Do YOU think THIS is a good LAW???

Question

im 13 and i think that if you are in high school and do not have grades better than a c average you should NOT get a drivers licence

also

you should not get a licence if you are not in high school and so therefore you must at least graduate high school to recieve one

what do YOU think i think that it would be a great idea!!

Answer 1

I think it's a great idea. A good education is a key to a productive life. It gives you incentive to do better in school.  

Answer 2

education and driving dont go hand in hand. and your law makes no sense. first you say you can get one if you're in high school with a c average or better. then next you contradict yourself and say you cannot get one if you're in high school.

**good point but, they have already passed a law stating that if you were born in 1995 or higher you cant get your license til 18.  once when you're old enough at around 16, you'll see that driving is kinda important. i have a job [im 16] so i need to get my license.

**plus, the fact that kids born in 1995 and higher cant get theirs til they're 18, i think that'll get them even more lazy. i've noticed that im pretty much the only one, between all of my friends, who has an actual job. i think they're just lazy. it's not that they dont have the time, it's just that they want to live off their parents and not realize what a single dollar earned really means. so really i think both of these laws arent good. they just make our high schoolers even more lazy than they already are.....but you have a good mind set for your age.

Answer 3

Its ok, but it would be hard to enforce and it would never pass. People would say that its discriminating.  

Answer 4

Your ability to comform to the states idea of education has not one ounce to do with your driving skills and judgment.  

Answer 5

I think it's admirable that you want to encourage teens to stay in school and get good grades.  However, this should be up to the parents, not the government.  Once upon a time, some states denied the right to vote to citizens who couldn't read or write.  Ask a history teacher or a civil rights activist why, what happened to those laws, and how some people led marches and died to get rid of those laws.

Laws must apply to all equally.  If a person can meet the requirements and responsibilities for licensing, then they must be allowed a license.

Besides, if D-students and dropouts can't drive, who will deliver my pizza?

Answer 6

Not at all, you don't need an education to drive, this is just making life even harder for dropouts when it is already much more difficult than it needs to be.

Not having a job doesn't mean you're lazy though Audrey. The only job harder than finding a job is digging ditches. I've been looking for a job for years and I haven't even managed to get an interview.

Answer 7

Several states already have these laws.  You must either be a student with at least a C average or have a high school diploma.  I predict that it will be that way in most states within a few years.  You're a smart kid.

Answer 8

It's a very bad idea for a law.  Many people have already noted that there is no clear connection between high school grades and competent driving, but my complaint is that you haven't even clearly stated your proposed law.

You wrote that "you should not get a licence if you are not in high school and so therefore you must at least graduate high school to recieve one."  Don't you see that your proposed law makes no sense?  If you are in high school earning grades of "C average" then you must not yet have graduated.  If you have graduated, then you can't be in high school earning grades of "C average."   So, it is obvious that you haven't really thought about your "law" long enough to figure out what you want to say.  

What if a student gets straight A grades with one exception.  The one exception is an "F" in driver's education.  Under your "great idea" that student would have a higher than C average and would qualify for a license despite failing to show competency in driving.  So, your law seems to be a very bad idea.

What if a person earns an equivalency certificate?  They would not have graduated high school, but they would have done the equivalent.  Under your law, they would not get a driver's license.  Why is that a good law?  

Imagine student S has two younger siblings.  Imagine that S gets straight A grades but must drop out of high school to get a job when her parents die.  Because she had to drop out, she never graduated.  Under your law, she can't get a license.  She is trying to do the right thing and support her younger siblings and tragically has been forced to leave school, but your law penalizes her and make her life (as well as the life of her younger siblings) much harder.  That's not a good law, it's a horrible law.

Think it through and write it out more carefully next time.

ADDITIONAL DETAILS:

You have attempted to clarify your proposed law by writing "what i ment to say was that for the people who drop out or do not attend AT ALL will not get a licence until they at least pass a certain grade level but for those who do not recieve a c average throughout the grade when licence's are given you will not recieve a licence"  

It's still a very bad law for reasons I already made clear:  

1)  You need to understand the legal impact of the word "or."  Your law (even after you tried to clarify it) means that people who drop out of high school do not get a driver's license.  

2)  Some people drop out of school for reasons which are beyond their control, and you completely ignore that fact (although I brought it to your attention already).  You seem to wrongly assume that people always drop out because they are irresponsible.  Look at my hypothetical regarding student S.  Your law is still a horrible law for that hypothetical student.  Your law would make that person's life worse as well as working a hardship on their family.  There are a lot of people who drop out of school due to hardship -- that may not be your experience, but it is true.  That's a big problem with your law.

3)  Your grade point average concept ignores people with an acceptable GPA and poor driver's education grades.  That's a huge problem, don't you think?

4)  You still haven't addressed my point about people who earn equivalency certificates.

5)  You haven't explained what you mean by a "certain grade level."  Even moderately successful laws can't have unexplained phrases like "certain grade level" in them.  

A law impacts EVERYONE.  You are making sweeping and unjustified assuptions about people, and that is why your law is a very bad idea.  

Look, you've indicated that you're 13 years-old; so, I don't mean to come down on you like a ton of bricks.  It's nice that you are thinking about the law, it's nice that you want people to be responsible.  All of that it praiseworthy.  Plenty of people out there will pat you on the head and say "good kid, that's a great law" but I'm going to treat your idea like that of an adult.  I hope you can understand and appreciate that -- it may seem harsh, but it's honest and not patronizing.  Your proposed law is a bad idea because you are making assumptions which are only true in some instances.  Consequently, your law works well only when your assumptions happen to be true.  When your assumptions are not borne out by the facts, then your law creates great hardship.  That's the hall mark of a bad law.  Sorry, but that's how I see it, and I think I've given you some pretty clear examples as to why I see it that way.

No offense intended.  Think it over and you may see my point.  It is actually quite difficult to write a decent law.

Answer 9

I think you have very smart ideas for a 13 year old. Keep going!

Answer 10

This proposed law assumes that there is any relation between grades and driving ability. The only reasons anyone should not have a license are irresponsibility and lack of driving ability.

If someone doesn't take driving seriously, or drinks and drives, then they shouldn't drive until they can handle the responsibility. If that someone can't operate the vehicle, remember the laws, or obey the laws, they should learn them, but should not drive until then.

Having good or bad grades does not signal good or bad driving.

Answer 11

AMEN!

Answer 12

It would become a socio-economic issue.  People need to be able to drive to be a viable entity in the job-market.  If not individually, then imagine our society, like the ancient Romans, with a 2nd class of Plebians, unable to transport themselves.

This is actually an issue that is very relevant to labor reform around the early parts of the 20th century.  The introduction of mass produced cars, such as the Model T Ford, and their enabling of working class citizens to demand better pay and working conditions or they'd just up and go some place else did much to reconcile the schism between the upper and lower classes, which in turn did alot to kill the momentum of the anarchist and communist movements.

Don't think we can't turn back the clock there.

Answer 13

Pretty good, this would definitely keep young students to actually study but there can be many instances when it can be considered unfair... like if a student needs to drive because they have a single parent that works all the time and needs to have a car to attend school activities etc.,. maybe you should add this to your law: only under special circumstances and with good conduct behavior. That would be perfect for a 13 yr. old law maker  :)  Keep working at it!  

Answer 14

The grades one.. I'm not too sure about. But the one about not getting it until you graduate is a little harsh. I have mine and I'm going to be a Sophomore.. it was a long enough wait to get it this summer.. I don't want to wait 3 more years.