Teen Driving Accident

Last week, in the rural town of Griswold, Connecticut - a car full of five teenagers went speeding down a road late at night, and after going over a small hill, they lost control and slammed into a tree. Four were killed instantly, one still remains in critical condition in the hospital.

Some people might say that this is "outrageous! More laws need to be made!" I strongly oppose that viewpoint. Why, might you ask? Here are excerpts from the local news article. (You may read the entire article here. The article and all excerpts are property of WFSB and the Associated Press. No infringement intended.)

According to records from the Department of Motor Vehicles, the 16-year-old driver involved in a crash that killed four and critically injured another on Tuesday evening was driving with only a learner's permit.

In Connecticut, a learner's permit has several restrictions. The only person allowed in the car, besides the driver, is a parent, legal guardian or qualified trainer, such as a driving instructor.

There is no curfew for teen drivers. Drivers and passengers must also all be wearing seat belts.

First off, I just want to make a small comment/correction that Connecticut Teen drivers DO have a curfew (11pm to 5am), but only when they legally have their license. When they have their permit, they are required to have an adult instructor, but do not have a curfew at that time.

Now, while many people are mourning for the victims and lawmakers are scrambling to make new teen driver "blanket" laws in order to make themselves look good, we need to look at the TRUE reason this accident happened.

Part of the reason this crash occurred is that this driver was inexperienced, with only a learner's permit. I can tell you from experience, as a new 16 year old driver - even though I was used to driving farm vehicles from a young age - driving on the road is a very scary and nerve racking experience, especially your first few times. When you are a new driver you should have as few distractions as possible. Theres a reason only ONE ADULT INSTRUCTOR is allowed in the car with you while you are driving. When I was a brand-new driver, my parents wouldn't even let me play the radio for the first few months. They said it was distracting.

This brings me to my second point. The parents are also at fault for this. Now, you might say that I am a "terrible person" for accusing the parents of being at fault for the death of four kids, and potentially the fifth. But guess what? It's the truth. Hear me out....


Laws can only go so far. You can only make so many teen driving laws, and then it is up to the kids to follow them and for the parents to enforce them. Sure, the curfew for newly licensed drivers is 11pm to 5am, and you can't have any passengers for the first six months....but do you honestly think police are driving all over pulling over random teenagers on suspicion of violating curfew? No. They can't do that legally. It's called profiling. They must have committed a traffic offense for police to pull them over. It is up to the parents to enforce these laws with their teenagers. Remember, in most cases the parents are paying for the car and insurance, maybe even the gas. YOU as parents hold the keys. Your kids are YOUR responsibility until they turn 18.

Legally, the parents of the driver could be charged with four counts of Accessory to Manslaughter, as the teen driver was illegally driving his friends, and the parents most likely knew about the teen driver breaking the learner's permit laws. However, no prosecutor would do this (except maybe Jack McCoy on Law and Order...) for fear of public outrage.

But when are we going to actually hold the parents responsible? Police and lawmakers have already done their job - they've created and enforce laws to the best of their ability. But that is barely enough. It is up to the parents to do the rest. A personal example, my parents let me know, in no uncertain terms - if I broke the teen driving laws at any time I would lose the keys until I turned 18. If they even thought I was illegally driving on a learner's permit, I wouldn't have a car.

No doubt lawmakers are going to scramble for even more restrictive teen driving laws, and I say that this is extremely unnecessary and unfair. Why should you punish the majority of teen drivers, who are probably responsible, just because one moron decided to break the laws and ended up killing himself and all his friends as a result? Making new laws will only punish the teen drivers who already follow the rules, and those who do not will continue to disobey the rules. Had this teen driver survived, I would have strongly pushed for prosecution of him based on manslaughter of his three friends. Cold and heartless? Maybe. Necessary? Yes.

Freeze Military Pay? Not so fast.

According to news reports, the "President’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform" has suggested freezing military pay, benefits and retirement acquirement for the next three years. In addition, they suggested raising out-of-pocket costs for medical care for service members, amongst dozens of other things. (See the full list of proposed military cuts, here)

I don't even want to begin how ludicrous this idea seems. We are talking about cutting pay and benefits to our nation's freedom fighters. The very people who fight for our right to speak, write, and read in English and get paid in AMERICAN dollars. Of course, we've screwed our troops out of so much already...health care, psychiatric treatment, body armor, even saying 'thanks'. Why not go and finish the job?


So, what is the suggested savings of all this? $200 billion by 2015. That's roughly $50 billion a year. I can think of a MUCH better way to reduce the federal deficit...

