And that just might the clearest signal I need to write it.
He's a teenager -- a few months shy of 15 and full of all the "teen-ness" that goes with the age. Like all of his buddies, he can't wait to get his driver's license.
For the last year, he's been studying every vehicle on the road and backseat-driving like a pro.
He thinks he knows all about driving. He's just biding his time until he gets his license.
I take advantage of every opportunity when we're in the car together to point out driving tips,remind him that cars really are 3,000 pounds of metal and warn him that he'll walk forever if I ever see him driving like an idiot.
He's gotten used to it, I think.
But the talk we had last week was a little different. I told him that a close friend of his 16-year-old cousin was killed in a car accident a few days before. My son asked if the kid had been drinking. I told him no, that apparently his only mistake was doing what he did every Friday night: getting into a car full of his buddies -- four teenagers.
Then in a voice probably more shrill than was necessary, I made it clear he would not be doing that when he came of age. "And don't even ask, because I'll say no."
At which point the 13-year-old said he would never get into a car with all his buddies when it was dark out. "Only during the day," he said.
"Ah, no you won't," I said.
They seemed surprised. Neither had been confronted before
I can forgive them their shock; they're only kids.
Our legislators don't get the same pass, though.
Haunted by the death of a boy I didn't know but whose face I can see on my own boys and my nephew, I looked into the law, positive there was something on the books limiting the number of teenagers in one car driven by another teenager.
There is no law.
There are, however, three bills pending in the General Assembly. All three (House Bills 787 and 1904 and Senate Bill 1022) would allow for no more than one passenger under the age of 18 in a vehicle driven by someone under 18 unless a parent is present.
I understand that none of the bills is close to becoming law -- despite statistics that show a teen driver is five times more likely to have a fatal accident when two or more teens are in the vehicle than when driving alone.
Despite the gut-wrenching figures from the Pennsylvania AAA Federation that in addition to the 390 teen drivers who died in crashes from 1995 to 2004, 352 teen passengers also died in crashes involving a teen driver.
Despite the national figures that show two-thirds of all teen passengers killed in crashes were in vehicles driven by teens.
It's not just drinking and driving that's killing them, though that seems to get all the attention. And it's not necessarily bad driving.
It's their own age and inexperience and the way their brains work.
It's those teenage brains that we now know (if we're paying any attention at all) will continue to develop until they reach about 25. Until then, they're risk-takers. Their judgment isn't sound.
Yes, that's the same age their insurance rates go down. Think that's a coincidence?
I have a co-worker who thinks any effort to restrict teen passengers is wasted time. "How can you enforce it?" he asked.
The quick answer looks to the parents. But we can't legislate good parenting any more than we can legislate good driving.
So we do what we can. And in this case, we can make a law.
In California, where teenage passenger restrictions were instituted in 1998, crash fatalities among teen passengers decreased 25 percent just three years later.
So no, it's not going to save all those young lives, but saving one would be worth it.
Lori Goodlin is editor of The York Dispatch. E-mail her at lgoodlin@yorkdispatch.com.
Font Resize
