Wow - I’m pretty surprised by the resistance shown in this thread to the notion that allowing 5 kids no older than 16 to be driving around after midnight is risky. I don’t see anyone saying it’s risky because every 16 year old must be drunk. But it’s statistically very risky for - well, the exact reason outlined in the op. Roads are dangerous places, in general. They are more dangerous after midnight, they are more dangerous for inexperienced drivers, and they are more dangerous for teenagers driving with multiple passengers. This isn’t rocket science - the data clearly show that teenagers driving after midnight with multiple passengers is very risky behaviour (even without the potential for drinking on their part).
None of this mitigates any responsibility on the probably drunk driver. None of this says that, if found guilty, he shouldn’t be punished. But I don’t see what the problem is with acknowledging that certain behaviour is very risky, and parents should do their best to minimize some of those behaviours.
16 year old drivers are 2.6 TIMES more likely to be involved in an accident then a 20 year old driver.
2/3s of all teen crash deaths involving 16-year-old drivers occur when there are teenage passengers in the car.
For a beginning driver, the chances of a fatal crash are 3 TIMES greater with 3 or more teenage passengers in the car.
I’m really surprised that I have to even post this stuff. The bottom line is that 16 year old drivers are at greater risk for multiple reasons. This risk is increased drammatically by the time of day and the number of passengers. The accident in the op had all of these compounding risk factors. Allowing 16 year olds to take on this risk is, in my very humble opinion, an example of bad parenting.
None of this reduces or mitigates any potential responsibility of the other driver. But just because one driver may have been drunk, doesn’t mean that the other driver wasn’t taking too many risks as well.
Guess what: they’re going to. I guarantee it. Maybe only once, maybe a lot. Maybe you’ll know about it, maybe you won’t. But I absolutely 100% guarantee you that at some point during one of your kids’ teenage years, one or all of them will find themselves out in a car with friends “at night on the weekends when the roads are full of drunks.” You know why? Because teenagers, ALL teenagers, are good at one thing and one thing only: doing poorly thought through, high-risk things that worry their parents sick.
Maybe it’ll be a “party train” situation, and maybe it won’t. Maybe they’ll be drunk, maybe they won’t. Maybe they’ll get in an accident, maybe they won’t (I very much hope that they don’t). Maybe they’ll get in a serious accident, and maybe they won’t (I absolutely hope that they don’t). But no matter what the situation is, if something bad, even a little bad, should happen, something which is clearly caused by things outside of their control (bad judgment or not), then I really really hope that you don’t have to put up with people jumping to the automatic conclusion that because they were teenagers, they must be at fault, and because they were your teenagers, you must be at fault, as well.
New Mexico has a statewide curfew for 16-year-old drivers from 12 am to 5 am. In some municipalities it starts a bit earlier.
You’re missing the point. Nobody is saying they deserved to die - except possibly STS, who seems a bit off his rocker - but that they shouldn’t have been on the road in the first place. Had they not broken the law, Mr. Drunkypants probably wouldn’t have hit anything, and would not now be guilty of DUI manslaughter or whatever they call it in NM.
Does that excuse his actions? No. Are the kids blameless? No.
Attempted murder?! Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for “Attempted Chemistry”?
No, SmashTheState wouldn’t agree with you. His whole point is that if we must make driving legal, then we must also make drunk driving legal. (Though maybe it’s just a tactic to eventually get rid of driving altogether.)
Dio seems to have extreme difficulty understanding that not everyone in the world has the same life as him. More than once I’ve seen him refuse to accept the existence of diseases from which he doesn’t suffer, and assume that those claiming to suffer from them are being drama queens or just want attention. I’m not surprised to see him accept as undisputable fact that all teenagers are just as irresponsible as he was at that age, and therefore certain to be driving drunk right now or soon enough if they’re going to a party. (“Teenagers using a designated driver? Get real.”) He’s arrogant, but that’s the way he is.
As with the rest of your insane posts in this thread, I have no fucking idea what you’re talking about. You do realize the vast, vast majority of teens who do drugs don’t end up dying/harming others, right? I’m talking primarily about marijuana, maybe acid and Ecstasy as well, since those are the illegal drugs most teens are wont to take. My friends and I drank and smoked weed fairly regularly from 10th-12th grade, and all managed to make honor roll and avoid hurting anyone. So yeah, I do think it’s OK for teenagers to do drugs, just as I think it’s OK for adults to do drugs. Assholes are gonna be assholes whether there are chemical substances involved or not.
Your blaming the parents/kids is moronic. Are you telling me you were never out after midnight when you were a teenager? Then either you’re a fucking liar or the most boring person in America. Your position that they broke curfew is similarly laughable. Every teenager has broken curfew - that doesn’t make them “bad”. Seriously, why do so many “adults” forget what it was like to be that age, and get so judgmental at a certain point? Teens do stupid shit, to be sure, but 9 times out of 10 it’s harmless, just like when we were that age.
Also, as a father of teens, good luck with your plan of forcing them to obey your curfew/rules. I think we can all agree an iron fist is a much better course of action than honest communication about the realities of teen intoxication and effective methods to deal with it when the situation inevitably arises. You sound like someone who’s been conservative and middle-aged since you were 10.
Also, “But the teens shouldn’t have been driving at that hour!” is no different than “She shouldn’t have been wearing that revealing outfit if she didn’t want to get raped” argument. Or, to phrase it differently: you’re being a dick.
Technically true; you never said that they WERE drunk, just that they 100% DEFINITELY NO QUESTION were going to be.
Of course they MIGHT have been drinking, and they MIGHT have been planning to drink, but your absolute certainty is 100% obnoxious. Not every high-school kid gets drunk; my friends and I never did. We did occasionally stay out past curfew, so I guess we were “obviously… not responsible”, despite not using drugs or alcohol, getting good grades, and generally being goody-two-shoes.
Sure it can, if you look at SmashtheState’sdrunk driving thread in GD. Apparently he needed a place to propose his nutso thoughts on DUIs where people wouldn’t just outright say he was being a moron.
I don’t agree or disagree with SmashTheState but I think he is on to something. In Ontario a bill was introduced in late 2008 which would make it illegal for teenager drivers to have more than one teenage passenger in their car at one time. The bill was a response to a recent car crash which killed 5 teens. The bill also introduced the condition that any driver under the age of 21 would have to have a blood alcohol level of 0.0
Every driver 21 years old and older can have a legal blood alcohol level of 0.05. This is all very interesting because it’s drivers over the age of 45 who are most prone to driving drunk. They weren’t subjected to the same propaganda that anyone under the age of 25 was subjected to from birth and as an early driver. It was also acceptable in the 1970s for people to drive drunk. Most people adapted, but some people did not. I’ve known friends of my parents who drive drunk quite often and just don’t get caught.
Where did all this legislation come from? MADD, the conservative agenda of a few mothers who feel the state should consider people guilty until proven innocent. MADD is largely responsible for the RIDE Program which does random breathalizer checks on the major highways. MADD is also pushing for legislation which would make it illegal to drive while under the influence of cannabis.
After all this, do you know who the most dangerous drivers are? Those insane drivers over the age of 75 who can’t see over the steering wheel and drive too slow. I was nearly run over by one as she was turning a corner without checking for pedestrians.
Back to Smash’s point though. The kids in Ontario are being found guilty of participating in a dangerous behaviour which MIGHT cause accidents. How many accidents? We don’t know. I’m very suspicious that old people are much more prone to accidents and that when people under the age of 21 die in accidents the story is sensationalized.
So to those who think Smash is insane. Would you support a law which would make it a crime for four sober teenagers to be in a car together at 10:01pm?
The legislation was pushed back after a massive Facebook campaign where many people (not just young drivers) opposed the proposed bill. AFAIK, the multiple passenger portion of the law was removed, anyone under 21 still had to have a blood alcohol of 0. People who are 90 can still drive with a 0.05. Go figure.
I have seen other drivers TEXTING on their cell phones while driving. Oh and I have also seen people stuffing triple-decker cheeseburgers down their throats as well. Another one is picking their noses and then…looking at their booger while driving!
Driving is risky business because people choose to do stupid things while driving.
phobos_09: Forgive me for being so dense right now, I haven’t had a can of Dr Pepper in a few hours, so work with me ok?
What’s your point?
New Mexico already has a law that restricts how many other teens a teen can have in a car with them. New Mexico being most relevant as it’s the state in which the incident in OP happened.
I haven’t been a teen in a long time nor have I ever had a provisional license, so I can’t comprehensively address what you’re talking about, but New Mexico does have a law that restricts the number of other teens another teen can have in the car with them.
Someone in the last page linked to some info regarding NM teen driving laws.
I still don’t know what this has to do with drunk drivers and their VIP ticket to Hell though.
