Ads from Allstate drive a debate

[Ben Kenobi]

the portion of the brain that controls inhibition and decision making is not nearly as developed at 15 as it is at 18

And it isn't as developed at 20 then it is at 25.

I'd love to see a chart with a graph of an empirical measure of 'inhibition and decision making' correlated with age.

I have a sneaky suspicion that kids who are expected to have more responsibility develop more responsibility, and vice versa.

[Wiglaf]

And it isn't as developed at 20 then it is at 25.

dumb argument.

"well...bad drivers are driving already...might as well make the problem worse!!"

[Ben Kenobi]

Obviously if 20 year olds aren't as good on average at decisionmaking then 25 year olds, then we shouldn't let people drive until they are 25.

That's basically your argument for waiting from 16 to 18. Yes I agree with you that 16 year olds are less developed then 18 year olds, but why stop there? Why are 18 year olds qualified to drive and 16 year olds are not?

[Odin]

@ Ozzy

Christ, man, you've become a fanatic.

[SlowwHand]

25 is when insurance rates are reduced for male drivers in the USA. I would think, with all the money they have to spend, insurance companies likely spent some on research.

[OzzyKP]

I am quite familiar with those studies, better than all of you claiming to "pwn" me. They look at purely physical characteristics and have NEVER been able to show direct causation.

But sure, lets make an argument about brain development. What none of you seem to grasp is that brain development isn't a one way trip. It starts developing and then starts falling apart not long after. Brain development in nearly every category PEAKS at about 15.

So yes, if you are older than 15 your brain is inferior to that of a 15 year old.

So should we only let 15 year olds drive? And vote?

If not, then you admit that pure brain science isn't the only factor we should be looking at when determining legal rights and privileges. Otherwise you wouldn't want to trust the degenerated 50-year-old brain.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Odin
@ Ozzy

Christ, man, you've become a fanatic.

You're one to talk.

[SlowwHand]

Otherwise you wouldn't want to trust the degenerated 50-year-old brain.

Let's watch it, jackass.

[OzzyKP]

Can't argue with science.

[Mao]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


Specifically, there's neurological evidence that the part of the brain that controls judgment and self-preservation isn't fully developed until humans are in their mid-20s -- which explains not only bone-headed teen drivers but also quite a bit about my college years.

That's interesting. It makes me slightly afraid then, that we trust these young men and women with guns to fight wars for us. Maybe a lack of self-preservation is a good quality in enlisted personnel, but the lack of judgment must certainly be a big problem.

[SlowwHand]

No.
A teenager in the world, has no real controls in place when they're out. They mess up driving, they take out innocents.
A teenager in the bush, or sand or whatever, has controls in place and have been trained in responsibility and accountability.

A huge diference.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Then perhaps they should be taught control.

The major problem, of course, is that far too many adults lack control, and they cannot teach what they don't know.

[Space05us]

You're all sheep to corporate America, doing exactly what this company wants you to do.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Mao


That's interesting. It makes me slightly afraid then, that we trust these young men and women with guns to fight wars for us. Maybe a lack of self-preservation is a good quality in enlisted personnel, but the lack of judgment must certainly be a big problem.

Actually, what it means is that they make great warriors(no inhibitions, little fear) but lousy peacekeepers (too little judgment). Given the role soldiers are supposed to play in the modern military, that's the real problem.

[Mao]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
No.
A teenager in the world, has no real controls in place when they're out. They mess up driving, they take out innocents.
A teenager in the bush, or sand or whatever, has controls in place and have been trained in responsibility and accountability.

A huge diference.

So if drivers went through a boot camp of sorts, that'd be OK? Or soldiers that come back from the front are better drivers? Or is it that you need both the hostile atmosphere AND the training, in which case it'd be near impossible to replicate at home.

I tend to agree with Rufus a bit more here - you and I both know young men and women serving today, I'm sure. From my own admittedly idiosyncratic experience, the disdain many show toward "the enemy" that dehumanizes them (the enlisted personnel I know tend to do this anyway) makes for great warriors to fight wars, but do little for their role as peacekeepers.