportionately high. By comparison, between 16 and 19 years, the number of fatal crash rates was three times more than crash rates among drivers over twenty years (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, n.p.).

Furthermore, the risks of such fatal crashes and deaths were reportedly highest in teenagers aged between 16 and 17 years. With the understanding established, Fritscher argues that, among various reasons, teens should be allowed to drive because it plays a fundamental role in teenage development. The purpose of the essay is to compare, therefore, and contrast the rhetorical elements associated with whether the states should raise the legal driving age to 18. While teenage development is vital in growing up, it does not compare to the risks associated with teenage driving. Hence, the states should raise the legal driving age to 18.

Main body

Fritscher on Reasons why teens should drive shows that despite research showing the risks that come with teenage driving, the majority of the people in the U.S. consider teen going an essential element of life. By 16, getting a driver’s license is regarded as a rite of passage in the majority of the states in the U.S. (Fritscher, n.p.). In the understanding by Erik Erikson, developmental theorist, this rite of passage contributes to discovering the identity and plays a fundamental role in teenage development. Teenagers require space to break away from their parents, develop personal values and morals, and spend time with their peers (Fritscher, n.p.). While some metropolitan regions in the U.S. have excellent public transport systems, most similar areas do not and thus, require teenagers to drive in search of their independence.

While teenage development is a significant aspect of growing up, the search for independence, personal values, and morals might come at a cost, both in the lives of teenagers and other road users as well. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in Fatality Facts 2019: Teenagers aims to show that the independence sought after by teenagers comes at a high cost. In a study to analyze the licensing systems in the U.S. between 1990 and 2019, the graduated licensing for National studies found that lower fatal crashes were reported when every state adopted graduated techniques. In the presence of solid laws, there were associated lower fatal crashes and substantially lower insurance claim rates among teenagers (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, n.p.).

With substantial restrictions on teen passengers and nighttime driving, alongside raising the licensing age for teen drivers, the insurance firms encountered a decline in insurance collision claims resulting in reduced fatal crash rates.

From the findings of the study by the fatality analysis reporting system (FARS) of the U.S. transportation department, reports posted in March 2021 showed that in 2019, there were over 2,370 teenagers involved in automobile crashes. Compared to the same statement made in 1975, the figures associated with 2019 were over 70 percent more than in 1975 and 5 percent more than the previous year (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, n.p.). By breaking down the number of deaths, in terms of gender, the Institute discovered that two-thirds of the teenagers killed were male, and the number of male deaths since 1975 has been on the rise. Compared to their female counterparts, the rate of male teenage drivers who were reported dead rose by 76 percent, unlike 64 percent of female adolescent drivers.

Rouse, on the Pros and cons of driving at the age of 16, seeks to show that while teenage driving is essential, it might be inappropriate to allow teenagers to drive. It might be problematic for teenagers to go because it is the main contributor to the increase in fatal crashes among teen drivers. An increase in fatal crashes has been highly linked to the lack of experience by these young drivers (Rouse, n.p.).

Since these young drivers have only been driving for a shorter timeframe, they encounter dangerous or challenging situations where they lack experience in understanding how to respond safely. In a 2008 article by the New York Daily, the article reported that because of the lack of experience, the leading cause attributed to teenage deaths was car crashes (Rouse, n.p.). Minimizing the possibilities that come with adolescent driving might require all states to raise the legal driving age to 18 years.

Conclusion

While teenage driving, like a rite of passage in most Americans, might seem appealing, considering the risks and rates of fatal crashes is an equally attractive point to emphasize in the lives of Americans. The absence of experience from teen maturity levels, while it might be argued to increase responsibility, threatens the lives of many others due to the possibility of encountering dangerous and challenging situations. A high time has come when all states should legalize the driving age to 18 years, primarily as a way of combating the increased number of fatal crashes attributed to teenage driving.

Work Cited

Fritscher, Lisa. Howtoadult. 2017. Web.

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 2020. Arlington, VA.

Rouse, Britany. Howtoadult. 2017. Web.

