Vulnerable young and new drivers
Discussion
Is enough being done to prevent young driver deaths?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce5l0kvd7lro
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce5l0kvd7lro
I'm half and half on this, on a wider scale this is Darwinism and evolution at work but the personal impact of loss is just awful.
I think there should be more training related to actual driving not just passing the test and some restrictions as already outlined.
Some people you just can't help no matter what so trying to save everyone should be considered an impossible goal.
I think there should be more training related to actual driving not just passing the test and some restrictions as already outlined.
Some people you just can't help no matter what so trying to save everyone should be considered an impossible goal.
I’m very torn on this. For transparency, I am a a Bobby and spent a number of years on Roads Policing dealing with fatal collisions.
The foundations of this problem are that teenage boys have driven like d
heads since time began. When I was 17 I did, you did, most of us on this forum probably did.
What’s changed is the cars. I started in a 65bhp Fiesta. Now a 17 year old can easily get in a 130bhp+ car. The poor lads recently in the Marcham crash were in a BMW 225d. A powerful car for a young lad.
IMHO training isn’t necessarily the issue. You can train someone to the nth degree and give them incredible skills. But if they subsequently get in a car and decide to drive like a lunatic, they can and they will.
The issue of young lads driving badly and killing themselves and others is an attitude issue. Which is all linked to the frontal lobe brain development thing. Teenage boys don’t make great decisions and don’t often compute consequences.
If it was me, I’d bring in a few laws for a few years after tests passed.
BHP limit.
A limit of 1 passenger.
An alcohol limit of 5ug in breath(effectively negligible)
Mandatory black boxes linked to insurance.
Yes, massive kill joy for all of that (other than the alcohol limit) but if they want action that will work, that’s a starter for ten.
The foundations of this problem are that teenage boys have driven like d
heads since time began. When I was 17 I did, you did, most of us on this forum probably did. What’s changed is the cars. I started in a 65bhp Fiesta. Now a 17 year old can easily get in a 130bhp+ car. The poor lads recently in the Marcham crash were in a BMW 225d. A powerful car for a young lad.
IMHO training isn’t necessarily the issue. You can train someone to the nth degree and give them incredible skills. But if they subsequently get in a car and decide to drive like a lunatic, they can and they will.
The issue of young lads driving badly and killing themselves and others is an attitude issue. Which is all linked to the frontal lobe brain development thing. Teenage boys don’t make great decisions and don’t often compute consequences.
If it was me, I’d bring in a few laws for a few years after tests passed.
BHP limit.
A limit of 1 passenger.
An alcohol limit of 5ug in breath(effectively negligible)
Mandatory black boxes linked to insurance.
Yes, massive kill joy for all of that (other than the alcohol limit) but if they want action that will work, that’s a starter for ten.
Pica-Pica said:
Is enough being done to prevent young driver deaths?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce5l0kvd7lro
There should be no end to the effort to reduce the number of deaths of road users of all ages but measures taken should consider both the costs and benefits of driving and should be those that experience and data (of which there is a lot) show us have worked.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce5l0kvd7lro
The BBC article gives voice to the bereaved which is wonderful but says nothing about the decline in the death rate of young drivers over the past decades. To address this issue, it is worth considering what has contributed to the progress already made, which the BBC article does not address.
See this website: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-...
It illustrates both the high proportion of collisions that involved young drivers (age 17-24) between 2004 and 2022, the decline in total number of those accidents and the fact that the rate of decline of collisions involving young drivers was faster than that of collisions involving other age groups.
"Main findings
Overall, in 2022, around a fifth of all killed or seriously injured (KSI) casualties from collisions involving cars were in collisions which involved a young car driver.
Young male car drivers aged 17 to 24 are 4 times as likely to be killed or seriously injured compared with all car drivers aged 25 or over.
Between 2004 and 2022:
KSI casualties from a collision involving at least one younger car driver decreased from 12,333 to 4,935, a fall of 60%
KSI casualties in collisions involving other aged car drivers decreased from 31,339 to 19,355, a fall of 38%"
wiliferus said:
If it was me, I’d bring in a few laws for a few years after tests passed.
BHP limit.
A limit of 1 passenger.
An alcohol limit of 5ug in breath(effectively negligible)
Mandatory black boxes linked to insurance.
Yes, massive kill joy for all of that (other than the alcohol limit) but if they want action that will work, that’s a starter for ten.
Very interesting given your experience.BHP limit.
A limit of 1 passenger.
An alcohol limit of 5ug in breath(effectively negligible)
Mandatory black boxes linked to insurance.
Yes, massive kill joy for all of that (other than the alcohol limit) but if they want action that will work, that’s a starter for ten.
- The first two points seem self evident.
