essay2 Review1

-->

Cuihua Lin

Mr. Hayes

English 100 [1:10-2:00]

1/20/13

                                                Teens Driving

             The car is the most common transportation tool in the United States, and there are lots of teenagers who are allowed to drive under than 18.  However, increasing teens driving will increase cars’ collision because they are too young, and they lack experiences when they are driving. In order to learn more about the teens driving, I have read the three articles. “Distracted Driving” an article that published in a national problem by Gale, wrote about the subject of the distracted driving phenomenon in the US. This phenomenon reflects that using the cell phones is the main point that causes teens driving distraction.

There are so many reasons that lead teens’ driving distraction, and the three writers have found some ways to solve the problems. Dr. Sax judges another article, “Teen Should Be Encouraged to Participate in Supervised Street Racing” with his own opinion, which Dr. Sax claims that education is not an effective way to prevent accidents. He provides powerful reasons and evidences to explain his point why driving education is not effective. However, the last article, “Federal Graduated Driver Licensing Would Reduce Teen Crashes” which was written by Lori Johnston, who provides the reasons to explain his own opinion why federal graduated driver licensing can reduce teens’ crashes rate. All of these writers argue, essentially, that we should use some ways to decrease teens distracted driving. Dr. Sax’s argument stands out, though, because of his thorough refutation of possible objection to his argument. Each of other writers not only seem to be argued upon the basis of personal feeling alone, but also they fail to refute obvious objections, which makes their arguments less convincing than Dr. Sax.

            Dr. Sax uses refutation throughout his column, which makes his work more convincing than Gale and Lori Johnston. To evidence his opinion, Dr. Sax points out two aspects of the phenomenon of teens driving. One of the aspects is an epidemic of reckless driving by teenagers. Dr. Sax points out of “We are in an epidemic of death and injury caused by reckless driving.” It means teenagers do not focus on driving when they drive cars. For instance, when they are driving cars, they may do other things such as using cell phones to text messages, which shows the reckless driving. In order to reduce reckless driving, Robyn Solomon, the president of the Winston Churchill High School Parent Teacher Student Association said, “Parents need to be talking to their kids and explaining to them the risk.” As parents, they not only teach them how to drive, but also they should let their children practice enough before children drive alone. Like this, it not only reduces teens’ reckless driving, also can increase their experiences.

Another aspect is about that education may not stop teens’ reckless driving. Usually, teenagers learn some things when they are educated. However, he think that sometimes the education will lead to teenagers go to the wrong way. Dr. Sax, who writes about the government teaches teenagers to not eat the drugs, and tells them how dangerous if they eat drugs, but teenagers feel that drugs are fresh things while they are more likely to use it. Similarly, Dr. Sax believes the education also doesn’t solve the problem of reckless driving. As a result, Dr. Sax’s argument is effective way to prove that education may not stop teens’ reckless driving.

Both Gale and Lori Johnston’s arguments don’t adequately support their opinion, which makes their points less effective. From Gale’s argument, people have more bias on it. Gale points out, “Many commentators attributed the rise in distracted driving to the ever-increasing popularity of cell phones and texting, especially among the young.” In this case, I learn that using cell phone is not only and main reason leads teens’ distracted driving. Leading teenagers distracted driving have some other important reasons. For example, even though teenagers are allowed to drive, they lack experiences. I think unfamiliar driving will lead teens to get into accidents. Also, teens may distract when they talk to others or eat food, which increases the accident rates. All of these examples show that Gale’s point is less effective.

The same to the Gale’s article, Lori Johnston’s article also is not effective. In his claim that, “American Academy of pediatrics and the insurance institute for highway safety if teens have graduated driver licensing,” which indicates that teens who would reduce accident rates have graduated driver licensing. Johnston’s opinion looks like benefit for teens driving, but I think his opinion is not enough convincing. Because teens lack driving skills, it increases the accident rate. Without a good driving skills, teens usually do not have highly strain capacity.  In order to be excited, teens drive very fast even they know that is dangerous. In this case that indicates Johnston’s article is less effective.

Although Gale uses some evidences to prove his opinion, the way he fails to fully explain these statistics make his evidences less effective than Johnston’s. Comparing two articles, Johnston’s evidence is more convincing because his opinion is useful for teens, and he has a good explanation. In the article, Johnston points out, “The Federal Standup Act is a vaccination to protect teens in a very high-risk and very potentially fatal environment.” The federal standup act establishes some requirements for states such as when teens under 21 drive on the road, they should have a licensed driver who is over 21 in the vehicle. To prove this experiment is benefit, Jacqueline Gillan, the president of Advocates for highway and Auto Safety, a member of the Saferads4 teens, practices teens should have federal graduated driving licensing. Finally, the research has found that teens with graduated driver’s licensing programs can decrease their crashes rate. I agree this program is effective with teens while they are driving. In contract, Gale’s article is less effective because he fails to explain the problem. Gale writes about using the cell phone is the main point that leads teens distracted driving. Actually, this is true point, but leading teens to distracted driving have many reasons such as eating food while they are driving. Nevertheless, I think Johnston’s claim is better than Gale’s.

 Overall the tree articles, leading teens to distract driving that have many reasons such as use cellphone and lack driving skills. To decrease teens distracted driving in the future, teens should not use cell phone when they are driving. Also, before teens start to drive, their parents should teach them the driving skills. If teens learn all of driving skills, they will decrease the crashes rate. I have been driven for one year. Even though I am a new driver, I never do the reckless driving because I pay attention to drive. Then I think if teenagers pay attention to their drive, there will be fewer crashes rate than before.