80kmph Provisional rule - will you abide by it?

Tellox

Myself personally? No. Some of the speed limits in this country are plain ****ing stupid. Driving to cork is a lenghty enough trip as is. Im not making it any slower for myself, nor anyone else, by travelling at 80km/h on a 100km/h road.

This is an easy enough decision to come to for me - I drive a bike. Theres no clear indication that Im a learner, bar my license. So the only real chance of me getting caught is by hitting a checkpoint with a speedgun, or hitting a speedgun going over 100.

A lot of car drivers I've spoken to have told me that theyre simply removing their L plates - although not reccomendable, I'd understand where they're coming from. Most,if not all Bike drivers I've talked to about it, started laughing hilariously at the concept.

Input?
And no full licenses gloating, please.

Our man in Havana

Full licence here, no option for that then?

Tellox

Tellox wrote:

And no full licenses gloating, please.

.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

is their any way of finding out the percentage of provisional drivers killed on the roads...
again full license here so on option given....
but if their was an option in this poll, i would say its a good idea.

Vikings

In all honesty it is a load of bull and it will not stop any of the accidents that happen currently, this is not a solution to anything.

Lemming

This rule makes utterly no sense and is the "brainchild" (I use that term very very loosely and in the most sarcastic possible sense) of some f*ckwit marketing drone.

A) Roads already have speed limits. If people aren't obeying those, then what chance is there of obeying an intangible "imaginary" speed limit imposed by a piece of card that isn't pink.

Provisional drivers will never gain experience in handling a car beyond 80km which means they either have to break the law to get some experience in handling a car at higher speed or wait until they have a full license, in which case we now face the prospect of full license holders - who are apparently competent and safe and skilled according to the government - "learning" how to drive. Anyone care to point out the f*cked up logic (or lack) in this?

C) Provisional drivers actually get failed in tests for "not making sufficient progress", i.e. driving perhaps even 10km/h below the speed limit. So what happens if you're in a 100km/h zone in a test (if that happens of course)? You're holding up traffic and therefore "not making sufficient progress"

D) Provisional drivers get enough abuse from so-called full and competent license holders for "not driving fast enough" anyway on the roads. These same people who then rattle a lot of provisional drivers, make them nervous and therefore far more likely to make a mistake. Yeahhhhhhhhhhh. WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. WAY. To. F*CKING. GO!!! YEAHHH ROCK ON!!!! f*ckwits.

E) If someone wants to drive "fast", does anyone really think that any speed limit is going to stop them? :rolleyes:


So yeah, a well thought out suggestion there.

Vikings

Excellent post Lemming, could not have put it better myself.

I cannot see how there is a valid argument against any of those points, never mind a valid reason for this idiotic rule.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

i bet we will have loads and loads of people knocking this idea... and not bothering to put forward better suggestion's...

their is no point in criticising an idea if you don't have a better one to put in its place....

everybody can be a critic, but only a few can better this idea.

so come on all ye critics .... lets here your ideas.
other wise ye are just blowing smoke out yer ass

Vikings

Hold on.... that makes no sense. There is no sense in having this rule in place, why should a new rule be proposed in place of it? All of those points while they may be criticism are perfectly valid and true. The laws in place now would be fine and dandy if they were upheld.

Keith C

Most of us older drivers i.e late 20's onewards remember paying £3,000 for a car such as 1.1 peugeot etc.... didn't even think of a mod car as there was no way you could afford the insurance & thats even if you were quoted. I posted yesterday that a 22 yr old can get a modified civic for just over €1,000 fully comp :eek: albeit on a full licence but it is still dirt cheap.
The insurance companys have an important role to play, increase premiums for provisional licence holders on high powered cars or restrict them to a 1.4 cc until they pass their test (like the bike licence does), the government must do their part to ensure the driving test backlog continues to reduce.
Hibernian offers a provisional ignition scheme which is a very basic driving course. Why not introduce this nationwide?? The idea is that you get your prov licence, take driving lessons, then do the ignition test prior to taking out insurance. If you can'y pass the ignition test, no insurance & you take more lessons.
I have heard of people failing the prov ignition course but then take out insurance with a diff company at higher premium & off they go driving.
Its driver behaviour & skill levels that have to improve, not reducing speed limits.

fatboypee

A far better statistic than looking for Provisional license drivers killed on the roads would be to look for those involved in fatal accidents (dead or otherwise) of people who have had NO driving lessons.

FB.

Owen

When I passed my full license, to be quite honest, I didn't feel any more qualified to be on the roads than when I had a green one. My test comprised of 30mph top speeds, reversing around corners, 3 pointers, and hand signals. Big whoop. Getting advanced, regular training improved my driving though.

It has bugger all to do with licenses. The reason people are being milled in this country is 2 fold. Driver Education, and poor roads. I would love for someone to get the statistics of the Dublin to Cork road, pre Kildare bypass, pre Fermoy bypass, pre Cashel bypass, and compare them to the current statistics. The facts are, that with a decent motorway network, fatalities are vastly decreased. This is a fact that is covered up by the Government who are proceeding at a tortoise pace with our Road Network as it's incredibly expensive. Wouldn't it be great though if in the morning, we had at the very least Dual Carraigeways connecting every major City and large Town in Ireland?

Education must be paramount. People should be shown just how easily a car folds at 40mph, and the level of carnage that happens on a wet road at night when tires loose adhesion, and brakes aren't up to the task. Planning ahead is key.

Remember, in France, you can't set foot in a car on the Public Highway until you've sat 20 hours minimum on a closed circuit and proven your ability to look for accidents, and proven your ability to react purposefully.

But we'll continue to blame speed, set up more hidden cameras that no one can see, and so no one will abide with, continue to talk about young male drivers being the problem. Let's all bury our heads in the sand!

/Full Car, and Bike License, PPL, RoSPA, and Advanced Driver Training at work at least once a year.

Gregor Samsa

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

their is no point in criticising an idea if you don't have a better one to put in its place....

That's a fallacy, but here you go: Properly enforce the rules that already exist.

Lemming

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

i bet we will have loads and loads of people knocking this idea... and not bothering to put forward better suggestion's...

their is no point in criticising an idea if you don't have a better one to put in its place....

everybody can be a critic, but only a few can better this idea.

so come on all ye critics .... lets here your ideas.
other wise ye are just blowing smoke out yer ass

I don't need to put forward an idea to recognise and point out that another proposed idea is really stupid and counter-productive and of absolutely no benefit whatsoever other than to make the NTR look like they're doing something. Anything.

But since you'r eso hell bent on scape-goating provisional drivers, why not restrict the size of engine that provisional drivers can legally drive. Of course, since a provisional driver shouldn't be un-accompanied in a car anyway then this is a moot point since the accompanying full license holder should be reigning them in verbally.

So we're back to square one again .... which I shall point out implies that this is not an issue of provisional drivers. This is an issue of everybody.

Oh, and ... one other point. If a core problem is lack of enforcement of existing laws which are more than sufficient, how much good do you think bringing in another law that wont be enforced do?

Sam Vimes

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

i bet we will have loads and loads of people knocking this idea... and not bothering to put forward better suggestion's...

their is no point in criticising an idea if you don't have a better one to put in its place....

everybody can be a critic, but only a few can better this idea.

so come on all ye critics .... lets here your ideas.
other wise ye are just blowing smoke out yer ass

that's not really true tbh. basically you're saying:

"we can't think of the right thing to do but we have to do something so we might as well do the wrong thing". i hope you're never my doctor

the answer is education. as people have said, there are already speed limits and people break them. imposing a limit that makes no sense and will cause accidents because of the vastly greater number of overtakings there'll be will not solve anything. people will either break the new limit or cause more accidents, piss off everyone on the road and cause gridlock.

there should be a massive campaign to show people the dangers of driving (not just speeding) while they're in secondary school, before they even get into a car. maybe even driver's ed like in america. we have to stigmatise speeding the way drink driving has been stigmatised over the last few years

Wossack

Lemming wrote:

I don't need to put forward an idea to recognise and point out that another proposed idea is really stupid and counter-productive and of absolutely no benefit whatsoever other than to make the NTR look like they're doing something. Anything.

But since you'r eso hell bent on scape-goating provisional drivers, why not restrict the size of engine that provisional drivers can legally drive. Of course, since a provisional driver shouldn't be un-accompanied in a car anyway then this is a moot point since the accompanying full license holder should be reigning them in verbally.

So we're back to square one again .... which I shall point out implies that this is not an issue of provisional drivers. This is an issue of everybody.

Oh, and ... one other point. If a core problem is lack of enforcement of existing laws which are more than sufficient, how much good do you think bringing in another law that wont be enforced do?

I thought you were only required to be accompanied by a full license holder if its your first provisional..?

Lemming

Wossack wrote:

I thought you were only required to be accompanied by a full license holder if its your first provisional..?

Only exclusion is currently on the second provisional licence, although if I recall, that's being phased out due to an EU ruling.

Gregor Samsa

Wossack wrote:

I thought you were only required to be accompanied by a full license holder if its your first provisional..?

First, third and all subsequent provisionals. Second provisional is the only one you can currently drive unaccompanied on.

Macy

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

i bet we will have loads and loads of people knocking this idea... and not bothering to put forward better suggestion's...

It's a stupid idea that will probably cause more accidents.

Better suggestions: Enforcement, Enforcement, Enforcement. With the prime focus on the times between 11pm and 4am. On Country Roads. Where a significant proportion of fatal accidents happen.

Far better than restricting drivers on motorways and dual carriageways which everyone, including those proposing this ridiculous measure, say are the safest roads as it is. Any focus on national routes which are increasing dual carriageway standard should be on lane discipline and hammering home the message that the outside lane(s) are only for overtaking.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

Commander Vimes wrote:

that's not really true tbh. basically you're saying:

"we can't think of the right thing to do but we have to do something so we might as well do the wrong thing". i hope you're never my doctor

erm no, i thought i was speaking in English. no need to translate it. unless of course you don't under stand what i am saying and as you did translate it i presume you don't

so let me simplify it for you.

"don't knock what is in place till you have a better solution"
in the old days people might say
"don't through out the baby with the bath water"



and trust me i don't think a medical doctor is qualified to treat you maybe a shrink.:D

Lemming

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

so let me simplify it for you.

"don't knock what is in place till you have a better solution"
in the old days people might say
"don't through out the baby with the bath water"

And let me simplify what you've said, to you, for you.

"If it isn't broke, don't fix it"

The current system has all the legislation it requires in place. What is required is enforcement of existing legislation and driver education. What isn't needed is more legislation that wont be enforced. What you're backing isn't in place, therefore saying not to knock what's in place is disingenious since it isn't in place anyway.

Besides, these suggestions are all PR stunts. Would you actually consider something that comes off the back of a napkin in this regard to be something that is well thought out?

fatboypee

I'm confused by all this really. The answers are there and have been repeated ad-nauseum by soo many people, politicians and joe-soaps alike. In my humble opinion, the government knows what to do, but does not have the political balls to do it, the following is what SHOULD be done:

1. Automatically require ALL provisional drivers to undergo mandatory lessons by a suitably qualified and LISTED instructor prior to taking the Test. To be evidentiary at time of the test.

2. Immediately Close any licensing loop-holes that allow provisional license holders from taking to the the roads unacompained.

3. Set up a driving Test date when the provisional is first taken out/renewed with an option of deferring only ONCE.

4. Make ia requirement in LAW that Insurance will be invalidated if the provisional licence holder is driving unacompanied.

5. Enforce the existing legislation and ban all unacompanied provisional licence holders caught driving solo.

6. Driver Education should be a mandatory subject in all schools.

Of course, b0llocks about "resources" and "Money" and the "unions preventing outsourcing of testing" yada yada yada will excuse them from doing anything as per f'ing usual....

I honestly don't think this culture will change until all the old "amnesty" drivers are gone (those given full licences without ever having taken a test) and the rules on provisional licence carriers are tightented/enforced. The best we can really hope for with this is to enforce the legislation now for provisional drivers and educate new drivers. The existing drivers who gained their licences the old way will still continue to carve up the roads...

FB..

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

Lemming wrote:

And let me simplify what you've said, to you, for you.

"If it isn't broke, don't fix it"

let me clarify this... that is NOT what i said.

let me repeat it. That is NOT what i said.

how in earths name did you pick that from what i said.............wow man that far out.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

fatboypee wrote:

I'm confused by all this really. The answers are there and have been repeated ad-nauseum by soo many people, politicians and joe-soaps alike. In my humble opinion, the government knows what to do, but does not have the political balls to do it, the following is what SHOULD be done:

1. Automatically require ALL provisional drivers to undergo mandatory lessons by a suitably qualified and LISTED instructor prior to taking the Test. To be evidentiary at time of the test.

2. Immediately Close any licensing loop-holes that allow provisional license holders from taking to the the roads unacompained.

3. Set up a driving Test date when the provisional is first taken out/renewed with an option of deferring only ONCE.

4. Make ia requirement in LAW that Insurance will be invalidated if the provisional licence holder is driving unacompanied.

5. Enforce the existing legislation and ban all unacompanied provisional licence holders caught driving solo.

6. Driver Education should be a mandatory subject in all schools.

Of course, b0llocks about "resources" and "Money" and the "unions preventing outsourcing of testing" yada yada yada will excuse them from doing anything as per f'ing usual....

FB..

i agree with all your points and a few more.

Lemming

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

let me clarify this... that is NOT what i said.

let me repeat it. That is NOT what i said.

how in earths name did you pick that from what i said.............wow man that far out.

No. I actually read between the lines in your own argument. You claimed that people were complaining about these new "suggestions" without offering anything else therefore had no right to complain. Then you make a glib remark about not knocking something that's in apparently place.

I then pointed out the fallacy in both of your assertions. So .. tell me exactly where I read "that far out".

Keith C

Keith C wrote:

Hibernian offers a provisional ignition scheme which is a very basic driving course. Why not introduce this nationwide?? The idea is that you get your prov licence, take driving lessons, then do the ignition test prior to taking out insurance. If you can'y pass the ignition test, no insurance & you take more lessons.

If an insurance company can set this up & track drivers who have failed/passed surely the government can take a leaf out of their book? What about AXA that have the device that monitors the speed the car is doing, why not use these systems that are already in place??

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

Lemming wrote:

I actually read between the lines .

ah that where you made your mistake...
just keep to the black text on the page and you wont confuse yourself

and keep your car between the lines.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

Keith C wrote:

why not use these systems that are already in place??

now we are getting somewhere...
that's a great idea, and shouldn't cost the world, and hopefully save some lives

veXual

I don't see how the introduction of 80kph speedlimits & restricting engine sizes available to provisional licence holders will reslove any issue.

Im quite sure its been said already but who will enforce this proposed 80kph rule, its rediculous. The only way to solve the issue is to have a greater gardai presesnce on the road. I'd be less inclined to break the speed limit if I had in the back of my mind that a garda might be round the bend (Im aware that technically I should anyway). But in my last year of driving Ive been through only 3 garda checkpoints, and one speed checkpoint.

As for restricting L-drivers to lower capacity engines I can see the logic behind it but I drive a 1 litre Polo & can still sit into it and drive like an a$$hole in excess of 120kph, so thats that plan out the window aswell.

Stark

This is a great idea. Now all those boy racers playing chicken with each other and driving their cars at 160km/hr will think and slow down to a safe 80kph. Road deaths will come down overnight! It's brilliant, utterly brilliant.

Excuse me, I just dripped some sarcasm on my keyboard and have to get a new one before it corrodes through my desk.

Lemming

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

ah that where you made your mistake...
just keep to the black text on the page and you wont confuse yourself

and keep your car between the lines.

Thanks for the advice. Might I suggest that you use your brain before you attempt to write white text on a black background. That way you may actually get something ON the lines that makes sense.

Oh, and I do keep my car between the lines thank you very much. But thanks for the suggestion. Much appreciated.