Car smashes into coffee shop
Discussion
JontyR said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
tvrforever said:
My simple thought to this is to make driving licences only valid for 5yrs, with everybody having to resit their test every 5 years regardless of age etc -
And what's going to happen with the millions, maybe including you and me, who fail. The kids need picking up from school that afternoon, you have a job that involves driving, you've driven to the test centre, you have a life that's been organised around driving a car. Put in for a retest....how long will that take, with 35 million drivers taking a test every 5 yrs, that's 7m a year, or about 20k a day, assuming they work weekends and bank holidays, or 27K a day if they have weekends and xmas/easter off!I'm genuinely interested in how this will actually be achieved in practice.
But this is the problem, we have a perfectly good system that requires people to self regulate their driving ability. Sadly though, most GPs are too afraid to inform the DVLA in case they lose the trust and revenue of the patient. And there is too much pride at stake to admit to the DVLA that you are no longer capable. Especially as families are further apart these days and as you rightly say we depend on cars too much.
But maybe we need to take the emotion out of the equation and realise that we need a safer system that regulates whether people are safe to drive.
Think of the additional income this could generate for the government? It could be used to fund traffic police, hospitals etc etc, but ultimately it would bring down insurance costs and so make driving safer and cheaper.
So yes there are a good number of people driving and it would be fraught with problems initially. But we manage to get the 100million cars through an MOT each year, so 30 odd million people wouldn't be too much of an issue?
Initially the first test would be eyesight and general awareness. This could be done using VR equipment. This increases development in the VR world and creates jobs that could then be used in other fields.
If the person passes that then you can put them through a highway code test. Once again this can be done in a classroom environment which will keep costs down and allow a good number of people to be tested at once.
Then take them out on the road. Yes this would need to be done individually, but so what? You turn up in your car, this could be examined to access a basic understanding of car maintenance. It only needs to be an hour per person....to be honest you are going to get a good idea as to whether they are going to kill anyone by the time they have driven out of the test centre.
So how do you access them?
Using a points system. They are graded on each part and if they pass (A or B) then continue for another 5 years. If they get C or D then it is suggested that they have to attend lessons within 8 weeks on the area they failed on...but they can still carry on driving. If they get an E then they have to stop driving until they can pass a full test again. It could even be that the examiner deems them unsafe totally, through eyesight or speed of reactions etc.
REALIST123 said:
JontyR said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
tvrforever said:
My simple thought to this is to make driving licences only valid for 5yrs, with everybody having to resit their test every 5 years regardless of age etc -
And what's going to happen with the millions, maybe including you and me, who fail. The kids need picking up from school that afternoon, you have a job that involves driving, you've driven to the test centre, you have a life that's been organised around driving a car. Put in for a retest....how long will that take, with 35 million drivers taking a test every 5 yrs, that's 7m a year, or about 20k a day, assuming they work weekends and bank holidays, or 27K a day if they have weekends and xmas/easter off!I'm genuinely interested in how this will actually be achieved in practice.
But this is the problem, we have a perfectly good system that requires people to self regulate their driving ability. Sadly though, most GPs are too afraid to inform the DVLA in case they lose the trust and revenue of the patient. And there is too much pride at stake to admit to the DVLA that you are no longer capable. Especially as families are further apart these days and as you rightly say we depend on cars too much.
But maybe we need to take the emotion out of the equation and realise that we need a safer system that regulates whether people are safe to drive.
Think of the additional income this could generate for the government? It could be used to fund traffic police, hospitals etc etc, but ultimately it would bring down insurance costs and so make driving safer and cheaper.
So yes there are a good number of people driving and it would be fraught with problems initially. But we manage to get the 100million cars through an MOT each year, so 30 odd million people wouldn't be too much of an issue?
Initially the first test would be eyesight and general awareness. This could be done using VR equipment. This increases development in the VR world and creates jobs that could then be used in other fields.
If the person passes that then you can put them through a highway code test. Once again this can be done in a classroom environment which will keep costs down and allow a good number of people to be tested at once.
