RE: Tougher tests are on the way
Thursday 4th January 2007
Teach them to drive hereThere's to be a new tougher driving test, reckons the Government.
Tougher tests are on the way
Proposals aim for better driving standards
Teach them to drive here
It's proposing to cut the accident rate and high numbers of deaths among Britain's youth, especially among young men under 25 who are some 10 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured at the wheel than those aged 40 to 59, and three times more likely to crash than women of the same age.
The Government's proposing more education at schools and more pre-test practice, along with some elements of night driving and of driving on different types of road -- we'd hope this also includes motorway driving.
Now all the Government needs to do to enhance safety is to improve the quality of the roads and increase the numbers of traffic police. And what about removing the cameras?
Discussion
Why dont they also have a three strikes and you cant drive rule? I remember seeing some tv program where a lady took the test looooaaaadddss of times and finally passed, would you get in a car with someone who passed their 10th time?
And I agree with the comment above, you wont stop young lads driving like idiots. You know what its like when you are young in a car with your mates in a moment of madness do some bad driving. If they want to stop young men driving stupid - dont let them drive!
And I agree with the comment above, you wont stop young lads driving like idiots. You know what its like when you are young in a car with your mates in a moment of madness do some bad driving. If they want to stop young men driving stupid - dont let them drive!
Edited by chrisbr68 on Thursday 4th January 11:50
Kush said:
It will hopefully reduce the number of the idiots that sit at 50mph in the middle lane!
Sadly, from my experience these are usually middle-aged drivers who ought to know better than that.
Young drivers I usually end up seeing either in lane one meekly following the trucks, or out in lane three exploring the terminal velocity of their car.
This latter one is a bit of a pain, as anything more than the most trivial incline causes them to drop from 90+ down to under 70, tending to ruin the flow of traffic somewhat.
james f said:
i never understood why they never put motorways in the test as its where most of us drive most of the time
Exactly, it's the first thing people do when they pass their test. I know I did. Went straight onto the motorway.
I personally think the driving test is quite hard as it is now, although it seems to depend on where you take your test.
Retests are the answer in my view, with strict rules regarding actually GOING THE SPEED LIMIT. They wouldn't need to be as strict as the full blown exam but should cover the basics and re-educate people.
While 55mph in a 60mph is safe, the amount of people i follow doing 35-40 on de-restricted country roads boils the blood. They're not unsafe per se, it's what they make people do to overtake in frustration that causes the problems.
If everyone had a retest every 10 years, and the elderly more often our roads would be much safer imho.
While 55mph in a 60mph is safe, the amount of people i follow doing 35-40 on de-restricted country roads boils the blood. They're not unsafe per se, it's what they make people do to overtake in frustration that causes the problems.
If everyone had a retest every 10 years, and the elderly more often our roads would be much safer imho.
kieran2006 said:
I don't think a tougher driving test will in any way reduce the boy racer culture in young men, it'll probably just mean more business for driving instructors. Everyone drives sensibly for their test but being out on the road in your own car is a different matter isn't it?
That's simply the whole case.
The test does a perfect job of ensuring a driver can control a car and the theory test does the rest.
Skid pan is pointless, because if you're driving as you did in your Driving Test, and as you replied on you theory you'll prevent it from happening in the first place, and have plenty of room to correct for any unforseen occurences.
jon- said:
Retests are the answer in my view, with strict rules regarding actually GOING THE SPEED LIMIT. They wouldn't need to be as strict as the full blown exam but should cover the basics and re-educate people.
While 55mph in a 60mph is safe, the amount of people i follow doing 35-40 on de-restricted country roads boils the blood. They're not unsafe per se, it's what they make people do to overtake in frustration that causes the problems.
If everyone had a retest every 10 years, and the elderly more often our roads would be much safer imho.
While 55mph in a 60mph is safe, the amount of people i follow doing 35-40 on de-restricted country roads boils the blood. They're not unsafe per se, it's what they make people do to overtake in frustration that causes the problems.
If everyone had a retest every 10 years, and the elderly more often our roads would be much safer imho.
I think the real problem is people's attitudes. If you want to overtake it up to you to make sure that it's safe to do so.
Even if someone is driving at 25mph down your favourite stretch of road, what causes accidents and deaths is bullying, tailgating and rash moves.
noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!! with 1 and a half years left before i turn 17 i thought i was safe!!! now it'll be a lot more time and money to get on the road, great. I bet if anyone on this site was about to start driving and then were told they'd have to wait and pay a lot more, they wouldn't be happy.
nick_h said:
noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!! with 1 and a half years left before i turn 17 i thought i was safe!!! now it'll be a lot more time and money to get on the road, great. I bet if anyone on this site was about to start driving and then were told they'd have to wait and pay a lot more, they wouldn't be happy.
If you think the cost of learning is expensive, wait until you start running a car yourself.
Talksteer said:
james f said:
i never understood why they never put motorways in the test as its where most of us drive most of the time
I guess because the accident rate on the motorway is so low that it was never really seen as a problem.
However, a TrafPol told me a few years ago that the "typical" case was a new driver, gets hands on car, up MWay to Blackpool, Brighton or wherever with mates. Disaster.
A more varied test is welcome but you can't teach someone experience and the right attitude. Sure you learn just enough to pass the test and thats it.
I passed on my 4th go.. would like to think that I was gaining experience under assessed conditions
Passed my bike test a few years ago with only a single minor fault so its not a good way IMO to judge a persons future driving ability.
chimyellow said:
[quote=chrisbr68]Why dont they also have a three strikes and you cant drive rule?
I passed on my 4th go.. would like to think that I was gaining experience under assessed conditions
Passed my bike test a few years ago with only a single minor fault so its not a good way IMO to judge a persons future driving ability. Edited by twowheelterror on Thursday 4th January 13:13
Edited by twowheelterror on Thursday 4th January 13:21
When I learn't to drive 20 years ago, I often had lessons in the evenings in the dark, and also in the wet. There are no current restrictions on taking lessons under these differing conditions, although the time of year may make things different for some learners.
I also often drove on dual carriageway 70mph A-roads, which to all intents and purposes are as near as damn-it Motorway conditions (in some cases worse due to side roads, gaps in central reservations, cyclists/pedestrians, round-abouts and traffic lights). I don't get the hang-up with lack of motorway training. The new stretch of the A130 in Essex is a motorway in all but name, 2-lane dual carraigeway, hard shoulder, no side roads, and even a ban on horses and push-bikes. The only difference is you can pull over in a lay-by if you want. It is possible to teach learner drivers how to use slip roads, how to join fast moving traffic, how to safely move into the fast lane for overtaking, how to safely move back, what hazards to look for on fast multi-lane dual carriageways.
The report does contain some good suggestions though, which is refreshing from the current shower in charge of road safety. I particularly agree with starting lessons at school, and like the idea of log-books and minimum hours of tuition/experience. But I'm not convinced a harder test will help much.
Research shows that young males tend to do better at the driving test than females, but young males have worse driving records. A harder test will mean less females passing, but will not have much impact on the number of males passing. This can hardly be expected to address the issue of wreckless boy-racers. Besides, the current test is already supposed to be harder than when I took mine, but the problem is worse now than it was in the late '80s.
I'm afraid the issue is due to attitudes, and a harder test will not change this. Starting lessons at a younger age (not necessarily practical tuition) may help a little, but I think the attitude issue is a more complicated social issue, not just one of road safety.
I also often drove on dual carriageway 70mph A-roads, which to all intents and purposes are as near as damn-it Motorway conditions (in some cases worse due to side roads, gaps in central reservations, cyclists/pedestrians, round-abouts and traffic lights). I don't get the hang-up with lack of motorway training. The new stretch of the A130 in Essex is a motorway in all but name, 2-lane dual carraigeway, hard shoulder, no side roads, and even a ban on horses and push-bikes. The only difference is you can pull over in a lay-by if you want. It is possible to teach learner drivers how to use slip roads, how to join fast moving traffic, how to safely move into the fast lane for overtaking, how to safely move back, what hazards to look for on fast multi-lane dual carriageways.
The report does contain some good suggestions though, which is refreshing from the current shower in charge of road safety. I particularly agree with starting lessons at school, and like the idea of log-books and minimum hours of tuition/experience. But I'm not convinced a harder test will help much.
Research shows that young males tend to do better at the driving test than females, but young males have worse driving records. A harder test will mean less females passing, but will not have much impact on the number of males passing. This can hardly be expected to address the issue of wreckless boy-racers. Besides, the current test is already supposed to be harder than when I took mine, but the problem is worse now than it was in the late '80s.
I'm afraid the issue is due to attitudes, and a harder test will not change this. Starting lessons at a younger age (not necessarily practical tuition) may help a little, but I think the attitude issue is a more complicated social issue, not just one of road safety.
Calorus said:
kieran2006 said:
I don't think a tougher driving test will in any way reduce the boy racer culture in young men, it'll probably just mean more business for driving instructors. Everyone drives sensibly for their test but being out on the road in your own car is a different matter isn't it?
That's simply the whole case.
The test does a perfect job of ensuring a driver can control a car and the theory test does the rest.
Skid pan is pointless, because if you're driving as you did in your Driving Test, and as you replied on you theory you'll prevent it from happening in the first place, and have plenty of room to correct for any unforseen occurences.
The mind boggles if you think the test is enough to learn "perfect" control of the car.
Theory is great but the real world is not the same as the theory...
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff