new driver proposals

[ALLADDIN]

The statistics on young drivers is alarming, however this is no more than seeing what the reaction is. Parents and those with a licence will say it is good, but the reality is that it is ill advised.

 

They could do much more by making them have a P plate visible for the first year. As sometimes in experianced drivers are harrased by others who know no better.

They could restrict the power of the car, so you have an engine with less than 50bhp.

Restricting people in the car is the best one, make them have no passengers at night ad it will save lives as the mixture of young people, drink, bravado inexperiance will alway heighten the risk.

 

As for the black boxes, it is the thin end of a very large wedge. The insurance companies and goverments all over the world want these fitting as standard because then they can monitor you 24 hours per day. Just think about it you have an accident they download the data and see you were speeding, good excuse not to pay you out, instant savings for them. Download every year and see you get your foot down, increased risk you pay out an extortinate amount again more money for them.

 

We allow this creeping control because they convince us it is in our best interest and anyone who says no is either a terrorist, a lunatic or a criminal.

totally agree with all of it...........

 

what would be better is a gov leased, 600cc 50 bhp "city car" with a gov backed affordable insurance policy.  young drivers need to travel - work , uni etc and there must be a growing number that will adopt the Romanian approach ( buy it, drive it , to hell with it )

[greenandmean]

Many years ago motor cyclists were dying in lumps and someone took the decision to restrict learner to 250cc and the death rate fell dramatically, have thought for years to restrict learner drivers and beyond (maybe 2 years after passing the test irrespective of age) to say 1 litre, 2 wheel drive etc.

Must say I like Alladin and Jeff suggestions, especially Alladins about restricting power and the gov. sponsored insurance.

[Meakin]

What a load of gov tosh. All it will do is push the accident rate up a few years as its lack of experience that causes the accident not lack of years. As for the curfew how does that help?

When I passed my test the only time I could drive was at night when my parents didn't need the car. I took friends but never drove like an idiot as I knew what would happen if I did. (At least from my parents) never mind the cost of repairs and licence which I had worked hard to get.

I don't see those proposals having any positive effect. As for spy in the car no thanks, sometimes its safer to break the speed limit (like overtaking, look at the road not your speedo, get past, reduce back). The black box can never tell the full story. As had been said thin part of the wedge and in my opinion dangerous path to go down.

The best way to cut the deaths is to cut the car power. Like they did with bikes and have a direct access course for older learners. Saying that the insurance co.s do good job of restricting power with their premiums. A more formal method would be better imho.

The proposals are stereotyping that all young people are driving around like loons showing off to their friends. That certainly wasn't the case with me, and I'm certain its not the case with a lot of young people.

[ALLADDIN]

funny bikes should be mentioned,  it may be coincidence but the laws restricting bikes appeared to decimate the bike sales market ?  when i was young everyone had a chicken chaser (except me i had a datsun cherry  ) , you barely see mopeds now outside citys ?

[Meakin]

Its a common misconception that the bike restriction is mopeds. There are a lot of young people on restricted bikes 125cc limited to 35hp. The difference now is that they look like big bikes so are harder to spot.

It did make a difference in sales at the start but manufacturers coped. It certainly cut down the accidents. Partly cos young riders want to graduate to the bigger bikes so have to ride safer on the small ones.

It is certainly a better proposition than the gov stupid curfew law. They forget that an 18 year old could be married with kids. So saying they can't take passengers less than 30 could be saying you can't drive your family anywhere.

[jeff oakley]

You raise good points Meakin. The statistics do show that having other young people in the car is a recipe for disaster for a huge proportion of young men inparticular, but also women as well.

You highlight the difficulty in doing something as there is a fine line to walk between safety and freedom. I would restrict the power of cars and make the test graduated. I like the idea of 120 hours formal training with an instructor, not a family member and that they need a year between getting a licence and a test.

Attitude is the big problem, some young drivers are responsible, my daughter has had no accidents after passing her test but she has friends who have had a few but they are without doubt the most stupid people I know who see no danger and blame everyone else.

[dombanks]

banning passengers and curfews etc is just pointless. people who dont care will just ignore it and carry on regardless anyway just teh same as they do now with insurance tax etc. the only people this will penalise will be the law abiding majority who just want to go to go out with their mates or have a job etc.

 

apparently in loads of other countries there is a mandantory minimum time for learning. a few of my friends were supprised when they found out you can essentially take your test on your 17th birthday with no lessons (or has that changed now?)

 

i think whole system needs to be changed. if time is a factor what about having places where you can go and start to learn before your 17? have something like the CBT that requires a certain level before your even on the road? my ex went to such a place to learn how to drive a lorry so she could get her licence for her horse box.

[User0083]

I did a couple of lessons, plenty of "L-Plate" driving and from a very young age discussed the Highway Code with family. I was interested in what markings and signs meant. I considered myself a good driver for at Lear ten years. Never a near miss or accident. Except one incident on a track day! Then I moved to a city and although had done a lot of city driving and rush hour driving in Exeter, where I lived for 2yrs after passing my test, it did not prepare me for the last couple of years! Most incidents I have been stationary... But still feel all new drivers should have to do a defensive driving test within 12 months if passing their test and driving assessments should be compulsory every 5 years. Yes people may drive differently for the assessment, however proves they can still drive.

I'm sure many people know someone that passed a motorbike test, got rid of the bike, several years later buy a big bike and end up either dead or not far off dead. Some drivers are too nervous to drive, don't drive for ages, then when they have to drive they can't remember much and are shocking. I did not drive May-Oct 10th due to surgery and not feeling safe with my shoulder. The driving assessment showed me how a few months and an unfamiliar car can really shake things up.

Being honest, I'm worried about driving the Westfield and plan to leave it well alone until out of Birmingham.