Really? Graduated licenses up to 21??? I read the rules as the accompanying “responsible adult” when needed has to be at least 21, not that the license has restrictions to age 21.
The other rules looked pretty stupid - so basically you cannot leave Manhattan (or Long Island?) with a restricted license, but someone outside NYC on the mainland has free reign over the continental USA? If this is what politicians come up with for drivers’ licenses, no wonder they can’t even raise a debt ceiling without crashing the world economic system.
Is this a guy who needs (really needs) glasses but won’t wear them because it makes him look uncool? That would be a good reason for random minor scrapes and dents, if the guy seriously cannot tell when he is getting close to obstacles, i.e. when parking or going through the garage door.
Uh, no. It means you are restricted in New York City and not elsewhere. it doesn’t matter where your license was issued.
Remember that New York City has very low levels of car ownership (1/2 of all new York City residents do not own a car, and 75% of Manhattan residents are carless), and the high schools don’t offer Driver’s Ed. That means that to learn to drive, most people have to pay for a private driving course, and find some way of borrowing a car for practice. As a result, being qualified to drive a car at 18 is actually pretty rare in New York City. Thinking back to my high school, maybe 10-15% had their license at 18.
Heh, in California you can get your license suspended for being really unlucky. My brother, a police officer, was telling me that you get a point every time you are in an accident, even if you aren’t at fault. Get hit ten times in a year, iirc, and you could get your license suspended.
Mystery solved! The kid said he was driving, suddenly got a horrendous nosebleed all down the front of his shirt, and he kind of freaked and swerved while trying to find a tissue in the glove compartment. Cop pulled him over for driving erratically. The cop saw the mess, checked him out, and decided not to give him a ticket for anything except ‘not wearing corrective lenses’. The kid is going to traffic court and thinks the charge will be dropped.
Did the mom ever see a blood-soaked shirt? If not…well, I’m in doubt.
It’s possible he has had another ticket/incident she doesn’t know about and his license has been restricted, perhaps he’s only allowed to drive to and from work.
At least he’s more creative than the usual “dog ate my homework”.
I still think it’s a case of “glasses make me look uncool”, regardles of whether he needs them. Should be obvious - does the kid habitually refuse to wear his glasses?
I know I don’t wear my glasses around the office or at home, because my vision is fine close-up (except in low-light); but I do fail the minimum requirements in one eye, so I need to wear them driving and unless I forget them (rarely) I always do.
It could have happened, but it does sound contrived. I know he had to have been pulled over for something, not just driving without glasses or contact lenses. I mean, come on!
