what do you guys think of this?
21-Nov-2008, 09:24 AM
#41
Dude, that restriction is from 12am - 5am.
Everyone should read read the complete members bill, and not what the media decides for you to read.
I both agree and disagree, I agree that a law should be in place, but not the restrictions that this one intends to do. It should be for new drivers, not for the age of a driver.
And then everyone forgets this one, and it slips thru to be passed while you all ponder on the Teen restrictions.
http://ogov.newswire.ca/ontario/GPOE...=&lang=_e.html
Everyone should read read the complete members bill, and not what the media decides for you to read.
I both agree and disagree, I agree that a law should be in place, but not the restrictions that this one intends to do. It should be for new drivers, not for the age of a driver.
And then everyone forgets this one, and it slips thru to be passed while you all ponder on the Teen restrictions.
http://ogov.newswire.ca/ontario/GPOE...=&lang=_e.html
"And even though there would still be an exemption for younger siblings, police would have to pull over vehicles and check for identification in order to establish whether the occupants of the car were, indeed, related." what if ur last names dont match ur dad is different form ur brothers dad but u guys live in the same house with the same mother...
21-Nov-2008, 10:06 AM
#43
21-Nov-2008, 02:17 PM
#47
well IMO a car is just as dangerous as a gun.
So at 16 the gov't is giving you a license....to kill, if in the wrong hands.
Its sad that a few people can ruin something for the whole bunch, but thats life. Its got so bad, that the gov't has had to step in and do something about it. If its something that will protect me and my family while i'm on the roads, i'm all for it.
I also feel there should be at least some sort of refresher driving course every 10-15 years from the time you get your license and every 10-15 years thereafter. I think it should be necessary to take a test again every so often (10-15 years), but i'm sure a lot of people would disagree with that kind of regulation. I see a lot of idiot drivers out on the roads of all ages, race and sex. I do my best to be a defensive driver (a term a lot of people seem to forget) and can only hope others do as well.
So at 16 the gov't is giving you a license....to kill, if in the wrong hands.
Its sad that a few people can ruin something for the whole bunch, but thats life. Its got so bad, that the gov't has had to step in and do something about it. If its something that will protect me and my family while i'm on the roads, i'm all for it.
I also feel there should be at least some sort of refresher driving course every 10-15 years from the time you get your license and every 10-15 years thereafter. I think it should be necessary to take a test again every so often (10-15 years), but i'm sure a lot of people would disagree with that kind of regulation. I see a lot of idiot drivers out on the roads of all ages, race and sex. I do my best to be a defensive driver (a term a lot of people seem to forget) and can only hope others do as well.
21-Nov-2008, 03:02 PM
#49
well he's trained to protect his country and fellow countrymen.
Whereas with driving, you're trained NOT to kill your fellow countrymen, its a shame enough young drivers aren't following their training and now the government feels the need to step in and try to make new regulations.
Joining the army is your choice (unless you're drafted, but how many canadians do you know that have been drafted?), just like getting your license is your choice. Driving is your choice as well (as long as you've got your license), same with driving like an idiot or not paying attention, its all your choice. You have to be accountable for your choices/decisions/actions. It just sucks that enough young people had made enough bad choices and now all may (this hasn't passed yet) have to suffer from it....but if its gunna protect the other 80% of drivers out there, I'm all for it.
These new laws affect only a small percentage of people out there, but protects EVERY person on the road.
Whereas with driving, you're trained NOT to kill your fellow countrymen, its a shame enough young drivers aren't following their training and now the government feels the need to step in and try to make new regulations.
Joining the army is your choice (unless you're drafted, but how many canadians do you know that have been drafted?), just like getting your license is your choice. Driving is your choice as well (as long as you've got your license), same with driving like an idiot or not paying attention, its all your choice. You have to be accountable for your choices/decisions/actions. It just sucks that enough young people had made enough bad choices and now all may (this hasn't passed yet) have to suffer from it....but if its gunna protect the other 80% of drivers out there, I'm all for it.
These new laws affect only a small percentage of people out there, but protects EVERY person on the road.
21-Nov-2008, 03:53 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,505
I agree..
seems training may be the route cause for younger drivers short coming.
I have nothing against the law either.
When i started driving my parents had a 1 strike and you're out policy. Kept me in line.
it was only after i got my own car that I started to become wreckless, not that Im older i don't even see the need to speed...
biggest pet peeves: the douche bag teenager driving his mothers car its the starting grid of a F1 race.. until the next traffic light anyways
seems training may be the route cause for younger drivers short coming.
I have nothing against the law either.
When i started driving my parents had a 1 strike and you're out policy. Kept me in line.
it was only after i got my own car that I started to become wreckless, not that Im older i don't even see the need to speed...
biggest pet peeves: the douche bag teenager driving his mothers car its the starting grid of a F1 race.. until the next traffic light anyways
21-Nov-2008, 05:06 PM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: GTA
Posts: 2,305
my parents said if i got a speeding ticket, i would have to pay for my own insurance.
i got charged doing 50km/hour over the limit after a few years of driving.
they said i couldn't drive their car, so i bought one and paid my insurance.
my point is, it should be up to the parents.
more people die of cholesterol than speeding and drunk driving.
driving provides the ability to get from point a to point b.
McDonalds does not provide any utility.
we should maybe shut down fast food, or make sure people can't eat unhealthy food more than once a week.
i got charged doing 50km/hour over the limit after a few years of driving.
they said i couldn't drive their car, so i bought one and paid my insurance.
my point is, it should be up to the parents.
more people die of cholesterol than speeding and drunk driving.
driving provides the ability to get from point a to point b.
McDonalds does not provide any utility.
we should maybe shut down fast food, or make sure people can't eat unhealthy food more than once a week.
22-Nov-2008, 01:50 AM
#53
Let's not forget that once you tell someone not to do something they just do it even more. Especially teenagers.
Ex: Cigarette sales have increased since the new law passed of having them closed off in convenience stores. (Family member is in the business.) You think the government doesn't know this? So what are they concerned about more, peoples health or their bank accounts?
Ex: Cigarette sales have increased since the new law passed of having them closed off in convenience stores. (Family member is in the business.) You think the government doesn't know this? So what are they concerned about more, peoples health or their bank accounts?
22-Nov-2008, 10:58 AM
#56
Let's not forget that once you tell someone not to do something they just do it even more. Especially teenagers.
Ex: Cigarette sales have increased since the new law passed of having them closed off in convenience stores. (Family member is in the business.) You think the government doesn't know this? So what are they concerned about more, peoples health or their bank accounts?
Ex: Cigarette sales have increased since the new law passed of having them closed off in convenience stores. (Family member is in the business.) You think the government doesn't know this? So what are they concerned about more, peoples health or their bank accounts?
driving is a privledge and all these statistics are of the teenagers of u older guys' days too so all ur stupid moves are on the tally
25-Nov-2008, 05:46 PM
#57
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: burlington ontario
Posts: 16
Yes, and what about DD's? designated drivers. Now kids cant dd, becuase you can drink at 19.
25-Nov-2008, 06:46 PM
#58
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
26-Nov-2008, 01:39 AM
#59
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 58
The government is expecting responsibility when they're not giving a chance for these young people to exercise and develop it. If a teen couldn't do something when they're 19, doesnt mean they're not going to do it when they're 23...
If a teen came from a strict family, where they never let him do anything during highschool life.. when he goes off to university on his own, hes probably more likely to go crazy with the partying, and fail at life.. because he lacks the responsibility
If a teen came from a strict family, where they never let him do anything during highschool life.. when he goes off to university on his own, hes probably more likely to go crazy with the partying, and fail at life.. because he lacks the responsibility
26-Nov-2008, 07:48 AM
#60
Inactive
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,641
well thats kind of interesting. my buddy is in recruites and he is leveling up his rank there for the 2nd year now. hes 18 and damn hes much better at that than driving his car. hes got mk3 jetta vr6 and whenever we go somewhere with 2 cars i make sure i follow him (because he bumped into me once already) the thing is, in the army they are strict on rules, now when you are driving there arent too many cops around. he drinks/smokes weed and drives afterwards. so actually the 0% alcohol thing i can agree with. it makes sense to me. im 18 and i never drink and drive. not even one beer.