Then take them out on the road. Yes this would need to be done individually, but so what? You turn up in your car, this could be examined to access a basic understanding of car maintenance. It only needs to be an hour per person....to be honest you are going to get a good idea as to whether they are going to kill anyone by the time they have driven out of the test centre.
So how do you access them?
Using a points system. They are graded on each part and if they pass (A or B) then continue for another 5 years. If they get C or D then it is suggested that they have to attend lessons within 8 weeks on the area they failed on...but they can still carry on driving. If they get an E then they have to stop driving until they can pass a full test again. It could even be that the examiner deems them unsafe totally, through eyesight or speed of reactions etc.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I'd suggest a minimum of my "driving test light" for every driver over the age of 70? Perhaps not annually but at least every 24 months. This could then be rolled out to all those who suffer a black out, seizure type illness for a period determined by the BMA.
I really don't think it's impossible.
No, that's possible. But we've moved from a driving test for everyone every 5 years (which I said was a logistical impossibility) to a little bit of a test for the over 70s every 2 years (whereas now it's every 3 years).I really don't think it's impossible.
Hardly ground breaking. And still leaves a 53 year unmonitored gap!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I'd suggest a minimum of my "driving test light" for every driver over the age of 70? Perhaps not annually but at least every 24 months. This could then be rolled out to all those who suffer a black out, seizure type illness for a period determined by the BMA.
I really don't think it's impossible.
No, that's possible. But we've moved from a driving test for everyone every 5 years (which I said was a logistical impossibility) to a little bit of a test for the over 70s every 2 years (whereas now it's every 3 years).I really don't think it's impossible.
Hardly ground breaking. And still leaves a 53 year unmonitored gap!
Anyway, while I'm considering my made up driving license test I'll take on board your comments and to the above I'll add;
Mandatory retest every 10 years (for those under our oap age limit).
Mandatory retest every 2 years for those above oap age limit
Mandatory retest every 2 years for the first 6 years since passing test.
Mandatory retest after every medical incident that requires a retest.
Mandatory retest every 5 years for those operating vehicles in a commercial aspect (taxi drivers, minibus drivers etc)
Anything you'd add?
I'll add, knowing someone who had their license suspended due to a black out at work (thankfully nothing serious and now probationary period passed) I'd say the notification for involving the dvla seemed pretty wishy washy. Without a doubt, doctors should be made to immediately inform the dvla and suspend a license for any medical condition that could have an effect on driving.
I wonder how many experienced drivers would fail a retest? Pretty sure that I would, despite not having a "fault" accident or points on my licence for over 30 years, for 20 of which I was driving 40k a year.
A combination of bad habits and lack of practice on some manoeuvres would mean a fail. I can't remember the last time I reversed around a corner. I rarely parallel park, since most parking spaces are nose or reverse in.
Add in the increased pressure of potentially not being able to do what you have been doing for many years, and failure would be pretty much guaranteed for the majority I feel.
I'd be happy with a regular medical, visual and hazard perception test, plus a theory test refresher, though, maybe on the basis that, if you fail, you can carry on driving for 3 months until you take the tests again. That would give anyone incapable of passing time to adapt to being a non-driver.
As I have got older, I take less risks, like dodgy overtakes. I slow down more in bad weather. I drive less at night when it's raining. I am more aware of my own mortality. I still enjoy fast driving, but I plan ahead more than I did in my twenties, consider the consequences of my actions.
A combination of bad habits and lack of practice on some manoeuvres would mean a fail. I can't remember the last time I reversed around a corner. I rarely parallel park, since most parking spaces are nose or reverse in.
Add in the increased pressure of potentially not being able to do what you have been doing for many years, and failure would be pretty much guaranteed for the majority I feel.
I'd be happy with a regular medical, visual and hazard perception test, plus a theory test refresher, though, maybe on the basis that, if you fail, you can carry on driving for 3 months until you take the tests again. That would give anyone incapable of passing time to adapt to being a non-driver.
