If I was Secretary Of State for Transport, I'd...

[The Black Flash]

109 Bob said:

The Black Flash said:

109 Bob said:

heebeegeetee said:

109 Bob said:

your chances of walking away unhurt are very slim, the same as being involved in an accident on a motorway.

Give over, accidents on m'ways are rarely fatal, they're the safest roads of all, and i would say that a great many of those causes of accidents that do happen would not be addressed by training.

I didn't say fatal, I said unhurt. I think a lot would be addressed by training. You have your opinion I have mine.

Again?
If you were involved in an accident on the motorway last year, you had an 88% chance of walking away unhurt. That is not "very slim" in anyone's book.

That's pretty slim if you're one of the 12%.

Oh right, so any chance of injury means that you have a very slim chance of walking away is it?
Define what you mean by "very slim", because I doubt if most people consider nearly 90% to be it.

109 Bob said:

So it's ok for accidents to happen because 88% of people don't die?

No, I was just pointing out your factual error.

[heebeegeetee]

109 Bob said:

I would like to achieve safer motorways for everyone.

But they are the safest roads on the planet! No I mean honestly, they are. You can't say they're not. You can't say that driving on a uk motorway is in any way shape or form unsafe.

Not the nicest place to drive i'll grant, can be quite frustrating even, but you can't call them dangerous.

Doesn't something like 90% of accidents happen within the vicinity of the drivers home?

[ZesPak]

heebeegeetee said:

109 Bob said:

I would like to achieve safer motorways for everyone.

But they are the safest roads on the planet! No I mean honestly, they are. You can't say they're not. You can't say that driving on a uk motorway is in any way shape or form unsafe.

Not the nicest place to drive i'll grant, can be quite frustrating even, but you can't call them dangerous.

Doesn't something like 90% of accidents happen within the vicinity of the drivers home?

As said a million times before, that's a selffulfilling prophecy.

[Acehood]

Ban mopeds, tractors, cyclists, horses and OAP's from the road.

Ensure if roadworks are going to cause congestion, people are actually working.

If resurfacing a road, finish it. No more doing 50metres and stopping for no reason, our roads are terrible.

Make the driving test harder.

Minimum speed limits on the motorway.

More traffic police pulling over bad drivers/illegal vehicles, less cameras.

etc.

[109 Bob]

heebeegeetee said:

109 Bob said:

I would like to achieve safer motorways for everyone.

But they are the safest roads on the planet! No I mean honestly, they are. You can't say they're not. You can't say that driving on a uk motorway is in any way shape or form unsafe.

I didn't imply that they weren't the safest road on the planet. But now you bring it up, In my opinion they are not the safest roads on the planet. And to be perfectly honest I can't believe that you as a professional driver can say, driving on a motorway is not in any way shape or form unsafe. Seriously are you mad?

[heebeegeetee]

109 Bob said:

heebeegeetee said:

109 Bob said:

I would like to achieve safer motorways for everyone.

But they are the safest roads on the planet! No I mean honestly, they are. You can't say they're not. You can't say that driving on a uk motorway is in any way shape or form unsafe.

I didn't imply that they weren't the safest road on the planet. But now you bring it up, In my opinion they are not the safest roads on the planet. And to be perfectly honest I can't believe that you as a professional driver can say, driving on a motorway is not in any way shape or form unsafe. Seriously are you mad?

But they are the safest on the planet, generally. The very safest roads on the planet. The least likeliest place on the planet you'll come to harm in a motor car.

Try standing beside a motorway for a while, and watch the sheer numbers of vehicles that pass by. It looks bloody dangerous, but then bear in mind that over each 24 hour period millions and millions and millions of vehicles will pass by, and with rarely a problem.

Certainly m'ways are the easiest and most relaxing roads i truck along.

[109 Bob]

The Black Flash said:

109 Bob said:

St. Ives to the the M5 is a two hour drive, you have an hours test, a cup of tea & you're home for lunch. As I say, not the end of the world.

Funny, it took me three hours just recently.
Whichever, you're talking a 6 hour round trip minimum, which equals a day off work, not to mention the cost.

109 Bob said:

And as for evidence I don't have any apart from spending the last eleven years of my working life mostly on motorways & observing a lot of people that are quite frankly accidents waiting to happen.

Accidents waiting to happen? Yet you can expect to drive 12.5 million kilometers before being involved in one.
The evidence is there, and it does not support the need for what you are saying.

Sorry but that's absolute bullst. I'd bet really big money that not one person involved in an any motorway accident has ever done 12.5 million kilometres (why kilometres?) before crashing, and this is exactly why statistics never prove a bloody thing.

