Hellfire
|
 posted on 3/8/05 at 03:53 PM |
|
|
Good Idea or Bad Idea
It constantly amazes me how bad at driving most of us Brits are. Particularly with regard to Motorway lane discipline, driving through roadworks and
contra-flows, driving in heavy rain with Foglights on, to name but a few. I could go on, the list would be endless.
I reckon it would be a good idea, to get every driver who holds a Full UK driving licence to sit some sort of theory test EVERY five years. If they
fail dismally, they should then be made to re-take their driving test in full. If nothing else, it will reinforce the highway code, possibly
re-educate some drivers and remove the downright dangerous from UK roads.
Lets face it, there are some drivers on the road (I reckon) who passed their driving test in the army by driving a tank six foot forwards and six foot
in reverse, in the middle of the desert. 
Driving conditions are constantly changing - traffic volumes are higher, new roadsigns are introduced, new safer methods of traffic management are
introduced etc, etc but you only have to pass your test once in your lifetime and are then free to drive as you like, picking up bad habits along the
way.
I think every UK driver should be subject to periodic assessment. So what do you think ?
|
|
|
|
|
andyps
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 04:04 PM |
|
|
I think I agree with this - when my daughters have taken their theory tests I have played on the computer simulations and always passed, but there
were a few things I got wrong as they did not exist when I took my test.
The simple rule to help get rid of bad drivers which i would like to see implemented is that anyone going into a BMW showroom and saying they want an
X5 should have their licence instantly confiscated.
Lane discipline is hopeless in this country and if sorted would eliminate most of the congestion problems we have.
[Edited on 3/8/05 by andyps]
Andy
An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less
|
|
|
john_p_b
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 04:08 PM |
|
|
i'm totally with you on this one. sinse i passed my HGV test last year i've spent a hell of a lot of time driving around and the stupidity
of some "drivers" never fails to amaze me.
|
|
|
Scotty
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 04:08 PM |
|
|
definately agree
hopefully we all could benefit from a refresher course
it seems silly that we pass our test (s) when we are 17 (ish) and NEVER get checked again till we're grey and doddery
PLEASE NOTE! All comments made by this person are to be considered "Tongue in Cheek" and are not meant to be taken seriously in any way - so there!
|
|
|
chrisg
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 04:25 PM |
|
|
It's a top idea mate, perhaps with the addition of the police being able to stop drivers and make them take the test at any time when they spot
bad driving, although, judging by the driving I see, some people would be taking a test every other week!
Is ther some way of suggesting this to "the powers that be"? Possibly backed up by a petition of some kind.
"It's a major contribution to road safety" as someone once said.
Cheers
Chris
|
|
|
James
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 04:32 PM |
|
|
Fantastic idea.
Been saying it for years that they should bring this in.
There'd be no real justification for arguing against it either that I can see- only that you were against it cos you thought you would fail.
Well, if you're going to fail you shouldn't really be on the road anyway should you!
Cheers,
James
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses, behind the lines, in the gym and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights."
- Muhammad Ali
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 05:02 PM |
|
|
In theory it's a good idea, but who's going to pay for it?
I wouldn't suggest it to the governmet in case they snap it up as another way of taxing the motorist.
Also the roads would be forever clogged with people doing emergency stops, 3 point turns and parallel parking.
I do agree that the general standard of motoring is pretty poor - I do around 40k miles a year and have the pleasure of watching drivers ranging from
dangerous, idiotic, asleep, rude, too fast, too slow......the list goes on.
to expand on Andy_ps comment on BMW X5 drivers, this should include Mercedes M class, particularly those driven by middle aged women.
Nick
|
|
|
tom_loughlin
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 05:08 PM |
|
|
sounds good to me, last night in work, i was doing 30 in a 30mph limit, in bristol centre, and i slowed to about 27 when i saw a police car, and some
arse in an alpha 156 3.0 comes caning up behind me, and passes me, till he sees the police car, and nearly hits me in my van pulling back in - the
police lights went on, and there was a bit of a chase - was quite unnerving at the time, but id love to see what excuse he came up with for overtaking
me.
Tom
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 05:34 PM |
|
|
i fully agree
these last few days, theres been a lunatic driving a very fetching 7 type car around my local area, making an excess of noise and having totally too
much fun
As for who pays for it, well a computer assessment cant cost much more than £5 for a half hour test. Just call it another expense of motoring. Then if
you fail, you deserve to get stung anyway.  It would be a great way to ensure that all drivers are kept up to date with current issues
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 07:01 PM |
|
|
exactly how many locost owners are going to obey the rules of the road when their car is completed?
Or are you going to be driving fast a car that is highly overpowered and prone to tail slides. A fair number of people have totalled their cars on
here due to possible driver errors - didnt hellfire go that way?
atb
steve
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 07:18 PM |
|
|
i had 3 attempts on my life today,all by young drivers,2 females and a football player type who overtook me whilst i was turning right
imho its these drivers that need shooting not so much the older ones
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 07:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
it fu(ks me off the amount of people who insist on driving down the centre lane of the motorway, but if you asked them i'm pretty sure that they
would say that it was only to be used for overtaking especially if it meant failing a test.
That's interesting,
I believe that the highway code states
inside lane for normal driving, middle lane for normal driving and overtaking, outside lane for overtaking only.
At least it did when I took my test, or have they changed it.
David
Proportion is Everything
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 07:47 PM |
|
|
Oh and I think it's a bad idea.
An a**ehole is an *rs*hole no matter how many times they qualify.
David
Proportion is Everything
|
|
|
Benzine
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 07:51 PM |
|
|
I passed when I was 17. I consider myself a good driver. I have some friends who have passed within the last year or two and I honestly don't
know how they passed They seem to need to drive dangerously to prove some kind of point. How about extending the driving test for much longer,
including motorway driving?
|
|
|
Benzine
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 07:54 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hellfire
It constantly amazes me how bad at driving most of us Brits are.
When you actually think about it (i.e. go to Turkey or Johannesburg (there are others, these are the places I have seen the worst ever driving at))
it's clear to see we're not bad drivers at all. ^__^
[Edited on 3/8/05 by Benzine]
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 09:06 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by steve_gus
exactly how many locost owners are going to obey the rules of the road when their car is completed?
Or are you going to be driving fast a car that is highly overpowered and prone to tail slides. A fair number of people have totalled their cars on
here due to possible driver errors - didnt hellfire go that way?
atb
steve
Steve,
I'm not talking specifically about Locost drivers, but all drivers in general. You are also quite correct. Hellfire did go that way - driver
error - NOT disobeying the rules of the road. No amount of assessment could ever allow for driver errors.
I'm not talking about the odd error but driving in general in the UK. I have also seen much worse driving in other countries but am not
particularly interested in other countries.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 3/8/05 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
The trouble imho is that the current driving test is woefully inadequate when applied to modern driving. According to the current test, about the
worst thing a motorist can do is touch the curb whilst doing a three point turn. I mean really, why the hell can you fail your test for that?! Why
is it even examined? And who the hell reverses round corners anyway?
The main focus learning to drive should be safety. Why on earth are people not taught motorway/dual carriageway driving, lane discipline, avoidance
of lethal habits like tailgating, proper observation, proper reaction to bad conditions, basic vehicle condition maintenance, etc etc? It's
shocking how cluless one can be about vehicles and how to drive them safely, but because they can do a three point turn without touching a curb they
are unleashed onto the roads!! What is the government thinking?!
Cars are getting faster and heavier, and requiring less and less concentration to drive. At the same time people nowadays think their driving license
is a basic human right. The situation is seriously dangerous. People need proper training in the first place (to at least the standard of the
advanced driving course) and continual re-assesment. This would seriously reduce the staggering number of completely preventable deaths on our roads.
Of course it wouldn't quite generate the same revenue as speed cameras!
A girl i knew has just been killed in a car accident (she was a passenger), hence the rant. Something needs to change fast!
Liam
[Edited on 3/8/05 by Liam]
|
|
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 4/8/05 at 09:22 AM |
|
|
Im all for it as long as there isnt a strict fail - get banned policy. I would welcome a system whereby you could pass (eg 100 - 75%) - fail
marginally (75 - 55%) and have 4 weeks to pass - fail miserably 54% and below) and get licence taken off until you pass.
Iam not a good driver. I do however attempt to follow best practice. I enjoy a safe braking distance between me and car in front on motorways. 2
things that get me just past luke warm are;
1. people who have to fill my safe distance and put me in a potentially risky position.
2. people who undertake when iam keeping up with the flow, especially if they fill my safe distance.
Mr Gus - good point well made. I would suspect most locosters would exploit there vehicles on the queens highway to the point where they dont strictly
speaking follow the code. No different to other raod users really. I would hope that after putting in huge build commitment and investment that most
locosters would carry out a reasonable risk assessment of road conditions before doing so and above all - done get caught and dont put others in a
compromising (read - dangerous etc)situation.
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 4/8/05 at 12:08 PM |
|
|
Srirling Moss always says that if cars had a sharp spike sticking out of the centre of the steering wheel instead of an airbag, people would drive
more carefully.
Make people feel protected from harm and they will take risks. If the test was at fault then everyone would drive just as badly as each other. They
don't.
The fault lies with the attitude of some road users.
You may as well say making people retake their test every five years will stop drink drivers. It won't.
I can think of a number of rules that "Driver error" would break, for instance, failure to take account of road/traffic conditions, and
driving without due care and attention.
David
Proportion is Everything
|
|
|
OX
|
| posted on 4/8/05 at 03:49 PM |
|
|
a test is a test ,people will prepare for the test and once passed they will carry on with there normal every day bad habbit driving .i think its a
bad idea but do think the driving test should be a more strict and updated test
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 4/8/05 at 05:34 PM |
|
|
People who drive in the rain with their fog lights on and people who hog the centre lane of a motorway when the inside lane is empty, obviously think
they are driving correctly and within the highway code. I don't think it's a bad habit that they've picked up after passing their
tests. I reckon they'd be gobsmacked after they found out they had been driving incorrectly for the last thirty years and soon change their
ways.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 4/8/05 at 05:39 PM |
|
|
why would you not use fogs in driving rain? Spray can reduce visiblity as much as fog can.
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 4/8/05 at 09:12 PM |
|
|
my 17 year old son has his test in september. He has been told that touching the kerb isnt a fail - ist mounting it that fails you.
reversing around a corner is a test of precision and observation during the manouvre. Its not a real life event in normal driving.
I had spent some time trying to teach Matt how to parallel park int a space about 2 cars long. In the test, they just ask you to reverse into a space
behind a car that you pull up alongside - ie a pretty big space. Its cos they dont want you to hit someones car during the test.
atb
steve
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 4/8/05 at 10:32 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OX
a test is a test ,people will prepare for the test and once passed they will carry on with there normal every day bad habbit driving .i think its a
bad idea but do think the driving test should be a more strict and updated test
I have to agree with this. Just making people take a test every 5 years or so isn't going to stop them driving just as badly afterwards. By
making the test much stricter in the first place, you get to weed out the useless oiks that should never be on the road anyway.
It also needs to be updated to deal with modern driving conditions e.g.
Motorway driving.
Driving in heavy rain/snow/fog (maybe a skid pan test?).
Overtaking skills (but we like following HGVs for 150 miles don't we Mable?).
Instant fail for not "merging in turn" at a restricted section.
Ability to reverse 100 yards down a narrow lane at more than 3mph.
Ability to get in and out of a supermarket parking place without writing off adjacent vehicles.
Ability to understand what disabled parking bays are actualy for.
etc...etc...etc...
Maybe a special test for van drivers:
"Sorry to say you've failed, you left a gap of nearly 6 inches between yourself and the vehicle in front. The driver was clearly not
intimidated enough"
[Edited on 4/8/05 by MikeRJ]
|
|
|
jollygreengiant
|
| posted on 5/8/05 at 07:36 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by john_p_b
i'm totally with you on this one. sinse i passed my HGV test last year i've spent a hell of a lot of time driving around and the stupidity
of some "drivers" never fails to amaze me.
Yep I'd definately agree with you on that. I drive a taxi for a living now and when you do a high annual mileage, some of the road behavior
beggars belief. For instance, Wednesday morning this week. I'm driving down to Gatwick to pick a fare up, trundling round M25 happily until I
get to just after M40 intersection. I'm in lane 2 and have slowed down to 50 for the start of the matrix camera'ed variable speed limit
showing 50. To my immediate left is a 40 foot artic and to my immediate right is a volvo car followed by a citreon followed by another artic. Up comes
the next overhead gantry and its camera'ed and the limit is showing 40 so we all slow down, EXCEPT that is for the so called profesional driver
in the artic coming up behind the cars to my right. OH NO he is NOT going to slow down and he comes hammering up behind the citreon blasting on his
horn because the are abiding by the speed limt. So much so the he forces the citreon to close to only a foot behind the volvo because he has very
dangerously closed the gap to less than a foot between himself and the citreon. My immediate reaction is oh poo I'm the filling between two
artics here so I back off Cos I value my life. This Jackass in the artic then pulls infront of me so I back off further and watch as he then
accelerates so that he is alongside the two cars where-upon he then starts pulling over to his right forcing the cars to swerve right until he
suddenly dodges left a bit then flicks right and left again so that his trailer very nearly and VERY DELIBERATLY side swiped the motorist who were
trying to abide by the law. Unfortunately I was so busy trying to protect my own *rse while this was going on that I didnot get his number, other wise
I would have stopped & reported this to the very next plod that I saw.
My own prefered option would be that everyone retook a full driving test every 10 years, people who had more than a couple of accidents in a year had
to retake tests, people would only be allowed to attempt to pass the driving test a maximum of 5 times ( on the assumption that either you can drive
or you can't. people who take their test more that 10 or 20 times really should not be driving), and anyone who lost their licence due to points
or court action, had to retake it before they got it back. The driving licence should be viewed as a PRIVELEGE and not a god given right. As for plod
I think his time would be better spent enforcing driving standards as it is the lack of them that causes the most accidents, speed only varies the
severity of the injuries.
Rant over.
Enjoy.
[Edited on 5/8/05 by jollygreengiant]
Beware of the Goldfish in the tulip mines. The ONLY defence against them is smoking peanut butter sandwiches.
|
|
|