- Why not impose a zero alcohol limit? Is there a practical reason for that? A zero limit eliminates any doubt about how much a driver can drink.
- Black boxes have been promoted by insurers for years now. Is there data to show that young drivers with black boxes have fewer accidents?
TWPC said:
Why not impose a zero alcohol limit? Is there a practical reason for that? A zero limit eliminates any doubt about how much a driver can drink.
True, but by doing this you'd only effectively be criminalising those drinking within the current limit, which while not that low by some countries' standards, isn't all that high either. I highly doubt a significant number of those killed are killed because they're hovering around the drink-drive limit.Plus, where do you draw the line? How long after eating coq au vin or a bowl of sherry trifle should you wait before driving? Even bananas are 0.5% alcohol.
I say leave the limit where it is, but more strictly penalise those who contravene it, especially if they're bladdered.
I'm teetotal as well, so no vested interest here!
rallycross said:
Only one passenger a good idea for young drivers for first 12m but almost impossible to police.
Black boxes now probably sort most of the problem these days.
It's an odd idea, this. Surely the only rational reason to do it would be to limit the number of people being killed in an accident?Black boxes now probably sort most of the problem these days.
While practically not a bad idea, isn't this a bit of a backwards way of looking at it by assuming there's going to be an accident in the first place? Surely more effort should be put into stopping said accident happening at all.
I get that passengers can make drivers drive more recklessly (peer pressure, showboating etc.) but surely one passenger is enough to do this?
wiliferus said:
I’m very torn on this. For transparency, I am a a Bobby and spent a number of years on Roads Policing dealing with fatal collisions.
The foundations of this problem are that teenage boys have driven like dheads since time began. When I was 17 I did, you did, most of us on this forum probably did.
What’s changed is the cars. I started in a 65bhp Fiesta. Now a 17 year old can easily get in a 130bhp+ car. The poor lads recently in the Marcham crash were in a BMW 225d. A powerful car for a young lad.
Not just the power outputs/performance, but the electronic systems that provide a false sense of security. Most modern cars are ridiculously easy to drive fast, and will flatter and forgive all manner of cack-handedness, until the laws of physics ultimately intervene. At this point the speeds are an order of magnitude higher than we ever managed in the low powered, skinny tyred s**tboxes we started out in, and the accident often much more serious. The foundations of this problem are that teenage boys have driven like d
heads since time began. When I was 17 I did, you did, most of us on this forum probably did. What’s changed is the cars. I started in a 65bhp Fiesta. Now a 17 year old can easily get in a 130bhp+ car. The poor lads recently in the Marcham crash were in a BMW 225d. A powerful car for a young lad.
I had a Mini, which topped out at about 90 with a tailwind, and ran on skinny little 145 section tyres. You simply couldn't get to silly speeds in it, and God knows I tried! We are all invincible at 17 (to your point), and we will use whatever is at our disposal. It's just we never had that much at our disposal to begin with, and therefore our cock ups, despite sometimes being appalling, tended to be at much lower speeds, with pride being the biggest casualty in many cases.
We were no less idiotic than today's youth, and I absolutely shudder at some of the things we did and (in most cases) got away with. Doing the same things in a modern car, we'd be doing double, or even triple the speeds.
I've lost count of the number of threads where I've argued in favour of a graduated licencing scheme which would restrict power-to-weight ratio, number pf passengers, and maximum speeds for drivers who have just passed their tests. But rather than automatically graduating to the next level after a year or two, new drivers would have to take another more difficult test to gain a full licence. This would still restrict power but remove the restrictions on passengers. Drivers wishing to access high levels of performance would need to pass an advanced test which would only be available 3 years after passing full licence. So no driver with less than 5 years of experience can drive a car with more than say 200bhp/tonne, and only then after passing an advanced test which would test attitude as well as knowledge and skill.
This kind of thing is seen as normal in other parts of the world, but the British government seem to hate the idea of taking any measures that they didn't think of first.
This kind of thing is seen as normal in other parts of the world, but the British government seem to hate the idea of taking any measures that they didn't think of first.
Agree about the more powerful easy to drive cars.
Is phone use use more of an issue with this age group?
Are drugs and things such as laughing gas part of the problem?
Are young people influenced by social media and t**ts driving badly on You Tube?
Having lost friends early in my life to bike/car accidents i know it can have such an effect on families.
Is phone use use more of an issue with this age group?
Are drugs and things such as laughing gas part of the problem?
Are young people influenced by social media and t**ts driving badly on You Tube?
Having lost friends early in my life to bike/car accidents i know it can have such an effect on families.
All youngsters drive like ***** at times, either through intention or a lack of experience. A simple fix would be to have a tiered approach to what you can drive similar to a bike licence. Max 1.0l engine until 21, 1.8l until 25. But really what needs to happen to we teach people to control a car rather than tick a box and learn which order to look at the mirrors in.
