Encouraging advanced driver training
Discussion
Wouldn't it be a good idea for the govt/police to ensure that (and let it be known that) evidence of advanced driver training and ability would be taken into account in increasing leniency for those that have committed driving offences?
It would, sure as eggs is eggs, cause a dramatic rise in applications for such training, which would be of benefit to us all.
What's the police view?
It would, sure as eggs is eggs, cause a dramatic rise in applications for such training, which would be of benefit to us all.
What's the police view?
Hiya Matthew..
I would agree with you so some extent...although, I believe the system is already in place. ie: mitigation at court for a driving offence does include; past collisions, prosectutions and any extra training undertaken. All brought to the court's attention to make you look a more responsible and careful driver.
Trouble with advanced training is; nobody wants to do it. I'm the police liaison for my local town's IAM group. The group has over a dozen 'observer' but only 130 members. The town has approx 250,000 residents, most of whom drive...So the maths isn't hard to work out...
The group has left leaflets, adverts and magazines in doctors surgeries, supermarkets, test centres, Halfords etc...yet the response is only slight..
The thing is; it's too much trouble for the majority of people...nobody want's to do anything extra, even if it's of benefit to them. Of course..the subject of driving is one that is always emotive and not long after passing their tests do people suddenly become 'experts'....
Street
I would agree with you so some extent...although, I believe the system is already in place. ie: mitigation at court for a driving offence does include; past collisions, prosectutions and any extra training undertaken. All brought to the court's attention to make you look a more responsible and careful driver.
Trouble with advanced training is; nobody wants to do it. I'm the police liaison for my local town's IAM group. The group has over a dozen 'observer' but only 130 members. The town has approx 250,000 residents, most of whom drive...So the maths isn't hard to work out...
The group has left leaflets, adverts and magazines in doctors surgeries, supermarkets, test centres, Halfords etc...yet the response is only slight..
The thing is; it's too much trouble for the majority of people...nobody want's to do anything extra, even if it's of benefit to them. Of course..the subject of driving is one that is always emotive and not long after passing their tests do people suddenly become 'experts'....
Street
No.
If you are Advanced Driver you already have an advantage over the rest of the driving population.
1) You are far less likely to commit a traffic offence "by accident" (although I did!)
2) If you do decide to commit the mortal sin of speeding you are far more likely to choose the place to do it with regard to not being caught.
You don't need extra leniency if you don't get caught in the first place!
I DO think, though, that if the Govt wanted to encourage drivers to get extra training they could offer an incentive scheme like wiping three points off your licence on the production of an IAM/ROSPA pass certificate dated after the offence.
After all - you can always take a re-test!
If you are Advanced Driver you already have an advantage over the rest of the driving population.
1) You are far less likely to commit a traffic offence "by accident" (although I did!)
2) If you do decide to commit the mortal sin of speeding you are far more likely to choose the place to do it with regard to not being caught.
You don't need extra leniency if you don't get caught in the first place!
I DO think, though, that if the Govt wanted to encourage drivers to get extra training they could offer an incentive scheme like wiping three points off your licence on the production of an IAM/ROSPA pass certificate dated after the offence.
After all - you can always take a re-test!
charltm said:
Wouldn't it be a good idea for the govt/police to ensure that (and let it be known that) evidence of advanced driver training and ability would be taken into account in increasing leniency for those that have committed driving offences?
Why should an advanced driver be allowed to break the law, but not a 'regular' driver?
Surely the advanced driver should know better, and have better car control, etc etc
I can see an argument for advanced drivers being allowed to use a higher speed limit.
To take a parralel - is it OK for someone with SAS training to get off murder (because they've be trained to do it well) but not us regular folks :-)
In fact shouldn't an advance driver, caught running a red light for example, be forced to retake the test before they're allowed to keep their 'advanced' status?
By the way - if anyone knows of a way of getting an "am allowed to drive at double the speed limit (out of town and only where it's safe)" status (other than joining the police) - please let me know.
>> Edited by Joe911 on Wednesday 10th November 10:42
By the way - if anyone knows of a way of getting an "am allowed to drive at double the speed limit (out of town and only where it's safe)" status (other than joining the police) - please let me know.
>> Edited by Joe911 on Wednesday 10th November 10:42
Don said:
In fact shouldn't an advance driver, caught running a red light for example, be forced to retake the test before they're allowed to keep their 'advanced' status?
This is already the case. The IAM will chuck you out if you keep getting tickets...
How will they know...
PetrolTed said:
I don't think the murder analogy is a sensible one.
Well of course it's not, because murder is a crime with a victim. Speeding is not.
The law doesn't agree with me that, if there's no victim, there's no crime.
And yes, I would gladly take harsher punishment if I did create a victim through my own actions, in order to ensure no penalty if I didn't. It's all about taking responsibility for one's own actions - something to be encouraged in this land where it occurs less and less commonly.
charltm said:
Wouldn't it be a good idea for the govt/police to ensure that (and let it be known that) evidence of advanced driver training and ability would be taken into account in increasing leniency for those that have committed driving offences?
It would, sure as eggs is eggs, cause a dramatic rise in applications for such training, which would be of benefit to us all.
What's the police view?
I expect we'll get the police response in due course, but meanwhile here is a non-police view:
Rather than thinking in terms of being lenient on those who have committed offences, I would much rather we had a regime where exceeding the NSL, or crossing a solid white line for example, would not be an offence at all in the case of a recognised advanced driver.
Those who, when properly assessed, can demonstrate an ability to make safe use of speeds in excess of the NSL, should be free to do so without risk of prosecution.
As you may recall this is rather a favourite of mine though I usually get shouted down by people telling me it is impractical. Well rather than being quite so negative about it, we should be trying to find ways of making it work, as I do feel it would raise the level of interest in higher driving standards. That seems to me to be well worth pursuing, and I think it would yield substantial benefits across the whole road safety scene.
I find it hard to believe that this is of no interest to the rest of you.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Streetcop said:
Hiya Matthew..
I would agree with you so some extent...although, I believe the system is already in place. ie: mitigation at court for a driving offence does include; past collisions, prosectutions and any extra training undertaken. All brought to the court's attention to make you look a more responsible and careful driver.
That is SUPPOSED to be the case, but isn't always so in practice. Presented with evidence of no accidents (ever), of better eyesight than anyone I know (including a lot of international riflemen, for whom it's quite important), of full awareness of the car's stopping ability, and of a clear half mile or so of motorway on a bright, dry, spring lunchtime, the Exeter magistrates didn't show any leniency at all when I fell fould of the BiB (whom I would, as usual, have observed if they hadn't been hiding at the top of a long on-ramp with laser) a couple of years ago. Then again, I was misquoted by the BiB, which made me sound bad despite having shown v. good attitude at the time!
I guess we can't expect consistency everywhere.
And I still don't know how my observation skills will help spot BiB positioned at the top of on-ramps, obscured by hedge or bridge structure, if looking in my mirror back up the on-ramp is (should be) of no use in ensuring my own and others' safety when my eyes should be on the road!
Grrr...
Streetcop said:
Trouble with advanced training is; nobody wants to do it. I'm the police liaison for my local town's IAM group. The group has over a dozen 'observer' but only 130 members. The town has approx 250,000 residents, most of whom drive...So the maths isn't hard to work out...
The group has left leaflets, adverts and magazines in doctors surgeries, supermarkets, test centres, Halfords etc...yet the response is only slight..
The thing is; it's too much trouble for the majority of people...nobody want's to do anything extra, even if it's of benefit to them. Of course..the subject of driving is one that is always emotive and not long after passing their tests do people suddenly become 'experts'....
Street
So, don't we need to provide the motorist with a real incentive to do the training? Expunging prior points may be an option; the _requirement_ to be treated more leniently by the mags may be another. Perhaps magistrates could be instructed to use different base numbers to calculate the speed over the limit, depending on qualifications, experience and conditions, e.g. add 1mph per year of experience up to 10, add 5 mph for IAM (which of course would be lost on conviction), 10mph for police class 1 or a race licence, 5mph for an empty, dry, well-lit motorway (if provable). It wouldn't mean the offence hadn't been committed but might be helpful in ensuring (a) consistent setting of penalties for the level of danger presented; and (ii) an incentive to undertake driver training.
