New Restrictions Possible for New Jersey Teen Drivers

November 11, 2008

  • November 11, 2008 at 2:05 am
    Scott says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    At 17 they can enlist. They can serve their Country, operate military vehicles and die in combat. These new restrictions should not target teens but new drivers.

  • November 11, 2008 at 2:06 am
    Driver says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’ve driven in many states and NJ drivers are about the worse I have ever seen. I can think of another way to make it safer for teen drivers in NJ…teach the adults how to drive safely and courteously. I see more people run stop signs and red lights, cut people off, and speed excessively etc. etc. etc. here in NJ than I’ve seen anywhere else.

  • November 11, 2008 at 2:07 am
    SFOInsuranceLady says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    are those tags going to help? Is this going the same way as hanging those “baby on board” warning messages we used back in the 80’s? What is going to prevent the inexperienced driver from removing those tags? What a waste of tax money.
    We should all go back to defensive driving…isn’t that what we are taught inthe first place?

  • November 11, 2008 at 2:09 am
    SFOInsuranceLady says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Driver, I guess you’ve never driven in the San Francsico Bay area….PLENTY of
    that going on here.

  • November 11, 2008 at 2:13 am
    Driver says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Heh…Heh..Heh..

    Actually, I have driven in San Fran a couple of times and thought it was a pleasent drive. I’d drive there over almost any city in NJ any day. I hear L.A. is pretty tough though.

  • November 12, 2008 at 5:29 am
    Vince says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What’s missing is the importance of Driver Education. Having behind the wheel is great but what if the parent/guardian is a lousy driver? Kids need real formal instruction on the right way to drive as well.

  • November 12, 2008 at 1:34 am
    Curious says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Interesting stats 59,000 accidents with 35 fatalies. I wonder if the people which set up this article looked a the number of accidents involving 20-23 yr old drivers or perhaps 27-30 or some other 3 yr age group. Would the results be much different?

  • November 12, 2008 at 1:52 am
    InsIsMyPassion says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Curious,

    Interesting question. If you look at the stats, there actually 80 killed (35 drivers plus 45 passengers); but still, that’s only 0.14% of the number of accidents (and presumably a much smaller percentage than the number of teens IN an accident).

    In 2005, there were just over 6,420,000 car crashes; about 39,000 were fatal (killing just over 42,000). That equates to 0.61% of crashes being fatal.

    2007 crash statistics indicate that 3,108 teens died in car accidents. That is 7.57% of all people killed in car crashes (41,059).

    Figures don’t lie and liars figure. Seems teens are doing better than the population as a whole. Now, a lot of that has to do with the number of miles driven; I’m not sure how the accident rate compares on a “per 1,000 miles driven” basis. Would be interesting to see, though.

  • November 13, 2008 at 2:37 am
    Dave says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    because they restrict visibility. The hang tags commonly used for parking lots are supposed to be removed when driving.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*