To apply for a driver’s license, there are many facts to check such as age and driving experience of

a person. In the US, most states require drivers to be 16 or 17 years old at least but some experts and
politicians have proposed raising the minimum driving age to 18. We are provided with two arguments
which have different opinions about the minimum driving age. The first argument states that the average
16-year-old is not mature enough to make responsible decisions but by the age of 18, there is an
adjustment in his or her brain to make decisions. So, the first argument supports the idea of raising the
minimum driving age to reduce road accidents. On the other hand, the second argument states that the
cause of the accidents is not mainly concerned with the age of the driver. The important thing is the
driver’s experience. I stand with the second argument because it includes an authority figure, certain
datas, and logical reasoning.

Firstly, the second argument makes sure that its claim is more acceptable by the argument of a
woman of a driving school. Kate Willette of ‘Seattle's SWERVE Driving School’ agrees that “It’s careful
and extensive training, more than age, that prepares teenagers to be safe drivers.” As she is from a
driving school, her argument makes sure that the age requirement is not as important as the experience
of the driver to be a safe driving. Meanwhile, the first argument mostly focuses on the mind of the
teenagers and seems not to notice the necessity of the driving experience.

Secondly, the second argument has described some datas from the Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety by showing that raising the driving age does not actually prevent teen driver crashes. According to
their statistics, the death rate due to driving accidents in Connecticut, where the driving age is 16, is the
highest among 16-year-olds, but in New Jersey, where the minimum driving age is 17, is the highest
among 17-year-olds. These datas show that the minimum driving age is not the one we need to focus on.
The accidents happen only because of the inexperience of the drivers. So, the second argument makes
more sense than the first argument.

Lastly, we can see that the second argument has more logical reasoning than the first argument. It
states that no matter what age a teenager first begins to drive. He or she can begin with zero driving
experience. But an 18-year-old who has become a new driver with little experience will be like a 16-year-
old novice. It is logical that however a person has got a driving license and reached the minimum driving
age, if he or she does not have enough training and experience of driving, the potential to happen
accidents is surely more than an experienced driver.

In conclusion, the second argument is more logical, more acceptable, and includes more data than
the first argument. The first argument does not contain an authority figure or sure data to support its
argument. Therefore, we can say as the second argument that to be a safe driver and to reduce road
accidents, the important thing is to have enough driving experience and careful and extensive training.
The mind and personal problems of teenagers are not the main points that can cause more accidents
and fatalities.