To think yes actually it IS time to legislate to stop teenage drivers driving a car full of their mates around at night?

[northernlurker]

Very distressing story on BBC here. If you don't want to click - it's 5 teens killed last night in the same car. Two girls, three boys. I have a child the same age as some of them and it's just so sad. I've always thought that you couldn't legislate for this but something has to be done. There was a triple fatal crash on the same bit of road also involving teens a few years ago and it happens again and again. The first funeral I ever went to was a girl in the year above me at school. There were 4 in that car. Two killed, one badly injured and one slightly hurt.
If teenage drivers were limited to no more than two passengers under the age of 21 would it help?

To the poster who said that they had children they needed to get to medical appointments, a new adult driver isn't restricted here and even a new teen driver can drive a sibling to a medical appointment with a letter. But let's say that isn't the case and the law says that new adult drivers can't take passengers for 6-12 months then I would ask "what did you do before you could drive?" If that is the law then people would find a way... pay for a taxi for example. Even with pricey taxi fares occasionally it is cheaper than running a car.

Probably not a bad thing for all new drivers to be restricted to smaller, less powerful cars until they have built up increased confidence and driver awareness.
This law would be unworkable in many cases, in part because lot of teen drivers only have access to their parents car. Not everybody is willing or able to buy a car for their kid/s to drive.

I live in one of the states that restricts new drivers under 18 regarding passengers and driving hours. Among other things. Having ridden in cars with teenagers as a teenager, and having seen the sorts of things that teenagers do, this makes perfect sense to me.
As the restrictions only apply for the first year, and as the minimum driving age here is 16, there are still quite a lot of drivers under 18 who aren't subject to these restrictions. I'd be perfectly happy if they did, or even if they applied up to the age of 20 or 21. (Although my 18yo daughter might take exception to that last part.)

I happen to like teenagers a lot, and won't jump on the 'teenagers are nothing but trouble' bandwagon, but the truth is that an alarming number of them genuinely don't believe in their own mortality and are frighteningly good at making bad decisions. They are no less in need of being protected from themselves than younger children are, just in a different way.

A lot of people are saying it's inexperience rather than age that is he real problem. Would it make sense to address that by ensuring that you need x hours of supervised practice before you can take your driving test? X wouldn't need to be a huge number. And there could be a requirement to practice between the hours of darkness, in bad weather, with passengers etc. I'm thinking it could be similar to drivers' ed (at least, how it's portrayed on TV, I don't have direct experience), with colleges /6th forms offering courses designed to help you increase your hours of practice in groups at a reduced rate.

It took me two attempts to pass my test, and because the test centres nearby were booked solid there were 4 months between attempts. I had weekly lessons in between, so I had a lot more lessons than my DH- who booked one set of lessons, and passed first time. I'm convinced the extra practice made me a better driver than him. Even though he took pass plus, he has been involved in more incidents than I have.

So unbearable sad.

Yes op I agree with you. Personally I think there should be big restrictions on teenage/new drivers and everyone should be required by law to have up to date training every few years to check their capability to drive.
I think under 25s should get free access to public transport so the desire/need to drive is less attractive.
We are far far to lax on speeding, careless driving. Personally I think it should be a lot easier to ban drivers and it's far too lax to be building up points before you are banned.

Driving is seen as a privilege and a right. It's not it should be viewed as a responsibility to be earned.

From our own personal circumstances we were shocked to discover the lax proceedures that allow unfit people to drive coaches and lorries in Europe.

Much bolder action needs to be taken. The deaths and injuries here every week are akin to a weekly plane crash, imagine that.

The head of the school that these children attended was just on the Today programme. She has counsellors coming in and will be spending the day supporting who knows how many extremely distressed 16 and 17 yr olds. I can't begin to think how dreadful that is going to be :(
There needs to be some impetus for change. Ilovemonsters - your situation is totally different from this and no reasonable system would prevent a parent from driving their own children. Its not a risk laden situation like a car full of teens is. We all know children can be distracting but behaviour in general is different with children in the car. (I was refereeing mine and missed noticing the motorway was splitting. As I was in the left hand lane and missed moving across I had to drive right through Cumbernauld before finding the motorway again )
The problem is as others have said - the number of teen passengers puts up the risk of accident and the accidents are often more serious because of speed, circumstance and number of passengers.
My own 16 yr old is currently grumping round the house with her sister. They're getting a lift to school having slept in. For 5 families not very far away from me they will never have that again. I don't think it's good enough to say in the face of that, that teens need experience and many drive without accidents etc. We know this is a risk. We should be clamouring for changes in the law to protect our kids as well as everything we teach them ourselves.

I think you can't, and shouldn't legislate against this. Its agism, pure and simple.

But not all groups of teens are in cars due to being ferried home drunk, some take home 3 or 4 mates at the end of shift - round here the country pubs all let out after 11 - so you would be putting an end to teenage bar, kitchen and waiting staff sharing lifts - same with night staff in supermarket and care homes etc.. because SOME kids don't have the experience to handle a full car.

Driving at night on country lanes is something that has to be done sometimes - do we want the 4 mates leaving the bar job at midnight to ALL drive their own cars instead of sharing?

There was a case recently where a poor lad lost his life when he was rushing home to beat his black box deadline of 11pm as he was going to miss it.

I think all drivers need some sort of re-test / course every 10 years. Regardless of age.

I do think its worth noting the little cars most new drivers have to have (for insurance) the handling and visibility changes massively when they are full, unexpected by an inexperienced drivee

And there was another case near us a year or two ago where a young lad of 18 crashed into a tree and died through tiredness - he'd ferried all his mates home one by one, and then fell asleep on his way back to his own house. :(

We should have staged licences like they do in some US states. We do it in a small way with motorcycle licences so it could be done.

I had a 'quiet word' with a VI form student who was using the school parking as a race track. Pointed out that the parents from the primary next door walked through the car park with their children, it hadn't occurred to him.

I think once you pass maybe you should be limited to one passenger unless the other passengers are a) over 21 and b) have a driving licence themselves, after 6 months or a year this could change if they have not been involved in an accident.

So a 17 year old could pick up parents from a pub after Sunday lunch but not take a bunch of friends out for fun.

I think other things could be done such as only allowing a new driver to drive certain cars, or only certain cars when not accompanied by someone over 21.

Something like a smart car, small engine, lower top speed should be OK. I know not all teenagers can afford their own car, so not ideal, but it would have the advantage that any other driver on the road would start to think 'new driver' when they saw one.

With motorbikes you can either start with a 125cc at 17 progressing to a larger bike at 21. If you want to go directly to riding larger bikes you have to be 24.

I just don't think you can legislate it, but with most things, better education, more tests over a period of time (you drive ok for 30 mins or so you get a license).
I passed my test 15 years ago, my oh did a speed awareness course he said he learnt loads as loads has changed. Why don't we all have to learn about the changes?

There was an accident very similar to this in my home town about ten years ago. Five teens in a car, driver loses control, four teens killed, one girl survived but suffered appalling injuries. The road was an accident black spot anyway and this was the catalyst for the local council to make huge safety changes. The road layout was changed, the speed limit reduced and speed cameras introduced. Touch wood there have been no fatal accidents there since.

I don't know what to suggest? Not all young drivers driver dangerously, but it does seem that they are far more likely to have accidents like this one.

So awful and tragic. Five young lives wiped out. My thoughts are with their loved ones.

I think that a good reflection of what young people will be like in a car is down to what they drive. Insurance reflects the number of accidents someone is likely to have.

I'd be more inclined to simply ban younger drivers from higher insurance groups. As a new driver, the last thing you need is something with more blind spots and more power than what you learned to drive in. After all when was the last time you saw a 4 x 4 or souped up driving instructors car?

(Noting here that there are already exceptions in law to the driving of agricultural vehicles)

I don't know what to suggest? Not all young drivers driver dangerously, but it does seem that they are far more likely to have accidents like this one.

That's experience. I've had a couple of near misses where it was just experience that stopped the accident, if I hadn't braked / been going slower it would not have been my fault eg car pulling out of a junction, I saw her, she heard my brakes and stopped, our cars came to a stop inches apart, less than a second would have been an accident.

It was early morning, a residential road with cars parked on both sides, poor visibility. She could have made that turn 100 times and not had an accident.

to drive . hamlet this is how it's done in NZ. When I was learning to drive the age was 15 though. I think it was changed to 16 in 2011. There is also a 0 alcohol limit on drivers under 20 and a 50mg per 100 litre of blood for over 20s.

www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/factsheets/45/learning-to-drive.html my link didn't work so try this.

Cardibach I went to the funerals. 2 in my year, 2 in my sisters a year younger. Both the lads in my sisters year were only children. No way would I live rurally with teens.

MyBootsAreMuddy - it seems to me that NZ have got it exactly right. Lets hope some good comes out of this awful tragedy and our government bring in changes sooner rather than later.

I also think the black boxes should be mandatory for new drivers: my father and son were in a head on crash in a car driven by a young driver overtaking at speed on a blind bend. The young driver's car exploded into flames and he was fortunate that the car he had overtaken was being driven by an off duty policeman who dragged him from his vehicle. My father spent a week in hospital and, a year later, is still in pain from the injuries he received.

One of the most common accidents around here is drivers misjudging the bends because they are going too fast for the road conditions, losing control of the car and ending up in a ditch - sometimes it is just the car that suffers but there are several roadside memorials to young people who have not been so lucky.

I have a vested interest as my 17 year old son has his first driving lesson tomorrow and my 18 year old daughter passed her test 6 months ago. Despite any inconvenience, we live in a rural area with few buses (none after 7pm), I would welcome restrictions particular on passengers in the car and would rather continue picking them up at 2am from a party than have them drive or be a passenger in a car full of teenagers.

Something to mention is that in the UK less than 5 people a day are killed on the roads out of a population of 64 million. Now I personally think that just shows how safe the UK roads. I think that the only way to reduce this further is to concentrate on overall driving standards and car control rather than soley on speed and drink/drugs.

"A lot of people are saying it's inexperience rather than age that is he real problem. Would it make sense to address that by ensuring that you need x hours of supervised practice before you can take your driving test? X wouldn't need to be a huge number. And there could be a requirement to practice between the hours of darkness, in bad weather, with passengers etc. I'm thinking it could be similar to drivers' ed (at least, how it's portrayed on TV, I don't have direct experience), with colleges /6th forms offering courses designed to help you increase your hours of practice in groups at a reduced rate."

Here under 18s have to do 50 hours of driving instruction (can be with parents) including ??10?? hours at night, take a theory class for 30 hours (can be online), do 6 hours (at least three lessons) with a licensed professional, pass a written test and hold their permit for at least six months before they can take their test. Once they pass their test they are restricted to no drivers and 6am-11pm driving only unless exemption.

Once you are 18 you don't have to do any of this except the theory exam and practical and immediately have a full license. At 17 ½ you have to do some of this. Some kids just wait until they turn 18 to avoid the extra costs.

Neither of my DS's school offer Drivers Ed.

Personally I think an under powered car can be more dangerous, a little extra power can help get you out of sticky situations at times. I can tell if DS drives my car and is all boy racer because I keep track of my fuel efficiency and the numbers go down. The car he drives he pays for petrol and is careful with it because he doesn't like paying for it.

Yes because underpowered cars are more of an insurance risk and generally going 5 mph slower is more life threatening... Hmm.

I think that as well as doing a theory test, new drivers should attend compulsory speed/hazard awareness courses run by traffic officers. These should have the sole purpose of putting the fear into them.

I think EVERY driver should have to take a theory test, driving test and speed awareness course - every 10 years.

What's going on around you as a driver does have an effect, whether it's a phone call - even hands-free - music on the radio, or conversation between passengers or between driver and passengers.

I absolutely agree, changes need to be made and dialogue needs to start about what sort of changes these should be.