I know all the suggested numbers are arbitrary; just throwing the idea up in the air.
Joe911 said:
This is already the case. The IAM will chuck you out if you keep getting tickets...
Is it - right - just as well I've got a clean license then!
How do they know - is one supposed to declare it somehow?
Yes, annual membership renewal has to be accompanied by a signed declaration; something along the lines of "I have/have not been convicted of any motoring offences in the past year". I had to declare an SP30 back in 1975 - they grumbled a bit, but let me keep my membership.
Ah, several people seem to have made their contributions before I got my ass into gear properly.
In view the difficulty in stirring people to take an interest in the IAM, or indeed anything to do with driving, once they have passed their test, it would appear that we need to be much more adventurous in offering incentives. I think Gary's comments make that abundantly clear.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
In view the difficulty in stirring people to take an interest in the IAM, or indeed anything to do with driving, once they have passed their test, it would appear that we need to be much more adventurous in offering incentives. I think Gary's comments make that abundantly clear.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Advanced drivers are self selecting. The people who NEED further trainig are not necessarily the people who take it.
Personally, I would like to see a gradiated scheme whereby new drivers (and then ultimately all drivers) can only drive a certain BHP/tonne vehicle.
Then, people can earn the right to drive cars with larger BHP/tonne outputs if they take further tuition.
The levels could be something like:
1. Standard DSA
2. Pass Plus
3. IAM
4. RoSPA Bronze
5. RoSPA Silver
6. RoSPA Gold
7. HPC (Standard)
8. HPC (Silver)
9. HPC (Gold)
etc.. You get the idea.
I think we also need to get advanced driving better (and more formally) recognised. Personally, I think it is nothing short of a scandal that IAM/RoSPA which are charities are 'left' to manage advanced driving tuition.
I think we need to get IAM/RoSPA under a reformed DSA. Bib should be able to require drivers to undertake further tuition without a huge paperwork process behind it. Maybe increases financial penalties for careless/dangerous driving in order to try to cover these costs.
And perhaps most importantly we have to devleop an ethod of enforcement by the Bib so that where people are 'making progress' in total safety the Bibs can turn a blind eye. BUT where an advanced driver is driving unsafely then penalise them heavily.
Personally, I really really want to see the young drivers and Max Power brigade to get into advanced driving. They are the group of drivers who have the largest number of accidents.
Discuss.
Personally, I would like to see a gradiated scheme whereby new drivers (and then ultimately all drivers) can only drive a certain BHP/tonne vehicle.
Then, people can earn the right to drive cars with larger BHP/tonne outputs if they take further tuition.
The levels could be something like:
1. Standard DSA
2. Pass Plus
3. IAM
4. RoSPA Bronze
5. RoSPA Silver
6. RoSPA Gold
7. HPC (Standard)
8. HPC (Silver)
9. HPC (Gold)
etc.. You get the idea.
I think we also need to get advanced driving better (and more formally) recognised. Personally, I think it is nothing short of a scandal that IAM/RoSPA which are charities are 'left' to manage advanced driving tuition.
I think we need to get IAM/RoSPA under a reformed DSA. Bib should be able to require drivers to undertake further tuition without a huge paperwork process behind it. Maybe increases financial penalties for careless/dangerous driving in order to try to cover these costs.
And perhaps most importantly we have to devleop an ethod of enforcement by the Bib so that where people are 'making progress' in total safety the Bibs can turn a blind eye. BUT where an advanced driver is driving unsafely then penalise them heavily.
Personally, I really really want to see the young drivers and Max Power brigade to get into advanced driving. They are the group of drivers who have the largest number of accidents.
Discuss.
ca092003 said:
Advanced drivers are self selecting. The people who NEED further trainig are not necessarily the people who take it.
Spot on. That's what my IAM Observer said; the people who join up are *already* better drivers than the general population, in attitude, if nothing else.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff