A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

WPost: Brain Immaturity Could Explain Teen Crash Rate



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 1st 05, 11:25 PM
Daniel J. Stern
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 1 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.
Ads
  #12  
Old February 2nd 05, 06:10 AM
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...

> Yeah - and they're always in front of you, and they're always in the
> middle of trying to figure out which Happy Meal each of the little
> broodlings wants, and which drinks they want to go with them...


And a cellphone jammed into one ear on yakking away with hubby(or the
ex)/the office/therapist or whom ever about some stupid crap that would
not be worthy of a land line...

> Which is why it's ALWAYS faster to just park the goddamn car and walk
> inside.


Which is why I don't eat at fast food joints, prefering to go to regular
restaurants where I can sit and enjoy my meal (**** off, LBMHB) which is
generally better food at only a slightly higher price.


  #13  
Old February 2nd 05, 06:02 PM
Olaf Gustafson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 19:46:34 -0800, Scott en Aztlán
> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 12:43:32 -0700, Olaf Gustafson >
>wrote:
>
>>I'd say the people I see most frequently in fast food drive thrus are
>>soccer moms

>
>Yeah - and they're always in front of you, and they're always in the
>middle of trying to figure out which Happy Meal each of the little
>broodlings wants, and which drinks they want to go with them...
>
>Which is why it's ALWAYS faster to just park the goddamn car and walk
>inside.


It's often faster, but not always.

I've also learned that if I want KFC, go before 5 PM - they are
handing me the food even before they can hand me the change if I do
that.

After 5, ya' gotta wait.
  #14  
Old February 2nd 05, 07:45 PM
Matthew Russotto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ich.edu>,
Daniel J. Stern > wrote:
>On Tue, 1 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.
  #15  
Old February 2nd 05, 09:18 PM
Daniel J. Stern
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


Teens crash most. Therefore, restricting teen driving means fewer crashes.
That teenagers will stomp their widdle feet and go "No fair!" is
immaterial.


  #16  
Old February 2nd 05, 10:58 PM
Matthew Russotto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ich.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.

>
>Teens crash most. Therefore, restricting teen driving means fewer crashes.
>That teenagers will stomp their widdle feet and go "No fair!" is
>immaterial.


If it merely shifts the crashes from the 16-19 set to the 20-23 set,
or spreads them out across that period, it's not really an improvement.

Why do your critical thinking skills go out the window any time age
issues come up? Is there a "grumpy old man" gene somewhere in your
DNA that switched on when you reached 21?
  #17  
Old February 2nd 05, 11:08 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Matthew Russotto wrote:
> In article

ich.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.

> >Teens crash most. Therefore, restricting teen driving means fewer

crashes.
> >That teenagers will stomp their widdle feet and go "No fair!" is
> >immaterial.

>
> If it merely shifts the crashes from the 16-19 set to the 20-23 set,
> or spreads them out across that period, it's not really an

improvement.

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.

Eliminating crashes is good. Why would you be against that?
HAND,

E.P.

  #18  
Old February 2nd 05, 11:11 PM
Matthew Russotto
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
  #19  
Old February 2nd 05, 11:25 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Matthew Russotto wrote:
> In article .com>,
> > wrote:
> >
> >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.


No, actually, you don't.

If there are age-based reasons (such as lack of proper judgement), then
that supports age-based restrictions. The logic is straight-forward.

What isn't supported by logic is that somehow a separation of factors
is relevant.

HAND,

E.P.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.