swampster

iTrader: (1)

BBC NEWS | Politics | Driving age 'must increase to 18'

Good idea, or nanny state pandering again?

Personally I don't think it's too bad an idea, although I'm not so sure about the curfew bit..

CrisPDuk

When I was 17 there was a pretty good chance that if I decided to drive like a loon I would* get stopped by a copper

That is the real reason more kids are killing themselves (and others) in cars today

*And I was, often To the point where I was on first name terms with half of Cheshire's traffic mob

Markus

Perhaps a graduated system similar to what is in place in Ontario might be a good idea.

Class G1

New drivers of passenger vehicles learn to drive with six important conditions with a G1 licence. A new driver must hold a G1 licence for a minimum of 12 months before attempting the G1 road test. This time can be reduced to eight months if you successfully complete an approved driver education course. Drivers earn more privileges after passing their G1 road test.

As a G1 driver, you are required to:

maintain a zero blood alcohol level while driving;
be accompanied by a fully licensed driver, who has at least four years driving experience, and a blood alcohol level of less than .05 per cent, in case he/she needs to take over the wheel;
ensure the accompanying driver is the only other person in the front seat;
ensure the number of passengers in the vehicle is limited to the number of working seat belts;
refrain from driving on Ontario's "400-series" highways or on high speed expressways such as the Queen Elizabeth Way, Don Valley Parkway, Gardiner Expressway, E.C. Row Expressway and the Conestoga Parkway;
refrain from driving between midnight and 5:00 a.m.
Note: If your accompanying driver is a driving instructor licensed in Ontario, you may drive on any road.


Class G2

New drivers must hold a G2 licence for a minimum of 12 months before they can attempt the G2 road test. At this level, you have more privileges because of your driving experience. You may drive without an accompanying driver on all Ontario roads anytime. However, you are still required to:

maintain a zero blood alcohol level while driving;
ensure the number of passengers in the vehicle is limited to the number of working seat belts.
Our Graduated Licensing System has been a resounding success in reducing death and injury among novice drivers. Ontario research shows that new teenage drivers are almost three times more likely to be involved in a fatal or serious collision when they are carrying teenage passengers. In fact, research shows the more teenage passengers, the higher the risk.
To further protect youth on our roads, effective September 1, 2005: the number of young passengers that teen G2 drivers can carry will be limited from midnight to 5 a.m. as follows:

Initially, G2 drivers 19 or under can carry only one passenger aged 19 or under.
After the first six months, and until the G2 driver earns a full G licence or turns 20, they can carry only three passengers aged 19 or under.
The passenger restrictions do not apply if the G2 driver is operating a motor vehicle after 5 a.m. and before midnight.

These restrictions will not apply if the G2 driver is accompanied by a full "G" licensed driver (with at least four years driving experience) in the front seat, or if the passengers are immediate family members.

Thirty-one jurisdictions in Canada and the U.S. have some form of teenage passenger restrictions in effect.


The final stage after G2 is a full G which does not have the above restrictions.

PeteBrant

I'd like to know what magical transformation happens to you at 18 that stops you driving like an idiot.

Let's face it, up until the age of 25 or so, in general, you don't have the experience, and you still have a desire to "show off". Insureres knows this, why do yo uthink yuor insurance premiums take a dip at 25?


This is just a token gesture withe little of no substance.

OllyK

Quite, it's a sticking plaster approach rather than getting back to the root cause. In all likelyhood this approach will just result in an increase in underage, uninsured drivers rather than actually improving standards on the roads.

Yes the testing process can and should be improved, but this needs to be complimented by more traffic officers taking a common sense approach to policing and tighter controls around the purchasing or cars, both trade and private. Insurance companies should provide at least 2 copies of the cover note (not hard as most are just a laser print) and the seller of the car should have to retain a copy of said cover note as proof that the purchaser was insured, or perhaps return to the DVLA with the logbook.

Lee247

Excellent point

TBH, young drivers are no worse than "white van man" who is an absolute menace on the roads, most of the time. And is usually much older than 17

lozgti

Parents should stop spoiling their blooming kids and helping them out.

Credit should not be given to spotty 17 year olds either.It will stop them spending 20k on a £2k saxo and thinking they have converted it into a mini rocketship.

In fact how on earth do the kids get all there money to do these things.Have YTS wages gone up ??

OllyK

I think you answered your own question!

TSB Boy

In our country, you can only get a licence to drive if you are wealthy and responsible enough to own and look after at least five goats, a camel and three women. Which are listed in order of importance.

I trust you are all well?

OllyK

And no doubt sexual preference?

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

Unlicensed drivers seem to do most of the damage around here.


BBC NEWS | England | Devon | Two held as pair killed in crash

The driver in this case was previously banned from driving although he had never actually owned a license I am sure a 17 year old with a full license is going to take a lot more care than the millions of unlicensed/untaxed/uninsured drivers in this country.

davegtt

I think your probably a worse driver after driving for a year as you grow confidence and think your better than you really are, think its only when you pass about 23 than you start to become a little more responsible and think about stuff more.

OllyK

I'd like to see a mandatory motorway driving test which you can't take until 6 months after you pass your main test. I'd also like to see tests such as the IAM having a greater profile and people who pass getting greater benefits to encourage people to take it it. The couple of quid off my insurance is nice, but it's not likely to encourage large numbers to take it up.

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

I would like to see all women banned from overtaking HGV's in the rain, as soon as they see a bit of spray thrown up from the wheels they panic,slam their brakes on and stay in the outside lane blocking it off for the next 8 miles

TSB Boy

No, then the women would have been listed second

The Zohan

Yes, same here!

Drugged driving was not a problem at 17 i knew little or nothing about drugs or where to get them, now days you cannot fall over in town without hitting a dealer on the way down!

the problems that needs tackling;

More Police, not cameras policing the roads
Stiff penalties for drink/drugged drivers
much stiffer penalties for non-insured/liceinced/MOT'd drivers, custodial if second+ offence
raisng thr awareness of the problem with young and old alike

David Lock

I've 2 kids who have both passed their test in the last 3 years. They really have no idea of car control if things go wrong simply because they have never experienced it (aside from my boy when a wheel came off ).

So I wondered about sending them onto a skidpan course to learn a bit about control, especially on the need to slow down in the wet.

But do you think this is a good idea or it would just make them over confident if they did the course?

They both know of kids of their age group who are dead from accidents - mostly showing off and driving too fast. dl

PeteBrant

Of course a result of rasing the age limit to 18 will be less new drivers on the roads. Meaning the accident rate per 100,000 falls, meaning that the bottom line figure looks better - Which, as we all know, is all that matter in politics these days. Despite it being an absolute illusion that anything is any better.

OllyK

Hard to say, I passed the IAM test at 18, it certainly helped in terms of observation and vehicle control and it no doubt resulted in me avoiding some incidents that I would not have without the training. I did probably drive faster afterwards, but was probably safer and certainly had a better idea of how to handle the car if something did happen.

SJ_Skyline

I think applying a similar law such as the one that governs bikes would be better. For example, you can only drive, say 1.2l cars below 80bhp until you are 21 or have held your license for 2 years?

I guess it would be tricky to enforce, particularly with the vehicle power aspect.

Shark Man

The problem is now we have a generation who have no form of maturity or responsibility at that age. Leaving it for one more year won't help, because we have let a generation grow up without control and thus have no respect for others.

The thing is, amongst these type there is a number who wouldn't hesitate at driving without insurance tax or MOT, let alone a licence. So, is it solving the problem? No, because its partly a social issue.

However there are still plenty of kids out there who are good enough and are responsible drivers. So its once again Britain's scum giving them a bad name.

But there is also the issue of experience, and I would like to see much further empasis on car control in skid scienarios applied to training and testing, because what I have noticed is driving standards across the board have dropped vastly, especially in adverse driving conditions.

Raising the limit to 18 won't address this: we'll still have the same substandard new drivers on the road, just they will be one year older, but still with substandard training and abilities.

Anyone noticed how many people just can't drive for toffee when there is a slight flurry of snow (especially in cities)? Christ, it wasn't like that 10+years ago. And the odd thing is driving tests were easier back then.

Therefore I would propose retesting of drivers: that covers everyone. That will get rid of all the "boarderline" passes that should never really be on the road in the first place, which I fear is reason why there is an influx of substandard driver in teh past 10 years: Currently more focus is placed on the theroy than the practical, that must be a playing factor in all of this.

Also for new drivers, I like the idea of a minimum numbers of training hours: I for one don't like the fast-track type lessons. And those hours must include wet driving, skid control, night driving, snow and ice (on a skid pan), as well as motorway driving (currently not allowed), a bit like a plane licence in some respects.

Although I'm not a fan of shuffling my hands on a car with PAS and tiny steering wheels (HGVs and Series Landys without PAS, yes...modern cars; not needed), so there are elements of current tests that are outdated.

Finally, I'd like to see the test also focussing on driver positioning in the seat, by that I mean as far back to the point the clutch can be fully depressed, and backrest adjusted so that the arms are only slightly bent, with head restrained set at lower head/upper neck level, if the driver isn't sat in the car correctly; they can't drive it properly and their visual awareness is seriously affected - blind spots from being sat too far forward and inability too look at door mirrors without physically moving their head being the main issues as to why these drivers are a hazard to other road users.

Also a ban on fluffy objects inside cars; cars aren't for girly stuff

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

Over here you have to have lessons with a proper instructor there is no such thing as L plates and you can not drive with your mates or parents.

They are taught to be more aggressive drivers over here which is crap as the average German is a crap driver which obviously goes to prove their system doesn't work properly, however Autobahn driving is part of the normal driving lessons and test.

Also with regard to insurance, you can not get number plates if you do not have insurance, and you can only get number plates form the government agency in your designated area.

You show your paperwork and get a note, take the note to the shop that presses your plates, take plates back to government agency and they apply a sticker to them.

You can also not cancel your insurance except for 1 day a year, insurance is automatically renewed each year. If your car is out of MOT then the 2nd sticker on your plate lets the police know and you are done for it, you have 7 days to get it sorted ot the number plate is revoked.

plain, easy and simple.

Leslie

I agree with all that especially since I can remember how our little gang drove at that sort of age. It is not so much a question of ability as attitude of mind and that is not easy to change in young drivers. My old mate and I reckon they had a bench at Kingston Magistrates' Court with our names on it since we were always being caught for something on our bikes or in cars!

I also agree with PeteBrant's post. It is a complete waste of time thinking that increasing the driving age to 18 will improve the situation unless there is a secondary effect of less people on the roads as he says. Yet another knee jerk and useless reaction from the stupid clots who "lead" us.

Paul Hapgood's post is also pretty accurate. There was comparatively very little traffic about when I was driving at thet age and also no one hardly took drugs or were into binge drinking etc. That would also make a significant difference to the driving standards.

Too much shouting about all this and too many more terrible crashes by young drivers will eventually lead to a movement for no licence until you reach the age of 25!

Les

Spoon

Superb, Ali. Particularly the seating aspect which always annoys me. I raced from the age of 9 and still today cannot believe how some people are seated behind the wheel. Don't get me started on motorcyclists either, sitting like they are about to slide off the back.

Personally by the age of 17 I was more than ready for the road and to be told I'd have to wait another year would have been poo news!

Raising the level 1 year wouldn't do a thing apart from what Pete Brant and others have stated.

Brendan Hughes

Pah. Why under-18s? Just ban all drivers.

BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | Look, no hands

Devildog

Depends on the kids.

I was able to drive at 13 had cracked the ton on L plates while my responsible licence holder slept soundly beside me. I was competing with some success in autotesting and spent a fair amount of time on track in various race prepared cars by the time I was 18.

Fair to say that my car control skills were pretty good before I passed my test at 17, but it still didn't stop me driving like a nutter and having accidents as I grew up due to excessive speed for conditions. Luckily in my case he roads were quieter then, and the damage was to me and my cars.

