mjk@tty3b.UUCP (Mike Kelly) (07/02/84)
Sophie suggests a higher driving age, rather than a higher drinking age. I agree. The problem is that the U.S. is so built around the auto that to deny 18- and 19-year-olds driving licenses is to greatly restrict their mobility. If we had reasonable mass transit, it wouldn't be nearly so great a problem. I visited Sweden two years ago and went out with some friends of mine to drink. They insisted we ride the bus since one of use couldn't drink if we drove. How many people in America would do such a thing? Of course, the fact that the buses ran frequently and were comfortable (and full of people on a Saturday night) helps. This, by the way, wasn't in Stockholm or a very large city. In the suburbs, mass transit simply doesn't exist, and in the cities it can be a real hassle. Chicago, which probably has one of the best mass transit systems of any American city, still has about 60% of its buses with broken air conditioning AND sealed windows: how's that for a combination on these 95-degree summer days? And there is, of course, the (somewhat exaggerated) danger, especially for women. The only way we'll really be able to stop the incredible carnage -- 50,000 deaths a year in autos, half of them alcohol-related -- is to make not driving a realistic alternative. For too many people, it just isn't. And not solely as a result of personal choice, as the free-marketers like to believe, but as a result of deliberate government policy. Mike Kelly (A CTA rider)