![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pennfanaI understand that bad driving is a serious problem—I see far too many examples of it every day—but Ontario's provincial government is following a good idea (banning the use of hand-held phones, etc. while driving) with a terrible one (the proposed restrictions on drivers under the age of 22). Yes, there are young drivers who do some pretty stupid things, but the majority of the bad drivers that I see every day are middle-aged adults. I'm rarely tailgated by someone who looked like they're under 22 years old, though I suppose that it's remotely possible that Sault Ste. Marie has an unusual concentration of people in their teens and early twenties who are going prematurely grey. Talk about a belief in extreme possibilities!
The fact is, most of the people I see running red lights look like they're significantly older than I am (I'm 26). Most of the drunk drivers I hear about are over the age of 22. Of course, none of this particularly surprises me, because since most people in the area (according to the 2006 census, at least) are over the age of 22.
I've actually spent much of this morning doing some (admittedly unscientific) research. I've dug up as many news reports as I could of collisions in the area since the beginning of January where charges were laid and put together a spreadsheet with the drivers' names, their ages, the causes of the collisions and any additional details that I thought were worth mentioning. Of the 60 news articles I found which contained enough information about local collisions for me to reliably catalogue them, this is what I found:
45 of the people who were charged were stated to be 22 years old or older (only two were 22; of the drivers who were below that age, four were 21, two were 17 and one was 18; the ages of eight more drivers were unreported, including one who was described as simply being "young").
38 of the drivers who were charged were male (the sexes of three other drivers were unreported).
Of the people who were charged, 14 were drunk, 10 drivers ran red lights or stop signs, 14 drivers were careless in one way or another, one was too tired to be driving, one couldn't see out of their front window, one was street racing, one accident-prone guy reversed into another person's vehicle and later struck a utility pole (he fled both scenes but was caught later), one unsecured load resulted in a flying mattress which broke another driver's windshield and gave him minor injuries, three drivers were tailgating, two were cyclists (one was riding on the sidewalk and another ran a red light), and one incident where the cause wasn't reported, but which involved an impact which spun the car around—it eventually landed on its roof.
I found reports of many other collisions, of course, but no charges were laid that I know of—they were all weather-related.
So, this is the conclusion I came to: don't punish young drivers because they're young. Clearly drivers over the age of 22 are as much a part of the problem as the younger ones are—maybe even more, if only because they've had more time to develop those bad habits that make the road so dangerous. Intelligent driving is not a gift that's magically bestowed on a driver at the age of 22. So if you think that the younger drivers need more help, then find some way of giving it to them. Don't just pile restrictions on them and expect things to get better. They've earned their licenses just like the rest of us have—and since the graduated licensing system was introduced in Ontario in 1994, it's been tougher to get that license in the first place. Personally, I'm cynical enough to be thinking right now that the Ontario government is simply trying to look like they're being "pro-active" (Gods, I hate that word!) about the issue while not actually offering any viable solutions, but then, that could just be me.
The fact is, most of the people I see running red lights look like they're significantly older than I am (I'm 26). Most of the drunk drivers I hear about are over the age of 22. Of course, none of this particularly surprises me, because since most people in the area (according to the 2006 census, at least) are over the age of 22.
I've actually spent much of this morning doing some (admittedly unscientific) research. I've dug up as many news reports as I could of collisions in the area since the beginning of January where charges were laid and put together a spreadsheet with the drivers' names, their ages, the causes of the collisions and any additional details that I thought were worth mentioning. Of the 60 news articles I found which contained enough information about local collisions for me to reliably catalogue them, this is what I found:
45 of the people who were charged were stated to be 22 years old or older (only two were 22; of the drivers who were below that age, four were 21, two were 17 and one was 18; the ages of eight more drivers were unreported, including one who was described as simply being "young").
38 of the drivers who were charged were male (the sexes of three other drivers were unreported).
Of the people who were charged, 14 were drunk, 10 drivers ran red lights or stop signs, 14 drivers were careless in one way or another, one was too tired to be driving, one couldn't see out of their front window, one was street racing, one accident-prone guy reversed into another person's vehicle and later struck a utility pole (he fled both scenes but was caught later), one unsecured load resulted in a flying mattress which broke another driver's windshield and gave him minor injuries, three drivers were tailgating, two were cyclists (one was riding on the sidewalk and another ran a red light), and one incident where the cause wasn't reported, but which involved an impact which spun the car around—it eventually landed on its roof.
I found reports of many other collisions, of course, but no charges were laid that I know of—they were all weather-related.
So, this is the conclusion I came to: don't punish young drivers because they're young. Clearly drivers over the age of 22 are as much a part of the problem as the younger ones are—maybe even more, if only because they've had more time to develop those bad habits that make the road so dangerous. Intelligent driving is not a gift that's magically bestowed on a driver at the age of 22. So if you think that the younger drivers need more help, then find some way of giving it to them. Don't just pile restrictions on them and expect things to get better. They've earned their licenses just like the rest of us have—and since the graduated licensing system was introduced in Ontario in 1994, it's been tougher to get that license in the first place. Personally, I'm cynical enough to be thinking right now that the Ontario government is simply trying to look like they're being "pro-active" (Gods, I hate that word!) about the issue while not actually offering any viable solutions, but then, that could just be me.