As I have got older, I take less risks, like dodgy overtakes. I slow down more in bad weather. I drive less at night when it's raining. I am more aware of my own mortality. I still enjoy fast driving, but I plan ahead more than I did in my twenties, consider the consequences of my actions.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No, that's possible. But we've moved from a driving test for everyone every 5 years (which I said was a logistical impossibility) to a little bit of a test for the over 70s every 2 years (whereas now it's every 3 years).
Hardly ground breaking. And still leaves a 53 year unmonitored gap!
Whereas now it's not at all, surely? Hardly ground breaking. And still leaves a 53 year unmonitored gap!
clockworks said:
I wonder how many experienced drivers would fail a retest?
In all likelihood, many drivers who pass a driving test might, if asked directly afterward to complete another, subsequently fail.clockworks said:
A combination of bad habits and lack of practice on some manoeuvres would mean a fail. I can't remember the last time I reversed around a corner. I rarely parallel park, since most parking spaces are nose or reverse in.
Add in the increased pressure of potentially not being able to do what you have been doing for many years, and failure would be pretty much guaranteed for the majority I feel.
Good consideration. Personally, things which rely on experience I am much, much better at than I ever was; observation and anticipation, reversing cars, vans, trucks, even 4x4s with trailers I'm pretty adept at, but...Add in the increased pressure of potentially not being able to do what you have been doing for many years, and failure would be pretty much guaranteed for the majority I feel.
clockworks said:
As I have got older, I take less risks, like dodgy overtakes. I slow down more in bad weather. I drive less at night when it's raining. I am more aware of my own mortality. I still enjoy fast driving, but I plan ahead more than I did in my twenties, consider the consequences of my actions.
...I now concede that, without a shadow of doubt, I am much less gifted now than I was in my early twenties, to mid thirties, in terms of:- Eyesight. Despite having very good eyesight, regular tests and not needing glasses to do anything other than close reading, and a natural tendency top long-signtedness, it know my vision is not as sharp or sensitive, especially at night.
- Reaction time. I'd say this is very slightly less, despite me actually being significantly fitter - stronger, lighter, faster on foot - these days, my fast-twitch response is, I fear, not as good.
Maybe it should be mandatory to have a series of driving lessons each year then?
I certainly found when modifying cars for people; they were more than happy to spend lots of money on going faster, less on brakes and suspension and often or not nothing on driver training! It can never hurt to reacquaint yourself with old techniques.
And then as I suggested above have a certificate to establish you have good eyesight etc and can pass a highway code test.
I certainly found when modifying cars for people; they were more than happy to spend lots of money on going faster, less on brakes and suspension and often or not nothing on driver training! It can never hurt to reacquaint yourself with old techniques.
And then as I suggested above have a certificate to establish you have good eyesight etc and can pass a highway code test.
And again. 
Mother of three dies after being pinned against coffee shop wall by car
Mother of three dies after being pinned against coffee shop wall by car
telegraph said:
The 37-year-old woman was out walking with her partner and their three children - including a baby in a pram - when the car careered off the road.
She was taken to hospital in critical condition after the crash, but died of her injuries.
The father was also seriously injured in the crash, while the children suffered shock and minor injuries.
She was taken to hospital in critical condition after the crash, but died of her injuries.
The father was also seriously injured in the crash, while the children suffered shock and minor injuries.
As demographics change and cars get easier to drive there is definitely a need for a compulsory retest at say 70, years ago there wasn't that many older drivers around and before cars got power steering, over serveod brakes etc... lots of people had to stop driving simply due to physical deterioration.
Saw in the news today that an OAP actually got a custodial for killing someone, usually they get leniency shown due to age but this guy got the book thrown at him so to speak http://www.suttoncoldfieldobserver.co.uk/oap-john-...
Saw in the news today that an OAP actually got a custodial for killing someone, usually they get leniency shown due to age but this guy got the book thrown at him so to speak http://www.suttoncoldfieldobserver.co.uk/oap-john-...
untakenname said:
Saw in the news today that an OAP actually got a custodial for killing someone, usually they get leniency shown due to age but this guy got the book thrown at him so to speak http://www.suttoncoldfieldobserver.co.uk/oap-john-...
What a stubborn, selfish and horrible man. mail said:
'He did not swerve, he did not brake and he did not stop. He was only brought to a stop by a quick-thinking motorist who pulled into his path.
mail said:
Referring to Place, the couple said previously: 'He has not asked after us or seemed to care about the death of our beautiful little girl or the serious injuries he caused to her mother.
'Worse, he has shown complete disregard for us, getting his wife to drive him past the crash site up to five times a week – back and forth to attend a church that is a stone's throw from the end of our road. This has forced us to see him while dealing with the unbearable pain of losing our daughter.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4331236/amp/Driver-killed-three-year-old-girl-jailed.html'Worse, he has shown complete disregard for us, getting his wife to drive him past the crash site up to five times a week – back and forth to attend a church that is a stone's throw from the end of our road. This has forced us to see him while dealing with the unbearable pain of losing our daughter.
BlackLabel said:
untakenname said:
Saw in the news today that an OAP actually got a custodial for killing someone, usually they get leniency shown due to age but this guy got the book thrown at him so to speak http://www.suttoncoldfieldobserver.co.uk/oap-john-...
What a stubborn, selfish and horrible man. mail said:
'He did not swerve, he did not brake and he did not stop. He was only brought to a stop by a quick-thinking motorist who pulled into his path.
mail said:
Referring to Place, the couple said previously: 'He has not asked after us or seemed to care about the death of our beautiful little girl or the serious injuries he caused to her mother.
'Worse, he has shown complete disregard for us, getting his wife to drive him past the crash site up to five times a week – back and forth to attend a church that is a stone's throw from the end of our road. This has forced us to see him while dealing with the unbearable pain of losing our daughter.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4331236/amp/Driver-killed-three-year-old-girl-jailed.html'Worse, he has shown complete disregard for us, getting his wife to drive him past the crash site up to five times a week – back and forth to attend a church that is a stone's throw from the end of our road. This has forced us to see him while dealing with the unbearable pain of losing our daughter.
t. Deserves every year of his sentence and some more on top.telegraph said:
At Maidstone Crown Court on Thursday, Lord was sentenced to 22 months in jail, suspended for two years, a Kent Police spokesman said.
He was ordered to pay costs of £1,500, disqualified from driving for five years and will have to take an extended test if he wants to drive again, police added.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/23/rotary-club-treasurer-ploughed-coffee-shop-killing-woman-still/He was ordered to pay costs of £1,500, disqualified from driving for five years and will have to take an extended test if he wants to drive again, police added.
REALIST123 said:
I also think drivers between 17 and 25, especially women, should take an annual retest and training. They're the ones causing most deaths and accidents.
Nope, in the 17-25 age bracket, men are a far higher risk. That's why young women used to get lower insurance premiums than young men, before the EU stuck their oar in. TwigtheWonderkid said:
REALIST123 said:
I also think drivers between 17 and 25, especially women, should take an annual retest and training. They're the ones causing most deaths and accidents.
Nope, in the 17-25 age bracket, men are a far higher risk. That's why young women used to get lower insurance premiums than young men, before the EU stuck their oar in. Digga said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
REALIST123 said:
I also think drivers between 17 and 25, especially women, should take an annual retest and training. They're the ones causing most deaths and accidents.
Nope, in the 17-25 age bracket, men are a far higher risk. That's why young women used to get lower insurance premiums than young men, before the EU stuck their oar in. TwigtheWonderkid said:
Digga said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
REALIST123 said:
I also think drivers between 17 and 25, especially women, should take an annual retest and training. They're the ones causing most deaths and accidents.
Nope, in the 17-25 age bracket, men are a far higher risk. That's why young women used to get lower insurance premiums than young men, before the EU stuck their oar in. turbobloke said:
This is what I took Digga to be referring to with "certainly their own demise" and insurance costs won't differentiate between own demise and others' demise as costs will be as near as dammit the same.
Not true. A young man crashing and killing himself doesn't cost the insurers much at all. The cost of the car if it's comp and a small death benefit, maybe £2K to 5K on most policies. If he injures himself he doesn't even get that. He gets nothing. But killing or injuring someone else costs insurers loads.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff