Blah blah blah, yeah many people are excited for their driver's license, but just think about the safety. Think about how many teens died. For example "an article by —Alex Koroknay-Palicz stated that “between 1995 and 2004, there were 30,917 fatalities in accidents that involved 15-to-17-year-old drivers.” Look at this! Would you rather have 16 year olds just wait two years before death potentially may strike them from some other young teen. Also about the adults transporting their teen to school, you could just have the bus take you, or go carpool with a nice friend's parent. Rethink it.

Why risk it?

Representative John D'Amico once said "I cannot sit back and watch more innocent lives be claimed because of lack of experience." Now in this text, you see that John heard about many young teens dying from car crashes, so why risk it. I mean it would be a tragedy to see your own son or daughter die just because she have enough experience driving, look at that, what a young and innocent kid dying because of some dang old car crash. It doesn't make sense. I mean like I'd rather not risk more 16 and 17 year olds dying and just raise the dang driving age. It makes perfect sense, think about it.

I agree with Granger, 16 and 17 year olds are not as developed as 18 year olds. As I stated before with evidence from multiple websites, the brain isn't fully developed until like the early 20s. That could effect them with like the hand-eye coordination thing as Granger said, the brain not fully developed could cause many accidents. So why risk it?

(You wouldn't be smart if you risked it, just sayin'.)

Okay now the U.S doesn't let 16 year olds drink but guns and smoke, but they let 16 year olds start driving! It's like really, what the heck? Dang, I mean it's just weird to me, they don't let 16 olds buy guns, drink, or smoke but they can drive a car that is a way bigger potential to lead to death than those three. Not only death to the driver but to other people, whereas drinking and smoking have a little potential to get some sickness or liver cancer, and only guns can be a bigger problem. Just think about it, isn't the Government crazy?

Okay now the U.S doesn't let 16 year olds drink but guns and smoke, but they let 16 year olds start driving! It's like really, what the heck? Dang, I mean it's just weird to me, they don't let 16 olds buy guns, drink, or smoke but they can drive a car that is a way bigger potential to lead to death than those three. Not only death to the driver but to other people, whereas drinking and smoking have a little potential to get some sickness or liver cancer, and only guns can be a bigger problem. Just think about it, isn't the Government crazy?

I think they should raise the driving age because younger people are just not mature enough. They may still not know the outside world responsibilities from what I've noticed. Unlike 18 year olds, they aren't really adults yet, they may just go and party with friends whereas 18 year olds knows the responsibilities and knows the consequences. Also unlike 16 year olds, they still kind of rely on their parents, their parents can pay. But 18 year olds are adults, again. And they know the consequences.

Since April 20, 4,000 Americans were killed in automobile accidents like Ava said, but let's go a couple years before that. "Alex Koroknay-Palicz stated that “between 1995 and 2004, there were 30,917 fatalities in accidents that involved 15-to-17-year-old drivers.” Look at how many young people are dying!

Also there's another website telling you that "neuroscientists agree that brain development likely persists until at least the mid-20s – possibly until the 30s.”

I think they should raise they driving age because “According to recent findings, the human brain does not reach full maturity until at least the mid-20s.” As you can see in this quote, the brain doesn't fully develop, so I think that 16 year olds may cause more accidents whereas when you raise the driving age, I believe that there would be less accidents because the brain is more mature.