Start by cutting congressional salaries and allowances. With 435 members in the House - making roughly $175,000 each per year (averaging the Speakers and other leadership positions raised pay), and 100 Senators making roughly $175,000 a year, that equates to $93,625,00.00 PER YEAR. Over the next 5 years, to 2015, If we cut each members pay down to $125,000.00 each, that would be a savings of over $26 million PER YEAR, or almost $134 million by 2015.

Of course, why would Congress vote to reduce it's own pay? Would you?

Invasive Patdown or 3,000 dead?

You choose. Some random person in a huge airport gives you an "invasive" patdown, along with every single other person on your plane. Or - in favor of "civil rights" and not being "molested", we go back to the old system of metal detectors only.

This is how the "underpants bomber" was allowed to pass through TSA Security on Christmas Day 2009. Had he been able to detonate his "package", over 200+ people on the plane would have lost their lives, along with multiple people on the ground.

Let's forget about the argument that the TSA has become ineffective, because obviously we have not had a September 11th style attack since, and multiple attempted attacks have been foiled by airport security personnel and procedures.

However, in my view, many people have become complacent. Instead of allowing minor sacrifices in order to keep hundreds of people safe, they don't want some random person "touching their junk."

Lets face it people, these are people who will process hundreds if not thousands of people per day. They will most likely instantly forget your face, because they are just trying to do their job. They don't care about "feeling your junk" and, truth be told, they probably are just as uncomfortable giving you that invasive patdown as you are recieving it.

So, the next time you see a story on television about the "horrible invasive patdowns by TSA personnel", think about this...your one to two minutes of being frisked and being uncomfortable may save the life of you and every other person on your airplane.

....Or, You could always not even bother flying.

NAACP = Morons.

Just saw this on Fox News....decide for yourself. Is this graduation card saying "Black holes" or "black whores"?

In my own opinion, I believe the NAACP is totally overreacting, and this is just another reason why racism is so prevalent still in America. We have become so politically correct and sensitive, that the mere possibility of something being construed as racist is immediately condemned and removed.

If we cannot learn to laugh at ourselves and not take offense to every possible tiny thing - we will destroy ourselves. I'm willing to be my right nut that very VERY few people even CONSIDERED this to be a "racist" card....until of course the NAACP had to put focus on it.

I'll let you see the video, hear the card, and read the story. Form your own opinion and post it below :)

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/11/naacp-urges-hallmark-pull-racist-card-shelves/?test=latestnews

This is why we fight.....

This is just another reason why we are fighting the Taliban in the Middle East.

Taliban executes 7-year-old boy for "spying"
by Mira Jacob, Shine staff,
There is plenty that the Taliban has already done to incur global loathing, including planting IED's in girls' schools, killing scores of Afghan civilians to gain power, and horribly misrepresenting Islam by performing atrocities in the name of Allah. So why is the political movement's reported execution of a 7-year-old boy on the premise that he was "spying for the government" newly sickening?

Because it's horrendous. As a mother, I am disgusted that grown men could ever justify this act. The fact that the Taliban are not alone in killing children to gain political power, or even in persecuting kids for supposedly committing an adult criminal actions, does nothing to stem my horror. These are kids. They cannot be tried as adults because they haven't had the benefit of growing up yet. Kids at this age don't make decisions to further political agendas. They make decisions to please the adults around them, or to stay safe from harm, or to eat.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai summed it up pretty well during a news conference today when he said, "A 7-year-old boy cannot be a spy. A 7-year-old boy cannot be anything but a 7-year-old boy, and therefore hanging or shooting to kill a 7-year-old boy ... is a crime against humanity."

During a press conference in Kabul, British Prime Minister David Cameron added, "If true, I think it says more about the Taliban than any book, than any article, than any speech could ever say."

Pretty messed up right? In my mind, this is just another justifiable reason why our military is overseas. To keep this insane and cruel individuals from killing more innocent people. You never know, one of them may come over here one day and decide YOUR child is an "infidel".

Who I Am.....

So I would just like to say thank you for visiting my blog. I've been considering starting out a blog for awhile now. I have quite a few opinions, and am extremely vocal with them. So now I will finally have my little place online to complain, scream and vent :)


Who I am....

I am a 17 year old guy, born and raised in central Connecticut. I've lived in one town my whole life, and cannot wait to get out of it. I'm extremely honest with my opinions, and am not afraid to tell you like it is. I've always loved politics and keeping up with current events, and will mainly use this blog to post my opinions about a variety of topics.

There is a ton more about me that I will be posting soon, but I'm sure the blog can't hold that much - so you will just have to wait until the next post :)

- Stay Safe -
Alex :)