Why can Americans drive at 16 but not drink until 21?

Bizarro World wrote:

I think the disparity in age for these two activities is probably linked to America's TOTAL reliance on the automobile, more so than any other developed country,

This could have something to do with the fact that our country is larger than your entire continent.

You mention that the automobile is dangerous, then ask why these driving teenagers also are not allowed to drink. The answer is obvious.

It has to do with PHYSICAL maturity. In general, a 16 year old is physically just as capable of driving an automobile as an 18 or 21 year old. On the other hand, a 16 year old is not physically as capable of metabolizing alcohol as an 18 or 21 year old.

If it weren't for America, all of the people in every country in the world would be praying in a mosque right now.

Go suck on a crepe.

Pinwheel, Pinwheel wrote:

If it weren't for America, all of the people in every country in the world would be praying in a mosque right now.

Go suck on a crepe.

This would actually be quite amusing but a good proportion of Americans actually believe this.

There is also an intentional disparity between these two ages. While there are certainly cases of people drinking themselves to death, drunk driving is far more frequent in the U.S-- a result of so many people having access to cars. The age restriction on alcohol is primarily to reduce DUIs.

trollism wrote:

This would actually be quite amusing but a good proportion of Americans actually believe this.

Trollism, what do you think would happen if the US military was just gone tomorrow? Who would stop the Militant Islamic forces?

Seriously?

I don't really understand the drinking age. At 18 you can die for your country but you can't drink? Anyone underage who really wants to drink is going to find ways to drink, whether it's illegal or not. I'd totally do away with an age at all except there're too many irresponsible parents who would be gettting their 3 year old wasted.

Driving age? This is going to sound arrogant, but I can honestly say I was a better driver at 16 than my mom has ever been in her life. Many teenagers are shitty drivers, but many people of all ages are shitty drivers. I don't mind the age but think they should make it a lot harder to get a license.

America does depend on cars, and like someone said, that's because most people have to commute long distances, and we don't have very good public transportation in many cities. However, Americans overrely on automobiles, which is related to the obesity rate, imo. I'm in college, and I very rarely drive my car. I ride my bike and walk everywhere, and it's not an inconveniance at all, but that's because I'm not a 40 year old 200lb woman (or man). I know plenty of people who drive whereever they go, even if it's only a half mile away. I'm starting to ramble...

That's my take on ages etc.

ride tha pole wrote:

It has to do with PHYSICAL maturity. In general, a 16 year old is physically just as capable of driving an automobile as an 18 or 21 year old. On the other hand, a 16 year old is not physically as capable of metabolizing alcohol as an 18 or 21 year old.

Of course the logical thing would be for the US to not give our driver's licenses to 16 year olds, who are NOT as capable of driving as a 21 year old.

Let them drink at 16, but keep them out of cars until they are 21 or at least 19. That's a banner idea. There's aren't many teenagers with a legitimate reason to be driving and the serious problem with letting them drive is it's the first step in them becoming fat and lazy. The only reason they drive is to a job they need to support a car, no car, no job needed. It's stupid that they drive to athletic practices, since walking (or even running) and biking make more sense. If a teenager can't do either they really don't belong on an athletic team. Getting to and from school is what we have buses for.

Guppy wrote:

Driving age? This is going to sound arrogant, but I can honestly say I was a better driver at 16 than my mom has ever been in her life.

Yep, you're right, it did sound pretty arrogant. 16 year olds may be good drivers as far as handling the car, but they do not have the experience of driving in traffic and avoiding accidents. A sixteen year old may be able to take a car through an obstacle course better than their mom, but the mom knows traffic patterns, dangerous situations, and can drive defensively.

Your comment is kind of like saying, "I drive better when I'm drunk, or I can drive fine while drunk." Sure you can, its not that hard to control a car, even while drunk. The problem is when something happens that is out of your control, and how you react to it. For example if a car cuts you off, you won't be able to respond quick enough while drunk.

Keith Stone wrote:

Of course the logical thing would be for the US to not give our driver's licenses to 16 year olds, who are NOT as capable of driving as a 21 year old.

Let them drink at 16, but keep them out of cars until they are 21 or at least 19. That's a banner idea. There's aren't many teenagers with a legitimate reason to be driving and the serious problem with letting them drive is it's the first step in them becoming fat and lazy. The only reason they drive is to a job they need to support a car, no car, no job needed. It's stupid that they drive to athletic practices, since walking (or even running) and biking make more sense. If a teenager can't do either they really don't belong on an athletic team. Getting to and from school is what we have buses for.

