[Closed] 62 points and still on the road

That wouldn't be difficult. Lend me a tenner?

If you're shit at driving, the solution isn't speed limits

Speed limits AND better training.

We will always need limits. People will always think they are better than they are, but more importantly we need consistent behaviour on the roads.

No. Better training AND speed limits.

I'm not arguing against limits for the reasons you suggest, I'm arguing that the priorities are arse-backwards.

Better training won't stop dicks being dicks. And it's dicks that have and cause the most accidents.

I mean a stationary object at the limit of your line of sight. Obviously. But why engage brain when the usual sarcy comments can be rolled out.

This has been said numerous times but is always pissed on. It's the whole driving to the conditions point - it might me safe to do a ton over Rannoch Moor on a dry day with full visibility but forty round a sharp bend further up is way too fast. You could find cyclists or a broken down car on the road. But hey, you weren't "speeding" when you hit them.

Molgrips- same people who will get dogmatic rather than look at something dispassionately.

I mean a stationary object at the limit of your line of sight. Obviously. But why engage brain when the usual sarcy comments can be rolled out.

It was a genuine response to your simplified explanation.
There is No point making something "simple" if it's completely ambiguous.
But feel free to criticise someone pointing for out your errors.
Be aggressive and dismissive too if it makes you feel better.

mrlebowski - Member

The reason there is so much focus on speed..

Is that it's one of the easiest ways to reduce RTC's & improve road safety.

What bollocks! 😯
Speeding counts as primary causal factor in 4% of KSIs, so you're not addressing the cause of 96% of serious accidents.

Putting a plaster on a scratch on your forearm will do **** all good when you're bleeding out of your femoral. 💡

There is a straight line of decay of KSIs over the years, and increasing speed enforcement has had no effect on that straight line.

How exactly did you form your opinion? It's not one that can be concluded from the facts.

You have to accept there will be accidents when people are driving cars as people don't concentrate when driving, drive too close behind each other, take silly risks etc,.

Passing the driving test takes training and everyone has done that and if every drove exactly as they did on their test there would be far fewer accidents. But they don't.

Passing the driving test takes training and everyone has done that and if every drove exactly as they did on their test there would be far fewer accidents. But they don't.

As brought up in most other threads on this subject, I believe mandatory re-tests or refresher courses would be the place to start for improving driving.

Serious negligent behavior that results in death should come with a lifetime ban. Minor infractions could fall under points / fine. The more serious, but not fatal incidents should result in a re-test with stricter parameters for passing.

On top of this, five yearly mandatory refresher courses for driving and skill improvement would be implemented. It's all moon on a stick, but would be better than the current situation. All in my opinion of course.

What bollocks

Charming...kiss your mother with that mouth?

It was what I was told on my speed awareness course - yes, I've been knicked for speeding & far be it for me to argue with someone whose job it is to retrain drivers..

You, on the other hand...?

& I think you've missed the point of what I said.

That being it's the most cost-effective way of improving road safety.

The most effective? I wouldn't know..

There is a straight line of decay of KSIs over the years, and increasing speed enforcement has had no effect on that straight line.

Might that have something to with cars being safer?
Any proof that there is a direct link proving that speed enforcement has little or no effect on road safety?

As brought up in most other threads on this subject, I believe mandatory re-tests or refresher courses would be the place to start for improving driving.

Agree but how often would they have to be. How quickly do people start to drive badly after passing their test as would need to be at least at that interval. Monthly re-tests!

Neal, sorry, genuinely thought you were being facetious.

Agree but how often would they have to be. How quickly do people start to drive badly after passing their test as would need to be at least at that interval. Monthly re-tests!

I'd go for after two years for new drivers and then every five. Not ideal, but at least it would be proactive and maybe convince people to stick to a higher standard knowing that they have to, at some point, prove to an examiner they are still capable of driving. Perhaps make it random to keep people on their guard.

My wife used to be an instructor and do advanced driving courses too. She says one of the most infuriating things was trying to instill situational awareness in teenagers. She'd spend time explaining why regular mirror checks, looking ahead, planning ahead and being extra cautious in residential areas are paramount. Only for the kids to arrive at the next lesson spouting "my dad says not to worry about other cars, nothing wrong with speeding to make progress" etc

How do you tackle that? When kids are learning selfish, idiotic behavior at home.

[i]When you want to overtake a slow moving vehicle on a single carriageway road, you see a gap, you think ok that's enough space, and you go. If someone comes screaming around the corner at 100mph, suddenly you have far less space than if someone came at 60.[/I]

I taught my sons to always consider that when thinking of overtaking, is there enough space for them to do it safely if [b]I[/b] was coming the other way.

The most dangerous part of the road, is the other side.

Mol
The Police's only role is to enforce the rules, Parliament makes them and councils/departments implement them.

[i]I'd go for after two years for new drivers and then every five. Not ideal, but at least it would be proactive and maybe convince people to stick to a higher standard knowing that they have to, at some point, prove to an examiner they are still capable of driving. Perhaps make it random to keep people on their guard. [/I]

We've done this previously. It's a 4 month wait around here for a test, and somehow you're going to increase capacity 30-40 times?

Approximately 1m people take the driving test pa and we've 45m drivers (own a licence).

Also interesting that 50k were banned (in a year), so 1%pa.

Can't believe the people pushing for retests. Do you want the cost and ball-ache of doing that? I don't. Maybe for pensioners.

From the moment you pass your test you [i]should[/i] get better at driving. If you're getting worse then either the test/training was too short/easy or you're a moron.

I also don't believe that speed is the be-all and end-all. I think it's generally about people being stupid. I've met so many otherwise book-smart people who genuinely believe that cyclists shouldn't be on the road, will drive whilst texting etc. There's something wrong with the training.

I guess what I'm saying is that retests would likely be just a nice little earner. Like the education system that churns out straight-A students with the common-sense and creativity of cannon balls - people will just pay the fee and pass the retest. They won't actually learn anything.

Can't believe the people pushing for retests. Do you want the cost and ball-ache of doing that? I don't. Maybe for pensioners.

There are many thing I don't want the "ball-ache" of but making roads safer is hardly what many of us term a "ball-ache"....

I guess what I'm saying is that retests would likely be just a nice little earner. Like the education system that churns out straight-A students with the common-sense and creativity of cannon balls - people will just pay the fee and pass the retest. They won't actually learn anything.

Why would they not be safer drivers?
Why would they not learn something?

How about a re-test every day at 6am then? For safety like.

How about a re-test every day at 6am then? For safety like.

Your facetiousness just undermines your point & strengthens mine.

Thanks!

As I said, moon on a stick. I definitely think the test should be more difficult and more involved. When my missus was teaching she had several conversations at various seminars regarding how lessons and testing need a massive shake up and fundamental changes. Some of the thinking applied to a different era.

As for being a ball ache having to pay out and partake in re-tests / refreshers, that'd be part of the point. Yes it would be a ball ache, but that might help hammer home
the importance of good driving.

How about a re-test every day at 6am then? For safety like.

🙄

[i]As I said, moon on a stick. I definitely think the test should be more difficult and more involved.[/I]

The Russian driving test is harder than ours, doesn't seem to make a difference - maybe because it's not the answer, just another 'easy answer'?

I think a better initial training and test that includes a basic intelligence test, and a graduated development of road skills from cycling, through to motorbike, to car. Which would develop awareness and empathy for other road users rather than "I'm the king of the road in my little safety-bubble"

The Russian driving test is harder than ours, doesn't seem to make a difference - maybe because it's not the answer, just another 'easy answer'?

What do you think the answer is? Genuinely curious about other people's ideas and views, no matter how far out they may seem.

I think a better initial training and test that includes a basic intelligence test, and a graduated development of road skills from cycling, through to motorbike, to car. Which would develop awareness and empathy for other road users rather than "I'm the king of the road in my little safety-bubble"

That would be a great idea. Showing people what it's like on cycle, motorcycle and progression from there would help build empathy and show people how vulnerable these road users are. Now we're getting somewhere. Less arguing, more theories on improving skills 🙂

I'm not sure that compulsory retesting at any interval is going to improve things - everyone genuinely believes that they are a better than average driver so why do they need to be retested? Maybe retest those with a certain number of points on their license.

Perhaps different punishments: points on your license doesn't seem to be working very well. A week in jail for every three points? Would cause pandemonium to begin with but a few high profile cases and people would start to get the message.

Generally it's the attitude/belief that once you get into a car you can do what you like with near impunity that needs to be changed.

I'd retest only those who're involved in a crash or who get points above a certain level (I'm thinking 6-9 and then every time after that)

and after a couple of times they'd have to pass an advanced type of test - and/or mandatory black box or something

A combination of Scaredypants suggestion above and Jambourgie's ideas regarding staged learning of different vehicle types would be great. It would initially reduce the number of road users due to the level of time and skill required and place serious restrictions on bad behaviour for those that are already on the road.

Generally it's the attitude/belief that once you get into a car you can do what you like with near impunity that needs to be changed.

This is key to it all really. It's nice to see people partaking in this debate and putting forth ideas without it resulting in arguing and point scoring 🙂

It would initially reduce the number of road users due to the level of time and skill required

FWIW I'm in favour of compulsory telematics and dashcams with tougher penalties.

This has been said numerous times but is always pissed on. It's the whole driving to the conditions point

What? Who's saying we should NOT drive to conditions? I'm certainly not. Let me be clear. Drive to the conditions, but no faster than the limit.

I cannot believe you are advocating giving drivers free reign over how fast they go. That's insane. Most drivers just aren't that good. And no driver knows everything going on around him at all times.

I'm not sure that compulsory retesting at any interval is going to improve things - everyone genuinely believes that they are a better than average driver so why do they need to be retested?

staged learning of different vehicle types

That wouldn't be too hard to implement, we already do it with bikes. Pass your test, you're restricted to (say) sub-100PS vehicles. After two years you can take an advanced test to qualify for bigger cars.

I guess what I'm saying is that retests would likely be just a nice little earner. Like the education system that churns out straight-A students with the common-sense and creativity of cannon balls - people will just pay the fee and pass the retest. They won't actually learn anything.

I am regularly assessed on the standards of my driving at work, together with the rest of my colleagues, it's not like a driving test at all. It's more akin to the test I did to get my C1 category, testing your wider observational skills, knowledge of the regulations and your reaction to situations. Has it made me a better driver? Definitely. Should everyone have to do something similar every 5 years or so? I think so, yes.

To use your example of straight-A students, they may have the basic knowledge but need to be coached into how to use it effectively, pointing out any bad habits at the same time.

I can't believe we're all on here arguing for/against further driving skills training when we are all generally happy to accept that the best way to get better at riding a bicycle off-road is to pay decent sums of money to spend a day with someone like Jedi! Make a mistake on your bike and it's usually you who comes out worst, make a mistake driving and you can potentially kill multiple people. The culture of the car has skewed the priority of the population, even the cycling community.

Drive to the conditions, but no faster than the limit.

Why?

If everyone drove to the conditions, the limits would be meaningless. The only reason to have limits at all is precisely because people cannot be trusted to drive appropriately to the conditions.

when we are all generally happy to accept that the best way to get better at riding a bicycle off-road is to pay decent sums of money to spend a day with someone like Jedi!

Not me.

@pondo - a slight misinterpretation of what I wrote 😆 people believe that they are better than average therefore they don't believe they should be retested.

@pondo - a slight misinterpretation of what I wrote people believe that they are better than average therefore they don't believe they should be retested.

Makes it compulsory and personal beliefs on skill level don't matter. There is always room for improvement.

Are there any countries that do not have speed limits and if so does this reflect in accident and fatality statistics?

If everyone drove to the conditions, the limits would be meaningless. The only reason to have limits at all is precisely because people cannot be trusted to drive appropriately to the conditions.

That's the frustrating thing. I fully understand your point of view, but there are too many individuals (zanelad from a few pages ago for example) that would just travel at ridiculously fast speeds irregardless of weather or road conditions.

Resulting in the depopulation of rural communities as young adults wouldn't be able to get to/from education and employment. That's the problem with all these good suggestions, individually they look great but the knock-on effects could be devastating in other, unintended, ways.

Public transport improvements, cycling, Mopeds, motorcycles, ebike etc. We have this weird, everybody should drive, culture that needs to be addressed for the sake of the environment if nothing else.

Public transport improvements; subsidised by the tax payer? Cycling, e-bike; not suitable for many journeys.
Moped, motorcycle; are you suggesting these road users don't require testing?

Again, I'm not disagreeing from an environmental perspective but you're still enforcing a centralisation of the population and that's not only unrealistic but also undesirable.

Public transport improvements; subsidised by the tax payer? Cycling, e-bike; not suitable for many journeys.
Moped, motorcycle; are you suggesting these road users don't require testing?

Sorry, I'm working on the Jambourgie staggered test approach whereby you have to pass muster on two wheels before four. Should have really outlined that.

I'd be interested to know how many people pass their test and then just drive distances that are easily covered by other methods. I know a couple of people at work who only drive to work and back, to the shops etc who live within walking distance of both. Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to, just curious as to what percentage of traffic on the road those sort of journeys are?

I've just been to the shops, about a mile away.

Only other option is walk or cycle. It's pi55ing with rain plus windy.

Oh, and about 200 feet lower, so a climb all the way home.

+1

I often use the motor to nip down to the shop which is 300m. But it's the weather thing. In summer, I'll happily wander down in my shorts, but I'm not getting all wrapped up to go out in the howling beastliness when I don't have to.

I also occasionally exceed the limit if appropriate to so, or the whim takes me.

Ah, confession feels good 🙂

In mitigation: In summer I barely use the car. It's just that the weather doesn't suit my clothes so I use the car in winter.

From the moment you pass your test you should get better at driving. If you're getting worse then either the test/training was too short/easy or you're a moron.

I've been driving over 40 years and haven't had an accident in the last 30. Oh, apart from reversing into that bollard in a car park!

😆 at mountain bikers being bothered by wind and rain 😉

I must admit I tend to use the car more in winter too. That's the solution then, we need some kind of weather machine or system of underground tunnels to avoid rain and wind!

Why are we a nation of fat people? Hmmmm 😀

I've just been to the shops, about a mile away.

Only other option is walk or cycle. It's pi55ing with rain plus windy.

Oh, and about 200 feet lower, so a climb all the way home.

I believe the standard answer here is HTFU Princess. It's a bit of wet and gravity. 😉
With all the money not spent on VED, Insurance and depreciation most of us could afford Assos kit.

I'm working on the Jambourgie staggered test approach whereby you have to pass muster on two wheels before four.

Whilst I'd love it if more people took a bike test (it improved my driving no end), there's a problem here in that not everyone who drives is capable of riding a bike. Plenty of physical disabilities that would preclude it, for a start.

Oh, apart from reversing into that bollard in a car park!

How fast was it going? (-:

From the moment you pass your test you should get better at driving. If you're getting worse then either the test/training was too short/easy or you're a moron.

You can get better at driving technically (car control etc,.) but nobody gets better than they were during the test conditions from an observation, speed, adhering to every law etc,.

If you had to take a test in the next 5 minutes with no preparation I would put money on you failing and you walking away afterwards calling yourself a moron....

Whilst I'd love it if more people took a bike test (it improved my driving no end), there's a problem here in that not everyone who drives is capable of riding a bike. Plenty of physical disabilities that would preclude it, for a start.

In this theoretical world I think you'd get a pass for disabilities. Maybe just taken out in a sidecar for s set number of hours? 😉

The only time I've ever had an incident in my car is reversing in to my own bloody driveway (twice) when people have parked illegally all over the street making access really tricky. Smashed my rear light on the fixings for an old gatepost the first time and scraped the rear wing along the wall the second time 😳

molgrips - Member

I cannot believe you are advocating giving drivers free reign over how fast they go. That's insane.

It's reality.
There are (a huge number of) roads with a 60mph limit (for cars) that cannot be negotiated at 60mph.
Every single driver that negotiates one of those roads has chosen a suitable speed, and your beloved speed limit has had zero effect.
Not sure why you struggle to accept this fact.

If you had to take a test in the next 5 minutes with no preparation I would put money on you failing and you walking away afterwards calling yourself a moron....

Only because I'm drunk. Give me half an hour to sober up at least.

It's reality.
There are (a huge number of) roads with a 60mph limit (for cars) that cannot be negotiated at 60mph.
Every single driver that negotiates one of those roads has chosen a suitable speed, and your beloved speed limit has had zero effect.
Not sure why you struggle to accept this fact.

There's a road near me where that didn't really happen. Speed limit has now been reduced to 40. The number of occasions before this where you would see vehicles in fields, embedded in walls or in ditches was ridiculous. Some people will see a 60 sign and take it that that is the speed they are supposed to drive at. As has been stated numerous times, there are some staggeringly inept people out there.

Every single driver that negotiates one of those roads has chosen a suitable speed, and your beloved speed limit has had zero effect.

If only that were true.

There are two bits of road within 400m of our house where drivers regularly get it wrong: sharp right hand bend to avoid that rather big farm building straight ahead? No I'll just drive through the stone wall instead! Crossroads with a give way sign and marking? Sod that I'm going straight across!

And then of course you get the classic: "The car lost control". No it fekking didn't you idiot, "[b]You[/b] lost control"

[i]I believe the standard answer here is HTFU Princess. It's a bit of wet and gravity.
With all the money not spent on VED, Insurance and depreciation most of us could afford Assos kit. [/I]

Aye, and you'd get the 4.8m lengths of timber back how?

[I]There are (a huge number of) roads with a 60mph limit (for cars) that cannot be negotiated at 60mph.
Every single driver that negotiates one of those roads has chosen a suitable speed, and your beloved speed limit has had zero effect.[/I]

And many others that aren't safe at that speed in the wrong conditions, a bit like a wet rush hour in a 30 zone.

I don't drive to the speed limit, I drive to what's safe (for me and everyone else). Which is why I'm just as happy doing 25mph with a queue behind me as I am doing 120mph (when making 'progress' 🙂 ).

120mph - where are you doing this? Did you have somebody on the verge of death in the car with you? Were you in some sort of elaborate movie plot similar to Speed? If not, why would you ever need to travel at that speed?

I admit that motorway speeds could probably be raised above 70, but 120 is very fast.

[I]I admit that motorway speeds could probably be raised above 70, but 120 is very fast. [/I]

Except when you drop BACK to 120mph it doesn't 🙂

When I lived in Germany on the local (unlimited) Autobanh most cars are doing 80ish, a few are going quicker and the odd one was seriously fast.

We use to go out on Sunday mornings on the motorbikes to bait the fast boys. I remember one day we covered the 40 mile between two junctions in 15 mins.

Yes Molgrips, that is exactly what I didn't say.