Having to wait to 18 would have made sod all difference, to be honest - its about the individual.

Some experienced 40 year olds are lunatics while some spotty yoofs with slammed saxos are not.

AndyWalker

raising the age limit to 18 only delays the idiots getting on the road by 12 months, if they think they are some sort of racing hero at 17, im sure they will at 18 instead?

i wish people would stop assuming its every young driver thats **** poor behind the wheel - i passed my test at 17 relatively quickly - bought my own car - a 6 month old corsa sxi, which i owned and looked after for 3 years without causing any accidents, and at 20 i bought my wrx type ra

the curfew for passengers is a joke - driving to pub in a group - with 1 nominated driver, how does everyone else get home?

car sharing for... a trip to the cinema for example, do we all go to 6pm showing so we can be home before 11, or do we kill the environment (which is on its *** already apparently) and turn up in seperate cars??

the testing scheme needs reviewing, to make sure it is harder to obtain a license, and something needs to be to ensure young hotheads (more often than not, chavvy idiots would we agree?) dont get behind of the wheel of their racing 1.1 Polos - i dont think limiting engine size is a solution - you can drive dangerously in any car

government - please think a little harder before making new rules

ps - gorden brown is officially an idiot

PeteBrant

There simple answer is that there isn't really a solution. There is no substitute for experience, and unfortunatly there is no short cut to experience. It will take you a number of years to become a fully competant driver, that much is inescapable.

We have all made mistakes in the early years of driving. Some of those mistakes have been relatively harmless, some have had tragic consequences, but we have all mad ethem, and no amount of legislation is going to stop that happeneing - Short of making the learner driver period a vastly extended time period.

you either make the training period for driving a number of years, or, you do as is done now, take a balanced assesment of risk versus need.

al4x1

Its an interesting subject and the one bit I'd like to see is new drivers restricted as to what they can drive. Keep them out of powerful cars and get them to learn a bit about driving before getting anything powerful. Now if you can afford the insurance you can drive whatever you like which to me makes no sense at all.

corradoboy

I have taught people from their 17th birthday and had them test-ready within 7 weeks (14 hours). If they have the ability to pass the test, then let them attempt to IMHO. I have also taught people in their 40's whom I don't think should ever be allowed behind the wheel.

A good idea, but it is already in practise. All instructors following the DSA guidelines teach structured lessons detailing all the required abilities to ensure they are a safe and competent driver, and is thus tested in the current practical driving test. Instructors are periodically check-tested to ensure they are within those guidelines and graded as such.

Most people view the current hazard perception training as a video game and just another money-making hurdle formality. Several hours of driving on busy roads having such hazards pointed out to you, and then being asked to identify them yourself makes them much more aware.

Some foods contain yeast, some sugar. Together they can ferment in the digestive tract to create alcohol. A zero limit could therefore incriminate the innocent. A lower level for ALL would be responsible. I'm sure scientists will be able to tell us how much alcohol can feasibly be made from natural food fermentation and the limit set a small percentage above that.

So, why can a new driver take his 9yo sibling out for the night, but not his 10yo sibling And what if they are delayed whilst out and with several friends in the car the clock ticks past 11pm

A limit on the power of a vehicle is sensible, but again, can be unfair. Many motor-racing drivers are young (Jenson drove F1 at 19) and their abilities are often way above those of 40yo IAM drivers. Some of the old codgers I see in their empty-nest/mid-life crisis sports cars often have less of a clue than the youngsters.

Motorcycles however do need restriction. It is barmy that we allow 16yo's to sit on top of an engine with a bucket on their heads before we'll let them in a car with all its safety devices. I personally would raise the motorcycle limit to 25. They make up just 4% of road traffic, and yet account for 26% of KSI's. In 37% of motorcycle deaths, the biker has binned it themselves. How many of these nutters contribute to the statistics being used to affect the car test rules ? Cyclists need some rules forcing on them too, but I'll leave that for another debate !