[109 Bob]

The Black Flash said:

No, I was just pointing out your factual error.

I didn't make any factual errors. I implied that motorways are dangerous places & that statistics don't tell the full story.

[109 Bob]

heebeegeetee said:

109 Bob said:

heebeegeetee said:

109 Bob said:

I would like to achieve safer motorways for everyone.

But they are the safest roads on the planet! No I mean honestly, they are. You can't say they're not. You can't say that driving on a uk motorway is in any way shape or form unsafe.

I didn't imply that they weren't the safest road on the planet. But now you bring it up, In my opinion they are not the safest roads on the planet. And to be perfectly honest I can't believe that you as a professional driver can say, driving on a motorway is not in any way shape or form unsafe. Seriously are you mad?

But they are the safest on the planet, generally. The very safest roads on the planet. The least likeliest place on the planet you'll come to harm in a motor car.

Try standing beside a motorway for a while, and watch the sheer numbers of vehicles that pass by. It looks bloody dangerous, but then bear in mind that over each 24 hour period millions and millions and millions of vehicles will pass by, and with rarely a problem.

Certainly m'ways are the easiest and most relaxing roads i truck along.

I can't believe I'm arguing with a professional driver about whether motorways are safe places to be or not. But the fact remains that although I understand what you're saying, I do not believe that travelling on m'ways is ever safe, what ever the statistics say. There is such a very, very thin dividing line between having & not having an accident on m'ways. The slightest error of judgement is all it takes, the slightest thing, one second you think you are perfectly safe & the next, you're not.

All I'm saying is that in my opinion there are a lot of people who don't have a clue about m'way driving & that compulsory tuition would be a good thing, any thing to cut down on potential accidents happening is a good thing. You obviously don't agree, which I do find hard to believe, but that's your opinion & obviously I'm not going to change that.

heebeegeetee said:

Try standing beside a motorway for a while

Also dangerous as many people have been killed on hard shoulders.

[Stubby Pete]

Make it compulsory and free to retest every 3 years regardless of age, accident history and points.

As has been said, left turn on red lights.

Remove speed ramps but step up patrols to catch inappropriate use of speed everywhere and anyway.

Make sue that governers on HGVs actually govern to the same speed to prevent the two mile overtake.

[pauldc259]

Replace the tax disk with an annualised road-worthy certification for all cars over 2 years old which must be displayed in the windscreen and the fee for this would include compulsory 3rd party insurance.

Then ditch the car tax and add the fee to the duty in petrol so that it is cost neutral to a sub 10k miles P/a user.

[CommanderJameson]

109 Bob said:

any thing to cut down on potential accidents happening is a good thing

Now, this clearly isn't true.

Here are some things that would cut down on potential accidents:

• 30 MPH speed limit on dual carriageways
• A driving test that's very, very much harder than the one we have, taking a week to complete and costing hundreds of pounds
• A complete ban on in-car stereos, sat-navs, eating, drinking, smoking, talking, etc
• A walled partition within a car that means you cannot see or hear your passengers
• A hard limit on how many miles may be driven by each driver per day/week/month/year/whatever; if you're over your miles, you may not drive. A car that's not moving doesn't crash.
• Some of these may be rather* silly but you get the idea.

"any" thing to cut down on potential accidents isn't necessarily a good thing; anything that's reasonable and effective is a good thing.

It's hard to see how a mandatory motorway test will help, although I still think that dual carriageway driving should be a part of the DSA test. I'm not sure where the farthest point from a DC is, in the UK; probably somewhere in Scotland.

* very

[The Black Flash]

109 Bob said:

The Black Flash said:

Accidents waiting to happen? Yet you can expect to drive 12.5 million kilometers before being involved in one.
The evidence is there, and it does not support the need for what you are saying.

Sorry but that's absolute bullst. I'd bet really big money that not one person involved in an any motorway accident has ever done 12.5 million kilometres (why kilometres?) before crashing, and this is exactly why statistics never prove a bloody thing.

They never prove a thing because you call them bullst? Riiiiiiight. "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" is not a convincing argument.
Oh, and statistics are behind virtually every piece of scientific progress. So wrong again.

I will restate my position:

I think we should improve driving standards.
I do not think that focusing on motorway standards is the way to get best value (or best improvement in safety). I would look at simpler alternatives first (say, including observational training in the DSA test), before imposing yet another layer of beaurocracy, cost, and inconvenience to millions.

[The Black Flash]

109 Bob said:

But the fact remains that although I understand what you're saying, I do not believe that travelling on m'ways is ever safe, what ever the statistics say.

