Take the Stickers Away:
Getting rid of the section of Kyleigh’s Law that requires teens to have the stickers displayed--take the stickers away. No teen would be required to have red decals, or any other form of identification of being under the age of 18. This solution helps eliminate the factor of targeting which is sourced from police officers as well as predators and it does not bear any costs for the government or the individual; in fact, if the red decals were to be removed, teens driving without the red decal would not have to worry about paying a $100 if caught by the police . By removing the decals, it eliminates problems such as young drivers being targeted by police officers or predators, the teens are not carrying visible target on their back when driving which can help with staying calm while behind the wheel, which can improve focus and encourage better driving skills (McArdie 1).
Supporters:
Teens who feel unsafe displaying the decals and their parents who feel uncomfortable with their children being “marked” as well as the parents being supporters, now they are not forced to worry about teen drivers being singled out on the roads. Also, state legislature would support this as well as the police unit of NJ since they do not have to worry about suspicious people being able to target teens and follow them while driving. (Hochman). This plan creates a maximum effort of safety to teen drivers as well as others around them.
Unfortunately, there are many people that are still worried for the safety of new drivers, and want a way of them being recognized as inexperienced to everyone on the roads whose safety is on the line which means there will be no way to recognize the teens driving and may be dangerous for others on the road.
Opponents:
This solution would be implemented by removing the sticker altogether. There would no longer be a red sticker necessary for New Jersey teenagers with a permit. The law will need to be amended to account for this change. The part of Kayleigh’s Law, Section 6 of P.L.1977, c.25 (C.39:3-13.2a), is the section of the law requiring red reflective decals to be displayed on both front and back license plates. By removing this section of the law, the other sections of the law will remain in tact but we will get rid of the section causing the most problems for teen drivers (C.39:3-13.2a).
Getting rid of the section of Kyleigh’s Law that requires teens to have the stickers displayed--take the stickers away. No teen would be required to have red decals, or any other form of identification of being under the age of 18. This solution helps eliminate the factor of targeting which is sourced from police officers as well as predators and it does not bear any costs for the government or the individual; in fact, if the red decals were to be removed, teens driving without the red decal would not have to worry about paying a $100 if caught by the police . By removing the decals, it eliminates problems such as young drivers being targeted by police officers or predators, the teens are not carrying visible target on their back when driving which can help with staying calm while behind the wheel, which can improve focus and encourage better driving skills (McArdie 1).
Supporters:
Teens who feel unsafe displaying the decals and their parents who feel uncomfortable with their children being “marked” as well as the parents being supporters, now they are not forced to worry about teen drivers being singled out on the roads. Also, state legislature would support this as well as the police unit of NJ since they do not have to worry about suspicious people being able to target teens and follow them while driving. (Hochman). This plan creates a maximum effort of safety to teen drivers as well as others around them.
- State Senator Christopher “Kip” Bateman attempted to pass a bill undoing the sticker requirement and said, “It probably had a role, but I don't think it was the sole factor” referring to the decrease in accidents (Hochman). The Senator argues that one cannot forget that all of the restrictions included in Kyleigh’s Law were enacted at the same time as the decals, so there are a large number of factors that could have caused the decrease.
- State Senator Jennifer Beck said “‘That a tiny little sticker could prevent 1,600 deaths — that just seemed too fantastic”’ (Hochman). She and Bateman both advocated for the same bill eliminating the decal requirement due to their disbelief of the effectiveness of the law.
- NJ Governor Chris Christie has admitted to not liking the law
- More than 135 comments against the law were left on the Allison Curry’s study, described in the article “Study: Decal law kept 1,600 young drivers out of crashes in first year”.
Unfortunately, there are many people that are still worried for the safety of new drivers, and want a way of them being recognized as inexperienced to everyone on the roads whose safety is on the line which means there will be no way to recognize the teens driving and may be dangerous for others on the road.
Opponents:
- People who believe that Kyleigh’s Law only protects teens from danger as well as alerts other people on the road
- People who believe that the police are not specifically targeting teenage drivers would be against getting rid of the part of the law that requires teens to have the stickers displayed
- New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission because they would no longer be making money from stickers
- Opponents can be persuaded by telling them that there have been multiple cases where teens driving with the red sticker have been targeted either by the police or by predators
- Educating opponents on the harmful effects of the law that they might not be aware of would change their perspective on the law
- We could override this opposition by having meetings and conferences across the state to discuss the dangers of the decals and how they are affecting the ability for the young teens to drive safely and securely.
This solution would be implemented by removing the sticker altogether. There would no longer be a red sticker necessary for New Jersey teenagers with a permit. The law will need to be amended to account for this change. The part of Kayleigh’s Law, Section 6 of P.L.1977, c.25 (C.39:3-13.2a), is the section of the law requiring red reflective decals to be displayed on both front and back license plates. By removing this section of the law, the other sections of the law will remain in tact but we will get rid of the section causing the most problems for teen drivers (C.39:3-13.2a).