Introduction: International Driving License

An International Driving License allows the holder to drive a private car in a different country. For one to qualify for the license, he must have a genuine driving license from his home country. An IDL captures and translates the information into the normal driving license. It bears a photo and other important information about the holder. United Arab Emirates recognizes IDP although visitors on a short-term sojourn need not necessarily acquire it (Wakefield, 2008). In the UAE, one can apply for various categories of licensing. These categories enable you to drive different motor vehicles in a foreign country. IDL is acceptable as a valid document in the United States of America, Australia, parts of South America and Africa, Europe, and Asia. Obtaining the license is inevitable if you wish to study or work abroad.

People with special needs and the challenge of driving

People with special needs find it challenging to learn driving because of perceptual problems. Dyslexic people have trouble in language thus making it hard for them to learn and understand road signs (Hitt, Ireland & Hoskisson, 2011). Other learning disabilities make body coordination difficult thus making it hard for learners to handle the equipment. Many driving companies have marginalized people with special needs because of ineffective instructional strategies. Such learners require specialized training that most companies are not ready to offer. There is an urgent need for an International Driving License in the United Arab Emirates in order to equip this sidelined group with one of the most essential skills of life.

Vision, mission, and core values

Union Driving Company aims to provide the best training for people with special needs. The company plans to offer training that addresses the specific needs of the learners through an Individualized Training Plan. Learners will be given the extra effort that is in tandem with their level of central nervous system functioning. The company will have a psycho-neurological department that will primarily evaluate learners with special needs in order to measure their readiness for the rigors of IDL learning. It will use tests and measurements that take into account the learning disabilities of each individual learner. The company’s vision, mission, and core values are highlighted below.

Vision-To becomes the premier first choice International Driving License company in the UAE offering world-class driving training for people with special needs in order to improve their road safety awareness.

Mission-To offers competitive and innovative International Driving License training for people with special needs through individualized programs in order to achieve the highest international standards and best practices.

Core values include teamwork, customer-centric, technology-driven, innovation and leadership, and road safety. Core activities include psycho-neurological evaluation, driver rehabilitation upon referral by recognized persons and institutions, refresher driving courses, and international driving training. The company intends to employ modern technology to beat competitors who have stuck with out-dated technology. There are plans to hire therapists in order to conduct an evaluation for other companies that lack the services. This way, the company will be in a position to make more profit. Additionally, the company will employ modern technology in training to give the best value to customers. It expects to break even in two years. Their profit will come from the money charged to the customers. This company will plow back the profit and invest it in order to increase its capital base.

SWOT Models

A SWOT analysis will help the company in strategic planning (Christensen, 2010). It offers a holistic understanding of the business and operating environment hence it’s choice for analyzing Union Driving Company. It will also enable it to make decisions from a point of information. Similarly, it will empower the company to explore possibilities by identifying opportunities within the industry. A SWOT analysis of Union Driving Company reveals the presence of various strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

The company’s strength lies in its unique technology. Most companies training people with special needs in the International Driving License employ outdated technology. They lack modern learning visual and spatial aids that are proven by improving learning for people with special needs (Geel, 2011). The company will have branches all over the UAE. It intends to create a recognized brand that offers services of the highest international standards. An additional strength will come from the focus on customers. By making customer-centric one of the core values, the company plans to offer services that will win loyal clientele.

Like any other company, Union Driving Company has several weaknesses. The company requires diversification in order to shield itself against losses. The lack of diversification means that the company will suffer greatly in case of an upheaval in the market. The fact that the company will depend on one source of income exposes it to the risk of incurring great losses in case of an unprecedented event in the market. The company’s financial situation is another weakness that may deprive the company of the opportunity to expand and cover major cities in the UAE.

In spite of the weaknesses, the company has several opportunities. The increasing number of users promises a steady flow of income and growth. In cases where learners’ disabilities are severe, there is an opportunity to invent driverless electronic cars. The company can either manufacture cars or sell licenses. The increasing number of electronic products in the UAE market provides an additional opportunity. The company can diversify into these products and cushion itself against losses.

The major threat to the company is the competition in the market. Even if the market is not very competitive now, there is always the challenge of new entrants especially international companies that have been in business for long (Peters, 2005). The competition will lower profits by forcing the company to invest in advertisement.

Strategic Plan

A strategic plan offers a systematic path that the company will chart to achieve growth (Peters, 2005). The immediate objectives of the company are to get a suitably located premise for the company and recruit competent human resources. Within the first three months, the company will choose a suitable building and modify it to fit the demands of an environment of learners with special needs. Within the same period, they will hire twenty internationally accredited instructors for the main campus. Those will serve branches within Dubai town. To minimize cost, the company will hire part-time therapists to help in making the environment learner-friendly. The strategy will incorporate a rigorous marketing strategy that will sensitize the community and parents on International Driving License for people with special needs. Being the new company of its kind, the company expects to face the challenge of resistance to change. They plan to mitigate this through a rigorous sensitization campaign in collaboration with the relevant state department. They will monitor progress by the number of learners with disabilities who will register with the company.

The mid-term objectives of the company are to consolidate its hold on the market share it would have curved for itself. To retain clients, the company plan to offer high-class individualized training in a customer-centric approach. It will monitor customers’ satisfaction through a customer feedback mechanism. This way, it will be in a position to adapt its services to the demands of customers. As a mid-term objective, it intends to collaborate with foreign companies offering training in international driving. This will benefit the company in keeping abreast with the changing practices in other countries’ road safety measures. It is easy to evaluate this objective, as what the company needs is the knowledge that it has got into partnership with foreign companies. There are plans to have one partner in Europe, the United States, and Africa. The hurdle of language barrier arises in such collaboration. To mitigate it, it intends to hire administrators and instructors who can speak two or more international languages.

The long-term objective of the company is to open branches in five cities in the United Arab Emirates. It will obtain capital from profits accrued from the initial investment. The branches will run independently of the main office. In the same period of five years, the company plans to diversify goods and services by venturing into electronic goods and services. The obvious challenge is the saturation of the electronics products market in the UAE. To circumvent this challenge, there are plans to manufacture products that are tailor-made for the clients’ specific needs. The company will also distribute modified cars for people with special needs. The cars’ modification will suit specific learning disabilities.

Expenditure and income

The budget for the initial project is $500,000. Half the amount will go to acquiring the premises and modifying them to suit the environment for individualized learning. The amount will also cater for licensing. $ 100,000 will go to purchasing modified vehicles for practical. $ 50,000 will cater to human resources and an aggressive marketing campaign. The remaining $100,000 will act as security for any other thing that may emerge in the course of running the company. The course will be individualized hence the absence of time limits for customers. The charge for admission and training will be $1,000 per person. This amount will cater to the remuneration of employees. With a customer base of approximately 1000 individuals, the company will break even within one year. The accrued profit will go towards meeting the company’s mid and long-term objectives.

Tangible and intangible resources

The company will optimally use tangible and intangible resources to spur growth. Tangible resources include land, vehicles, finance, and all the other physical assets (Witcher & Chau, 2010). The company will use the land as a factor of production; to expand training facilities and conduct demonstrations. Instructors and customers will use vehicles to facilitate the learning process. The finance will go into fostering a partnership with foreign companies, establishing new companies in different cities, and carrying out social corporate responsibilities. The company will also use the money to enhance the skill levels of employees so that they can offer first-class services to customers.

Intangible resources include such things as human resources, customer relations, and technology (Thompson & Martin, 2010). The company will make optimal use of employees but also ensure that they are motivated enough. Technology drives companies and Unity Driving Company will be at the forefront in innovation in order to keep abreast with the dynamic environment. Customer-centric is a core value and the company will practice it in all its operations. With the plan outlined above, the company stands a good chance to be a force to reckon with in UAE International Driving License companies. There are many opportunities especially from the growing demand for electronic products. The company can harness these opportunities to spur growth.

References

Christensen, S. (2010). Frommer’s Dubai. Chichester: John Wiley.

Geel, R. (2011). Strategic management: The radical revolutionary strategic management matrix for predators. S.l.: Trafford On Demand Pub.

Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2011). Strategic management: Competitiveness & globalization. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Peters, J. (2005). The Arab world handbook: [the essential guide for business travellers, expatriates and tourists]. London: Stacey International.

Thompson, J. L., & Martin, F. (2010). Strategic management. Andover: Cengage Learning.

Wakefield, M.-R. (2008). UAE: A MEED practical guide. London: Middle East Economic Digest.

Witcher, B. J., & Chau, V. S. (2010). Strategic management: Principles and practice. S.l.: Cengage Learning.