JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER
img

Vermont’s Proposed Driving Laws are Ageist

Written by RPost May 10, 2007

Proposed Bills: S.0133, H.0026, H.530

The Vermont legislature is currently passing a bill that will ban hand held cell phones while driving (for teen drivers or for all drivers depending on whether the house’s version or the senate’s version passes). It will also make not wearing a seatbelt a primary violation, meaning the police can pull people over if they see someone not wearing their seatbelt. And most controversially, the house’s version will ban youth drivers from driving between 12:00am and 5:00am unless going to or returning from a school function or a job.

A law that bans cell phones is legitimate as long AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT DESCRIMINATE BY AGE. According to the associated press in an article “Several states bar teen drivers using cell phones”, studies show that youth drivers impaired and distracted by using a cell phone have average reaction times equal to senior citizens. If this is such a big safety concern then why only address youth impairment? Senior citizens must be even more dangerous when using a cell phone. This law could not pass if it restricted only senior citizens from using cell phones, even though they would be doubly impaired. The house’s ban on hand held cell phones is acceptable morally if possibly ineffective, but banning even hands free phones for youth and not for adults is discriminatory and unjustified. The senate’s ban on youth using cell phones on the road is even more broadly discriminatory.

The teen-driving curfew is completely unjustifiable, and can be seen easily as discriminatory in light of the exceptions that go along with it. Apparently the only acceptable things for a teen to do (at night or otherwise) are school, school related activities, and work. The other objections that were given were equally condescending. Turkey hunting, family duties and other such, legitimate, and wholesome activities were cited as justified excursions that would be banned by the law. Are teens unfit for social interaction? The law clearly is aimed at late night teen parties, but is it acceptable to say that teens should not be able to have parties in the nighttime? Apparently because some youth drinking parties exist, all gatherings should be illegal. Of coarse adults have infinite legitimate reasons to be on the road at night, including social gatherings if I know anything about the minds of adults, but the legitimate things that would justify teens on the road at night are only school and work (and maybe hunting, family necessity, or some such other question). Even the progressive Vermont legislature is disturbingly ageist, a hotbed of discrimination against Vermont’s youth.

Also making lack of a seatbelt a primary violation will do more to help law enforcement circumvent the law than to strengthen safety regulations.

“Every study shows seat belts save lives. Every study shows seat belts save money. Every law enforcement agency in this state supports primary seat-belt enforcement.” said Rep. Andrew Donaghy, R-Poultney.

Why would representative Andrew Donaghy care what law enforcement agencies think about seatbelt requirements? Law enforcement’s is not an expert on safety measures, especially not seatbelts. Even if Vermont law enforcement had performed their own research on seat belt effectiveness, their bias would make their recommendations worthless. If a police officer can pull anyone over for not wearing (or supposedly not wearing) their seatbelt, it gives them more freedom to detain people for other reasons. The police already take advantage of primary violations like failing to use a turning signal or hanging something from a rear view mirror to stop youth suspected of going to or leaving a party, and the seatbelt law would only make it easier for them. Even if they can only claim that they saw a seatbelt off, once a car has been stopped they can ask questions and look in the car towards whatever goal they have.

img

OUR BLOG

img

Uh, About that Teenaged Brain …

In the 1970’s, feminist Gloria Steinem wrote a famous essay considering ways the world might be different if men menstruated and women did not. Among other...

BY Bill Bystricky
img

Youth Rights 101, Part 7: Behind the Wheel

This is part of the Youth Rights 101 series. Please check out Youth Rights 101: Introduction for the rest of the series and more information. Aren't...

BY Katrina Moncure
img

Reimagining Youth Rights from a Rural Perspective – Kathleen Nicole O’Neal

When we discuss youth rights we tend to do it from the default perspective of someone in an urban or suburban community. For those who spent...

BY Kathleen O'Neal
img

Stay in School if You Want to Drive

Want to drive? Stay in school A bipartisan bill moving through the Legislature would deliver what backers say is tough love to keep kids in school...

BY Katrina Moncure
img

NYRA Freedom, Volume 11, Issue 3

NYRA Freedom ISSN 1933-5229 Volume 11, Issue 3 March 31, 2011 Editors: Jackie Ferro, Katrina Moncure, Sidnei Banks, Alex Koroknay-Palicz Publisher: David Moss Contents - Introduction...

BY Katrina Moncure
img

NYRA Fights Kyleigh’s Law and STAND UP Act

Kyleigh’s Law took effect in New Jersey last month. It requires provisional drivers under 21 to display a red sticker on their license plate. Although it...

BY NYRA
img

This Hyundai Situation

I've written before about Hyundai's current ad campaign where they depict a teenager's messy room, and point out that because we have to share the road...

BY Katrina Moncure
img

NYRA Fights Bill to Raise Driving Age Nationally

In the midst of an active fight in New Jersey over Kyleigh's Law, the US Senate is looking into imposing national driver's license standards through the...

BY NYRA
img

Kyleigh’s Law puts the Bullseye on Youth

Kyleigh’s Law, which went into effect on May 1, 2010, adds additional requirements to New Jersey’s Graduated Driver’s License program. The most controversial of these new...

BY NYRA
View More

No Post Found !!