• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Steven J. Pouliot of Centennial writes:

The recent fatal accident on Ward road is an example of poor or no driver training. The driver failed in one of the most basic maneuvers of situational awareness. A traffic signal wouldn’t have helped. I think their was 4 distractions in the car -3 human and one audio. It would be interesting to know what if any driver training the driver had received. Also if he had a license for more than 12 months so he could carry more than one passenger. Parents place so little emphasis on driver training. They spend loads of money on “stuff” yet when it comes to proper driver training they want lowest prices always. I own a driver training school and have taught people to fly airplanes. The current state laws give people 3 ways for a teen to get a license. One is very through training and one requires a 25 multiple choice test and a drive test. The state needs ONE training standard of classroom time and some Behind the Wheel training for all new drivers. Currently any new permitted driver under 18 needs 6 hours of Behind the Wheel with a driving instructor. My opinion is that new drivers under 21 years old receive 6 hours BTW and over 3 hours minimum. For classroom 4 hours is too little and the 30 hours is a lot. A figure of 10-15 hours would cover the material. And no internet classes because can’t be sure the student actually did the work. Because driving is a cognitive function that must be cultivated I believe in using driving simulators to train drivers in situations that are unsafe or impossible in a car. This is the 21st century and driver education should catch up with technology. I have 2 different programs on the simulator. The program disciplines the driver to the task in a safe environment while they learn. I believe that more training can be completed in a driving simulator to produce a better,proficient and safer driver. It also restrains them from driving on the road till they are competent. The wide spread use of simulators won’t come about without the help of Insurance companies and the government. My other comment is that any driver who is reinstating a driver license should be required to take a refresher class and some Behind the Wheel.(2 hours min.) Safety begins with proper training anything less gives poor results.
This letter has not been edited.

READER COMMENTS

All good ideas, but let's not forget that there are plenty of adult drivers who could use some driving re-education.

And that lesson should start with a new state law banning the use of a cell phone while operating a motor vehicle.

While the message is a good one, I do think it is a little self serving coming from the owner of a 'driving school'. What about the rural areas that do no have access to driiving schools,, or the only access they have is the internet. Do you deny them a license because they cannot reach your school. Or lower income individuals, that don't have the most expensive or latest toys, because they cannot afford them. You need to be a little less self serving.

I think they should raise the drivers age limit to 18.

It has been clear for many years that kids under 18 do not follow the rules and restrictions already in place.Parents don't want to upset their children by seeing that they follow the rules.

I think it's time to raise the driving age to 18.

You will see teen deaths go down dramatically.

When I see reports that 1000 officers nabbed 447 (roughly) drivers in DUI operations over a holiday weekend I become ill. This politically selective enforcement of laws to appear tough on DUI has got to be dealt with.

That's 2 officers being used per arrest. Where are the officers patrolling for speeders, red light runners, tailgaters, etc... since nearly 2/3's of all traffic fatalities DO NOT involve alcohol.

How about patrolling the neighborhoods looking for auto theft, burglury or other property crimes that rage so high in this area?

Ok, I'm done with my rant now.

I fully agree with KW and all of the other viewpoints expressed above.

Lower the age to obtain a driver's license to 18; require extensive driver's education for new drivers and those involved in at-fault accidents; and while we're at it, begin teaching American drivers the proper protocols for entering and exiting traffic circles (roundabouts).

Make a second offense for DWI a mandatory 5-years in squeeze. If an accident is involved, make it 10-years. A fatality gets life.

I'm no fan of Big Brother, but cameras at intersections and main throughfares do have a positive effect. Apply the money derived from traffic violations to more light rail and mass transit options.

Thomas-

No doubt that using cell phones while driving is a distraction but so is tuning in radio stations.fumbling with cd's or mp3's, women putting on make-up, dogs in cars, dealing with children, even talking.

Should we ban all of those things too?

all of those idiot kids deserved to be killed for their idiotic behavior on the road. and I am thinking their parents should also be in jail for allowing them to drive as well.

Its called thinning out the heard people. and it is perfectly ok!

Get Real,

I don't argue with you that those other things are distractions and do cause accidents but as noted in a report by the National Conference of State Legistatures, the use of cell phones has been proven to be more distracting and for much longer periods of time than other activites.

" The vast majority of wireless phone subscribers use hand-held phones that are highly portable and can be taken in and out of a vehicle. Such phones often are used for an extended duration and are easy to spot in the hands of other motorists. Anyone who has been in a car lately knows that it is common to see another driver maneuvering through traffic with one hand pressed against his or her ear. Other potential distractions—such as eating and drinking, personal grooming, or using a radio or CD player—often are not as easy to spot and can occur over a much shorter time period, making them less likely to draw the ire of other motorists, including state legislators and their constituents."

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/transportation/cellphoneupdate05.htm

Get Real - I agree with anon 8:44.

Cell phones are a much greater distraction than most of your examples sans makeup & dogs.

Talking with someone in the car is vastly different simply because they can also see the road you're on and adjust the conversation accordingly with road hazards.

I've heard people say cell phone use is no different than drinking a cup of coffee while you drive. If that's all the more attention you're giving to the phone call, I'd prefer not to be the one on the other end of the line.

Call me when you can give the conversation your full attention.

POST A COMMENT

• Couple’s blind loyalty to Bush is amazing
• The wrong question
• Exercise part of solution
• Children’s health
• 9-11
• Blue Ribbon Commission
• Hunting in CO
• Confused about taxes