When Ohio drivers receive their licenses, they face only one restriction on passengers -everyone in the front seat of the car must wear a seat belt. If the Ohio Department of Public Safety has its way, however, young drivers will have to abide by a new law that would allow only one passenger, other than family members, for 16-or 17-year-old drivers. While groups like the AAA Ohio Motorists Association claim the regulation would reduce risk for young drivers, teens and parents across the state are trying to halt this legislation. Wishful thinking leads to the belief that the one-passenger law will improve driving records. In reality, the new rule leaves drivers and law enforcement at a dead end. It's neither enforceable nor realistic.
Any law created for new drivers should be applied to all drivers. Ability, not age, should determine how many passengers are allowed in the car. And, because ability is not measured beyond the standard driving test, driving laws should pertain to everyone. The state cannot present teens with licenses and then limit their driving rights. If the state wants to place restrictions on drivers, it should start with those who have terrible driving records. Even if the one-passenger regulation goes into effect, police will have no way of enforcing it. Young drivers mostly would be cited after an accident, and at that point, it's already too late.
Having fewer people in the car would do little to improve the situation. Instead, it would take other 16-and 17-year-old drivers out of their friends' cars and into their own, adding to the number of inexperienced drivers on the road. Though lawmakers sometimes believe teens use their license for trouble, many young drivers actually use their ability for worthwhile reasons. Getting from one place to another with a group of friends is useful for many reasons. Driving to school or sporting events shouldn't be limited to two people per car. Ideas like carpooling are logical, and unrealistic limitations are just that -limiting.
In 2001, Athens feared the demolition of a historical landmark. In an effort to save the building known as the Little Red Schoolhouse, citizens raised money to move the building to a new location and the city paid for renovations. After the building was moved, photographs surfaced proving that the Little Red Schoolhouse was not a schoolhouse, but a shed used by a lumber company in 1897. Now, as Ohio begins major preservation of houses along the Underground Railroad, the state can't make the same mistake again. Because the Underground Railroad operated under secrecy, it's difficult to find proof that some of the houses were even involved. Before Ohio starts renovations that will most certainly entail high costs and arduous effort, it needs to be sure it is preserving historical sites and not lumber sheds.
The Underground Railroad story is an important one to tell. The National Underground Freedom Center will open this summer in Cincinnati and serve as a tribute to freedom. While preserving Ohio's rich history is certainly worth the cost, it is useless to transport and renovate houses that were not included in the Underground Railroad. As long as there is enough proof, houses can be listed on the National Register of Historical Places and remain untouched. There are more than 30 locations on the National Register, but hundreds more need to be listed. Every one of these sites should be preserved as long as there is proof of its relevance to the Underground Railroad, but the state cannot waste money if there is no evidence. To avoid a major loss of time and money like that wasted on the Little Red Schoolhouse in Athens, the state needs proof. Once Ohio has that, they should bear whatever burden is necessary for carrying on the glory of the Underground Railroad.
17 Archives
The Post Editorial Board