And yet you have spent the last 11 years driving on them. So you presumably don't consider that the risk is very high? I wouldn't do something I considered "unsafe" every day for a decade.

[109 Bob]

The Black Flash said:

109 Bob said:

The Black Flash said:

Accidents waiting to happen? Yet you can expect to drive 12.5 million kilometers before being involved in one.
The evidence is there, and it does not support the need for what you are saying.

Sorry but that's absolute bullst. I'd bet really big money that not one person involved in an any motorway accident has ever done 12.5 million kilometres (why kilometres?) before crashing, and this is exactly why statistics never prove a bloody thing.

They never prove a thing because you call them bullst? Riiiiiiight. "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" is not a convincing argument.
Oh, and statistics are behind virtually every piece of scientific progress. So wrong again.

I will restate my position:

I think we should improve driving standards.
I do not think that focusing on motorway standards is the way to get best value (or best improvement in safety). I would look at simpler alternatives first (say, including observational training in the DSA test), before imposing yet another layer of beaurocracy, cost, and inconvenience to millions.

As I've already said, those statistics you keep banging on about will include every motorway accident. A lot of those accidents will be minor shunts in congested traffic, road works etc. If those statistics excluded accidents which involved speeds of less than 55mph then they would tell a different story.

I agree with the last part of your post. However I don't, & never will, believe that motorways are safe places to be & strongly believe that motorway tuition should be compulsory.

If you want to believe statistics then fine, you've probably got well over 12 million kilometres safe driving left anyway, but I'll continue to believe they're dangerous due to what I see everyday. You have your opinion & I have mine.

[109 Bob]

CommanderJameson said:

109 Bob said:

any thing to cut down on potential accidents happening is a good thing

Now, this clearly isn't true.

Here are some things that would cut down on potential accidents:

• 30 MPH speed limit on dual carriageways
• A driving test that's very, very much harder than the one we have, taking a week to complete and costing hundreds of pounds
• A complete ban on in-car stereos, sat-navs, eating, drinking, smoking, talking, etc
• A walled partition within a car that means you cannot see or hear your passengers
• A hard limit on how many miles may be driven by each driver per day/week/month/year/whatever; if you're over your miles, you may not drive. A car that's not moving doesn't crash.
• Some of these may be rather* silly but you get the idea.

"any" thing to cut down on potential accidents isn't necessarily a good thing; anything that's reasonable and effective is a good thing.

It's hard to see how a mandatory motorway test will help, although I still think that dual carriageway driving should be a part of the DSA test. I'm not sure where the farthest point from a DC is, in the UK; probably somewhere in Scotland.

I agree with the last bit of you're reply. As for the rest, I think you've misunderstood the context in which I said "anything" I meant anything to do with tuition & not anything to to with the list you posted.

Edited by 109 Bob on Thursday 22 October 09:18

[heebeegeetee]

109 Bob said:

If you want to believe statistics then fine, you've probably got well over 12 million kilometres safe driving left anyway, but I'll continue to believe they're dangerous due to what I see everyday. You have your opinion & I have mine.

So we legislate on what something looks like, rather than what something actually is?

I mean here's a thing: motorways look dangerous, 30mph roads don't.

Guess where pro rata, more are killed?

Edited by heebeegeetee on Thursday 22 October 18:08

[2 Wycked]

HOGEPH said:

Replace the road tax with a levy on fuel, so no one could avoid it.

My only concern with this one is that it may be made harder to spot cars that could potentially be driving without insurance or MOT.

Unless you replace the Tax disc with an MOT disc of some description?

[CDP]

I'd put road tax on fuel instead of this antiquated and easily duped system.

Now the police have APNR the tax disc is only there as a reminder to the owner.

The other thing I would do is reduce the age of the provisional car license to 16 but leave the age for a test at 17. As most teenagers want to get behind the wheel of a car as soon as possible many would end up with a year of lessons and hopefully a little more experience before their solo flight.

I can't even imagine that one being controversial, except with some parents perhaps. Oh, and the commie killjoys.

[109 Bob]

heebeegeetee said:

109 Bob said:

If you want to believe statistics then fine, you've probably got well over 12 million kilometres safe driving left anyway, but I'll continue to believe they're dangerous due to what I see everyday. You have your opinion & I have mine.

So we legislate on what something looks like, rather than what something actually is?

I mean here's a thing: motorways look dangerous, 30mph roads don't.

Guess where pro rata, more are killed?

Edited by heebeegeetee on Thursday 22 October 18:08

You do like putting words into peoples mouths don't you.

Edited by 109 Bob on Friday 23 October 00:10