How can reckless teenage driving be prevented?

[UncleColm]

We had that terrible crash recently in the UK which resulted in 7 deaths - RIP to the two Police Officers who were on duty.

In Ireland we had a very similar crash the previous week where five boys died - aged 15 to 17. All were wearing balaclavas at the time of the crash and were 'well known' to Guards. The family they crashed into were three sisters and a seven year old son of one of the sisters (on the way to the airport go to a family wedding) - they are all still in hospital and are very seriously injured.

The previous week, in Ireland, a car carrying eight teenage boys aged from as young as 13 crashed into a car being driven in the correct direction by one young man who is now seriously injured.

The boys seem to be from a mix of poor areas and Travellers. In death they are being celebrated by their families but where were these families when they were alive? Who lets their teenage boy out all night? And let's them produce tiktoks of their 'exploits'? Parental supervision is clearly not in place.

How can this reckless driving behaviour be stopped?

In Ireland there is a huge shortage of jail spaces and places to detain a child under 18. These kids couldn't care less if the Guards catch them - sure what's another Juvenile Caution to them? One of the boys who died was supposed to stay in his own County but had ignored it. They have no fear of the Guards or the law.

I work in a school and there is a huge amount of help available to Traveller children in particular but they still tend to not engage with any after school activities, don't do homework, don't go on school trips, leave school early, high absence rate, etc.

I read recently that, in Ireland, 50% of Travellers don't live beyond 39. In 2026 this a shocking statistic. I don't know what the statistics are for the poor, disadvantaged areas but I do know that the taxpayers provide Social Housing, child benefit, medical cards, free education, free school books and hot lunches, back to school allowances and a whole other host of allowances. There are many initiatives available to help people to stay in education and gain independence.

What more can be done? Is there any way of reaching these young males?

@Benvenuto “Society enables this type of attitude though. Speed limits are seen as an inconvenience,”

There are also biological, psychological and cultural reasons.

Driving fast causes a physical surge of adrenaline, higher blood pressure, and a fast heartbeat. Studies also suggest that operating a high-speed vehicle can temporarily increase testosterone levels in men.

Some men view their car as an extension of themselves, using speed as a tool for an ego boost or a way to feel more powerful and masculine.

People with high sensation seeking personalities are naturally drawn to risky and intense experiences, including illegal driving speeds.

Taking away their licence or making it that you have to be 25 to drive or whatever won’t make scrap of difference. Making or changing laws only affects those who follow the law. Look at e-scooters for example. It’s illegal to ride them anywhere other than private land, yet how many will you see today alone?
Banning them from driving will do nothing. In my 35 years of driving I have never once been asked for my licence for any reason other than ID or when I have hired a car. I’ve never been asked by the police. There is nothing stopping someone who is banned from driving a car other than the fear of getting caught. If you don’t stop of the police then it’s not a problem.

None of these recent crashes were people driving legally. Most of the boys killed were too young to hold a licence or had no licence, so tougher laws would have no effect.

I think social media applications should be held accountable for what kind of videos they host on their sites and possibly car technology may be helpful at some point in the future - self driving cars that refuse to exceed the speed limit or drive the wrong way down a motorway even if the self drive is overridden for example. Or possibly refuse to start with an unrecognised driver.

Having said that I do think there a case for not allowing passengers in the car of a new driver for the first year after passing their test. With the possible exemption for drivers over the age of 21 with a full driving license (the same criteria as to accompany a learner) and/or passengers the driver holds parental responsibility for. This would allow people to drive their own children.

The lack of investment in families and youth has been appalling.

NOTHING excuses what these kids have done but we are seeing the fallout of the destruction of surestart centres etc.

Investment in prevention should be greater than cure but investment in cure also needs to be there for when prevention doesn’t work.

as we are discussing the politics behind such incidences - including the lack of police - we have to look at the fallout of austerity and tax etc

Parenting and discipline enforced from a young age.

Apologies for reading that wrongly before - I'm very glad that that figure does include many people who weren't killed and will recover from their injuries.

I'm not saying that it isn't a good message to underpin when the opportunity arises - I'm just not convinced that actually officially making a huge thing about it, and giving specific details about safe driving, would do much good for most kids at that age - and may risk putting ideas into the heads of a reckless few from lawless backgrounds.

By way of (sort of) analogy, it's very valuable to tell kids that there are lots of nasty things online and that they should use the internet carefully, with supervision, and ask an adult if they have any concerns; but I wouldn't be giving them a list of URLs and telling them that these are all the sites they should absolutely never visit.

And I agree with those saying tougher laws don’t create a safer environment.

We have laws.

These lads were already breaking them. Many for years prior to this.

The problem stems from not getting them quick enough when they go down this path positively rather than laws that tell them not to do it.

The utter tradegy in circumstances like this are the victims are never just the guilty.

We need to do more to prevent and protect the victims as much as stopping the perpetrators.

They aren’t “accidents” though - the correct term is collision. An accident suggests that what happened was unavoidable yet many road collisions are avoidable.

I just quickly scanned the crime section of my local newspaper after reading your post & spotted reports of 4 collisions where there was clear guilt or a clear suspicion of guilt from the driver & only 1 that looked it might be driver error (although this might be disproved on investigation). That’s just one small area & it’s on a day when the newspaper is reporting a lot about the A66 rather than local news. The 2 collisions yesterday in Warwick & Anglesey were clear examples of dangerous driving too.

This is why the Reporting Guidelines were set up to counteract the impression that collisions are unavoidable. They are worth a read.

https://road-collision-reporting-guidelines.uk/

Penalty points and a social media/internet ban for parents would focus minds. These parents might not know where their child is, or care, but they might think twice if threatened with losing TikTok or Instagram.

@6ate9- I don’t disagree with your points, but we also have to recognise that society enables these views. Just look at how the largest SUVs are marketed showcasing how powerful they are & how they allegedly increase one’s attractiveness & provide unrivalled freedom. Yet in reality, the bonnet height is very poor re pedestrian safety, they are too wide for parking spaces & so heavy that the Institute of Structural Engineers issued a warning that older car parks may not be able to cope with the weight. A more responsible society would have cracked down on the bonnet height & made it clear that if you want to drive an excessively large vehicle you will have to pay for 2 parking spaces / park it with the coaches etc.

Speed cameras are another example - they are usually there for a good reason (previous problems with dangerous driving) & easy to avoid most/all of the time (stick to the limit) yet those caught by them see themselves as victims & it is all the council’s fault for treating them as a “cash cow”.

In any other context society would give exceedingly short shrift to this type of grievance.

How will that be enforced? They don't give a shit.

True, enforcement is key. Thing is, if we want proper enforcement and probation services, we all have to be prepared to pay for it. Nobody likes tax hikes but we can't complain if we don't get the services we want but also don't want to pay.

Enforcement Vs personal responsibility.? These are/were career villains. Their choice was made.

I’ve worked in schools in this area and my Dad is from there.
Whats lacking is a lack of aspiration. There’s no incentive to work hard and do well, also there are no jobs. All the industry has been closed now and what’s left is being dismantled by the government’s clueless green policies. 50 years you could get a job at 16, work your way up, make a nice life for yourself. Now you can work hard and barely afford to pay your bills.
Why work etc when you can have handfuls of cash from dealing/stealing.

By primary their parents are telling them they don’t have to do what they are told and school isn’t fun/engaging anyway. More prison places are a band aid.

This.

The life path was written for these lads from the moment they were born.

This is a massive societal issue, all the laws in the world won’t make a difference. Poverty, shit parenting, no future prospects, support services cut to the bone and this is the result. It is NO excuse, my sympathies lie firmly with the innocent families and police officers involved.

Is the benefits system to blame? Partly I suppose, but I imagine most of these families are making cash in hand on top of the benefits, usually by being involved in crime. Take the benefits away and they’ll still continue making their dodgy cash on the side. Care leavers and young people from this walk of life are prime pickings for drug dealers - “easy” money to be made without having to find a real job, a sense of belonging to a gang and feeling protected by those they surround themselves with.

Sure start centres, free school meals, family support services with eyes on the child, education welfare officers using everything in their power to get these kids in school, and court for the parents if they don’t. Investment in communities, job and training opportunities, more police on the beat, proper sentencing and rehabilitation opportunities in prison instead of being released to return to the same lifestyle. I’m sure there’s more that would help break the cycle, but none of it will happen.

Hmm not sure bringing in new, stricter laws for young drivers who have passed their test and pay road tax and insurance is going to make much of an impact in circumstances like this. Both crashed were caused by people who nearly all had some kind of criminal record. The cars they were in were stolen. They were never going to be affected by tougher laws because they didn’t care. The only “positive” thing about any of these 10 men and boys is at least they didn’t kill or hurt anyone else and they never ever will again.

I’ve just read that two people have been killed in a house fire in Teeside, a murder investigation has been launched with police saying that a link to an organised crime group cannot be ruled out.

The fire was less than two miles from the A66 crash site and follows the arrest of seventeen people following a major investigation into the crash.

What on earth is going on?

The only possibly conceivable way I could think of with bringing in much stricter laws could be if they were added conditions as a kind of second chance to people who had already committed a serious first offence, with the clear message that not keeping to them would mean an automatic very long prison sentence.

That said, it would still heavily rely on effective policing and proper enforcement of the law.

That’s a slightly different issue & changing the law is being considered due to the collisions like the Welsh one where 4 teenagers died. As said earlier on this thread, this will affect a lot of teens, & will be especially tough for people in areas without public transport. That might be why nothing has happened yet, but I think eventually the Government will be forced to take action if the collisions continue. It’s a similar situation with collisions & older drivers.

If they do eventually tighten the law for teenagers &/ pensioners, it may not affect the type of situation that happened on the A66, but may reduce collisions overall.

I’ve seen reports that the 5 died were chasing another “gang” (although that word wasn’t used) who had rammed the house of the father of one of the boys in the crash prior and the boys were chasing that group.

With all the other arrests this appears to be a huge criminal operation and something tells me those boys who died have uncovered a lot of information that have led police to those arrests and because they are dead already others will be on the chopping board for revenge.

Hence this latest incident and - quite rightly - the right lipped reporting on some details.

There’s currently another car driving down the road the wrong way in Stockton. I think this is going to go on for a while.

I agree. But reports coming out about this crashing wasn’t SM led joy ride but rather rival criminals in a chase that resulted in them going the wrong way to get away iyswim?

That’s worrying about Stockton though - especially daytime when there’s more cars about.

As far as I’m aware that’s never been proven. Police said “probably” and eye witnesses disagreed.

Weird that you say men only but then this is MN I suppose, I’d 100% blanket rules across all. There’s a 17/18 girl who lives on the street I drive on to get to ours and she drives like a maniac.