In article .com>,
> wrote:
>
>Matthew Russotto wrote:
>> In article
mich.edu>,
>> Daniel J. Stern > wrote:
>> >On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Matthew Russotto wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> Of course, the _intended_ application is to justify more and
>harsher
>> >> >> restrictions with higher age limits.
>> >
>> >> >Crash data show that's where the biggest problem is.
>> >
>> >> Without separating the effects of inexperience from the effects of
>age,
>> >> such data (presuming it isn't otherwise flawed) does not support
>harsher
>> >> restrictions with higher age limits.
>
>Inexperience can be trained out. Age-related lack of judgement can
>only be solved by time. No amount of experience will eliminate lack of
>judgement.

You still have to separate those effects to find valid support for age
restrictions.

>You are forgetting that some subset of the crashes may be due to lack
>of judgement. So, in that case, not *all* of the crashes are being
>shifted. Some are actually being eliminated.
>
>> Why do your critical thinking skills go out the window any time age
>> issues come up?
>
>Spoken like someone in their early twenties.

Thirty-three.