Hey, what did you do to the real Keith Stone? That is two posts today that are both intelligent and f***ing awesome.

I think you have him tied-up in a closet.

Agreed with Keith Stone, we should go to a system more like Germany and probably other countries in Europe. 16 year olds should be able to buy beer only, no hard liquor, and you can't drive until 19. That way you've learned how to control your drinking by the time you're driving, plus you're mature enough to drive somewhat responsibly.

somebody's not 21....

awweeeeee this beer is tasty though.

I meant relatively. Take France for example. The amount of people who commute to work or go on day trips etc. by train, tram, bus or bicycle will be much higher than a similiar sized area in the U.S(per capita) without doubt.

The reason for this is cultural. In the 1940s and 50s the Americans migrated en masse to the suburbs and they commuted to work by car. This meant they could work in the city while still enjoying the comforts of a garden etc.

In Europe this didn't happen to the same extent, plus of course there is a far superior public transport system which was developed.

Of course now that oil prices are rising there will probably be an increase in people living as close to work as possible. Everything goes in cycles...

BTW, I am 16 so I know what I'm talking about when I say that most of my peers don't have enough basic common sense to drive responsibily. I might be the exception but I spent all my money on drink ;) haha

Ticktock wrote:

Agreed with Keith Stone, we should go to a system more like Germany and probably other countries in Europe. 16 year olds should be able to buy beer only, no hard liquor, and you can't drive until 19. That way you've learned how to control your drinking by the time you're driving, plus you're mature enough to drive somewhat responsibly.

I always assumed we made the drinking age 21 and the driving age 16 so you can really build up your driving skills before you start drinking and driving.

It takes a certain skill to be able to drive with a cold one between your legs, half wasted and stay on the road.

Its not Puritanism, it's p$ssyism. In the USA we have continued adolescence past puberty until around the age of 30.

We treat 25 year old men like they are 15, so they act like it. That's why we've become a nation of whiners who can not accept responsibility for our actions.

The problem is the parents of these teens are tired of shuttling them around so that by the time driver's ed comes around, they're (tentatively) thrilled with the teen having a bit more independence. Granted it comes with other worries, but if the teen is free to get him/herself around then the parent has more freedom to do what he/she needs to do. Public transit just doesn't support viable transportation in rural USA. While I think the idea of allowing beer purchase at 16 and driving by 19/20 is a lovely idea, I think many rural folks would be up in arms.

Keith Stone wrote:

Of course the logical thing would be for the US to not give our driver's licenses to 16 year olds, who are NOT as capable of driving as a 21 year old.

There's aren't many teenagers with a legitimate reason to be driving and the serious problem with letting them drive is it's the first step in them becoming fat and lazy. The only reason they drive is to a job they need to support a car, no car, no job needed. It's stupid that they drive to athletic practices, since walking (or even running) and biking make more sense. If a teenager can't do either they really don't belong on an athletic team. Getting to and from school is what we have buses for.

1. In our school district, there's no bus service unless you're over 2 miles away from the school. The district measures 2 miles as the crow flies in order to eliminate bus service to nearly everyone. Sure, the kids can walk or ride to school, but my 16-year-old seems to have some big-ass project that he has to tote to school every week.

2. Sports practice. My oldest son played on a national championship youth soccer team this summer. Practice was 40 miles away 3x per week. That's a little far to walk or bike. My middle son was able to bike to soccer practice each day; he played on a crappy team. Sometimes you have to travel to have something better than what's nextdoor.

3. There are many teenagers who have a job to help their families get by, not just to support a car. I can look out my office window right now and see a bunch of houses where everyone in the family old enough to have a job has one to help make ends meet. Many of those jobs are in construction and lawn maintenance. You need a vehicle to get to/from the jobsites.

4. Finally, the one thing about having a 16-year-old driving age is that it gives the kids a couple of years driving experience before they go away to college. Under the idea of waiting until they're 18 to have a license, my oldest would have gotten his license and then got into a car to drive 900 miles to college the next day. Would you want to be on the highway with a kid who has only been driving by himself for a day or two?

As a sixteen year old I agree with the original poster. I have my license and drive to school and back everyday and enjoy the privilege. That being said the kids around me are definitely not mature enough to handle the responsibility of operating a vehicle.

The drinking age should be lowered to 18. Being responsible enough to live on your own but not enough to control alcohol consumption is absurd.