I disagree with most of what has been said already.
Regulations dont work they just give an illusion of doing something.
Education is the answer and it can be done.
https://under17driver.co.uk/
Black boxes tell you how far open the stable door was left open.
Power is not relevant because most are driving Eco power 3 cylinder fiestas, 500s or Corsa's. What are you going to do when they are driving Teslas that do 60 in 2 seconds.
passengers are less of a problem than 2 youngsters in 2 cars which is a race. The lady leading this says the state should have stopped her friend being alowed to take her daughter out, she could have done that herself.
Regulations dont work they just give an illusion of doing something.
Education is the answer and it can be done.
https://under17driver.co.uk/
Black boxes tell you how far open the stable door was left open.
Power is not relevant because most are driving Eco power 3 cylinder fiestas, 500s or Corsa's. What are you going to do when they are driving Teslas that do 60 in 2 seconds.
passengers are less of a problem than 2 youngsters in 2 cars which is a race. The lady leading this says the state should have stopped her friend being alowed to take her daughter out, she could have done that herself.
"It’s shocked me to the core of how at risk our young people are and how little is being done."
What planet is she living on ?
Does she really have no clue that young lads might be tempted to go for a blast and do stupid things ?
I know the roads around Shrewsbury & the Welsh borders very very well and spent between 17 and 25 blasting around them including the road those lads came off and died.
and yet, its someone else's problem.
What planet is she living on ?
Does she really have no clue that young lads might be tempted to go for a blast and do stupid things ?
I know the roads around Shrewsbury & the Welsh borders very very well and spent between 17 and 25 blasting around them including the road those lads came off and died.
and yet, its someone else's problem.
LunarOne said:
I've lost count of the number of threads where I've argued in favour of a graduated licencing scheme which would restrict power-to-weight ratio, number pf passengers, and maximum speeds for drivers who have just passed their tests. But rather than automatically graduating to the next level after a year or two, new drivers would have to take another more difficult test to gain a full licence. This would still restrict power but remove the restrictions on passengers. Drivers wishing to access high levels of performance would need to pass an advanced test which would only be available 3 years after passing full licence. So no driver with less than 5 years of experience can drive a car with more than say 200bhp/tonne, and only then after passing an advanced test which would test attitude as well as knowledge and skill.
This kind of thing is seen as normal in other parts of the world, but the British government seem to hate the idea of taking any measures that they didn't think of first.
Is there data to suggest they work? The BBC article failed to tell us. That's the only thing that matters, everything else is just handwringing.This kind of thing is seen as normal in other parts of the world, but the British government seem to hate the idea of taking any measures that they didn't think of first.
This whole notion of restricting power for younger drivers is a bit of red herring, I feel. I’d like to see data on the cars younger folk are actually crashing.
Sure, it fills column inches when a 17-year old bins a BMW M2, but I imagine most younger people are driving more humble cars.
If you want to drive a Fiesta 1.25 through a built-up area at 70, you can, fairly easily. That’s all it takes, especially if you hit a tree. If anything, faster cars are likely to be newer, more premium and feature better crash protection.
Sure, it fills column inches when a 17-year old bins a BMW M2, but I imagine most younger people are driving more humble cars.
If you want to drive a Fiesta 1.25 through a built-up area at 70, you can, fairly easily. That’s all it takes, especially if you hit a tree. If anything, faster cars are likely to be newer, more premium and feature better crash protection.
Is this more of something that it’s always someone else’s fault. No one wanting to take responsibility for their own actions.
Not sure if restricting passengers would work as most would flout that anyway. No saying if you have one or four passengers you’re not gonna show off.
With regards to engine size, wouldn’t that restrict young people who have certain jobs and are required to drive certain vehicles.
I think the black boxes are a good thing though and maybe for your first year are made compulsory. By which time you’d surely be used to driving in that manor. My daughter has one and it’s monitoring everything and I’m sure she’d get heavily penalised if she starts driving wrecklessly. Another lad who’s 19 I know in work has a bmw 530d and has a black box which he says does curb his driving.
Not sure if restricting passengers would work as most would flout that anyway. No saying if you have one or four passengers you’re not gonna show off.
With regards to engine size, wouldn’t that restrict young people who have certain jobs and are required to drive certain vehicles.
I think the black boxes are a good thing though and maybe for your first year are made compulsory. By which time you’d surely be used to driving in that manor. My daughter has one and it’s monitoring everything and I’m sure she’d get heavily penalised if she starts driving wrecklessly. Another lad who’s 19 I know in work has a bmw 530d and has a black box which he says does curb his driving.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff