Drivers 'should be made to learn for a year'
- Thread starter Super Uwe
- Start date
Currently reading:
Drivers 'should be made to learn for a year'
Hmmmm...
Yes, I like it.
Depends what the 'graduations' are, if it's going to restrict to them to old, knackered, crap heaps then no.
Yes, wouldn't mind that but would it really be enforced? My guess is not.
I was subject to not driving between 11-5 for my first 12 months and didn't mind. (Yes I got home at 10:58 once but that's another story. ) But no, I wouldn't mind that.
Good idea, but there has to be some exceptions due to food containing alcohol etc.
Not sure on this one.
(Copied from my reply on another forum.)
Dom
Yes, I like it.
Depends what the 'graduations' are, if it's going to restrict to them to old, knackered, crap heaps then no.
Yes, wouldn't mind that but would it really be enforced? My guess is not.
I was subject to not driving between 11-5 for my first 12 months and didn't mind. (Yes I got home at 10:58 once but that's another story. ) But no, I wouldn't mind that.
Good idea, but there has to be some exceptions due to food containing alcohol etc.
Not sure on this one.
(Copied from my reply on another forum.)
Dom
Ban intensive courses, yes and no, I didn't have an intensive course, but passed after only six 2 hours lessons. But 4 people I've known to have taken these courses have rolled their cars in the first 6 months of driving.
'graduated licence' - sounds like rubbish
'During this time the number of young passengers that a newly-qualified driver could carry would be restricted' - Not to bad an idea. Liveable.
'They would also be banned from driving between 11:00pm and 4:00am for the first six months, unless they were driving to and from work or college' - Sounds reasonable as long as for work perposes is allow
'There would be no blood alcohol allowed during those first six months' - Bring it in for first 2 years IMO, in line with the 6 points 2 years probationary period.
'But young drivers would be able to start learning earlier, at the age of 16 and a half' - Those on disability can drive from 16, so this 16.5 years of age shouldn't be an issue.
Just my 2 pence worth
'graduated licence' - sounds like rubbish
'During this time the number of young passengers that a newly-qualified driver could carry would be restricted' - Not to bad an idea. Liveable.
'They would also be banned from driving between 11:00pm and 4:00am for the first six months, unless they were driving to and from work or college' - Sounds reasonable as long as for work perposes is allow
'There would be no blood alcohol allowed during those first six months' - Bring it in for first 2 years IMO, in line with the 6 points 2 years probationary period.
'But young drivers would be able to start learning earlier, at the age of 16 and a half' - Those on disability can drive from 16, so this 16.5 years of age shouldn't be an issue.
Just my 2 pence worth
I don't know. I learned on an intensive course back in 2006 when I was in the army. 2 days after getting in for the first time I'd passed my test. I think the military will need an exemption from this because for a lot of trades in the military, learning to drive is part of their training! I was 17 when I learned.
Other than that, I don't see the problem with it at all. But in my experience it's about what people are being taught and how well it is taught. One of the young lads I was working with in Bedwas was learning to drive, giving it big licks and quoting the words of his "instructor" as gospel. Thing is, he was being taught that coasting in neutral down a hill is a good thing! That was just the start of it!
Being taught poorly to pass a test is still teaching someone poorly to pass a test whether they be learning for a day or a year.
Lets not forget btw, that you don't need to be young to be an idiotic accident magnet. The crash where I lost my stilo MW (*sniff*) was due to the other driver, a 48 year old driving around in the evening with no lights on. I think we need to have re-tests or assessments every now and then to keep us sharp. A pain in the back-end no doubt, but what would a regular mandatory retest do the accident figures? Perhaps that might reduce the accident rate?
Other than that, I don't see the problem with it at all. But in my experience it's about what people are being taught and how well it is taught. One of the young lads I was working with in Bedwas was learning to drive, giving it big licks and quoting the words of his "instructor" as gospel. Thing is, he was being taught that coasting in neutral down a hill is a good thing! That was just the start of it!
Being taught poorly to pass a test is still teaching someone poorly to pass a test whether they be learning for a day or a year.
Lets not forget btw, that you don't need to be young to be an idiotic accident magnet. The crash where I lost my stilo MW (*sniff*) was due to the other driver, a 48 year old driving around in the evening with no lights on. I think we need to have re-tests or assessments every now and then to keep us sharp. A pain in the back-end no doubt, but what would a regular mandatory retest do the accident figures? Perhaps that might reduce the accident rate?
Last edited:
