Judges stern warning to L drivers

gurramok

Just spotted this, a judge in Bray decides to uphold the law with threats of road bans for unaccompanied L drivers or without L plates starting in the new year.

It'll help road safety a bit in this part of town!

Henry Ford III

Good.

yayamark

Proper order.

jhegarty

Can't see what difference it will make...


don't these cases not end up in court because of the guards, not the judges ?

Vain

thats a JOKE iv been waiting 4months for my test now its not my fault im still on L plates. anyway who here can say they drive as carefully every day as they did during there test. if it cuts down on road deaths good but its not fair to be blaming L plates when the waiting list is so long..

tuxy

Don't worry the government have promised to cut waiting times!

MrPudding

Vain wrote:

thats a JOKE iv been waiting 4months for my test now its not my fault im still on L plates. anyway who here can say they drive as carefully every day as they did during there test. if it cuts down on road deaths good but its not fair to be blaming L plates when the waiting list is so long..

See here is the thing. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and go ahead and assume you are a good driver and you are capable of passing the test and you wuld be legal but for the fact the waiting is so long. So what?

Are all learners as capable? I think not, and that is the problem. yes, there are full licence holder that are sh1t as well, and their behaviour is covered by certain laws and they can be prosecuted under those laws.

Waiting time is a bullsh1t excuse for driving unaccompanied. We need a system of deciding who is capable of driving to a minimum standard, instead we have a sh1t test that most people don't bother doing and over 50% of those that do can't pass.

Personally I am glad a judge is finally taking these offences seriously and I hope he gets plenty of business.

MrP

Anan1

jhegarty wrote:

Can't see what difference it will make...


don't these cases not end up in court because of the guards, not the judges ?

How do you mean? The judge said there are large numbers of learners coming before him on 'strings of offences'.

Keith186

It's not fair to ban L driver for driving unaccompanied when you have to wait about 10 months for a test.

When the waiting list is only 6 weeks by all means impose proper penalties.
We pay tax and a charge for the test so I don't see what the problem is now arranging a 6 week maximum waiting period to sit the test except the fact too many people don't really give a crap about how bad the country is run and voted for the same government.

"A lot done, more to do" - we'll be hearing this one for decades at this rate!

skyhighflyer

Anan1 wrote:

How do you mean? The judge said there are large numbers of learners coming before him on 'strings of offences'.

I think he means that while the guards may pick up L Drivers for dangerous driving and other offences, they're unlikely to bother taking any of the hundreds of thousands of L drivers on the road for driving unaccompanied without some other offence to go with it.

Anan1

skyhighflyer wrote:

I think he means that while the guards may pick up L Drivers for dangerous driving and other offences, they're unlikely to bother taking any of the hundreds of thousands of L drivers on the road for driving unaccompanied without some other offence to go with it.

But how could they be coming before the judge if the Guards aren't charging them?;)

stovelid

I might add to this that if the judge finds out that the L driver has previously canceled a driving test, throw a large fine on top of the ban too...

littlejukka

a straight ban is a bit harsh for a first offense, but if they're seen in court twice for the same offense they should be given a 6-month ban. these are "learner drivers". if they can't learn from the first court appearance then they clearly aren't capable of learning and should be taken off the road for a while for everyone's sake.

RoundyMooney

Meh.

The moral of the story is, if you're on a provisional, and drive unaccompanied, don't end up on the receiving end of a summons.

In any event, proactive or otherwise judges laying down localised laws mean little if such a practise isn't applied across the board on a nationwide level...

Wishbone Ash

Vain wrote:

but its not fair to be blaming L plates when the waiting list is so long..

Only one third of those holding provisional licences are on a waiting list for a test. What about the other two thirds? What's their excuse?

BlackWizard

littlejukka wrote:

a straight ban is a bit harsh for a first offense, but if they're seen in court twice for the same offense they should be given a 6-month ban. these are "learner drivers". if they can't learn from the first court appearance then they clearly aren't capable of learning and should be taken off the road for a while for everyone's sake.

I agree with that alright. First offense should be a warning. Shame the warning couldn't be followed up in a few months. But I think just a warning for a first offense is fine.

I'm a L driver. Have been for a month. Driving on my own for the last two weeks. Now I'm waiting on the driving test.

I honestly don't think that if I passed a driving test tomorrow, that the next day I would be a better driver. I think as every day and week that goes by, I'm becoming a better driver. Not so much better, but more confident and aware of other drivers on the road. I think experience is the best teacher, not a driving exam. But by lord are there some dangerous drivers out there. I don't want to sound stereo typical/racist or start a rant. But there has to be some sort of basic tests done before people are allowed get behind the steering wheel. Insurance companies should maybe offer courses? I think an Irish company is doing this.

Edit: What is an offense? I was thinking of something small like stopping in a yellow box. But if it depends on the offense. Id have to hear the offense before saying "first and final warning".

stepbar

Sounds like a judge is throwing a bit of a tissy fit...... Until we have a proper driving test system which allows a test / retest within 6-8 weeks of an application and driving restrictions on the car you can drive (i.e. engine size, speed limiter), the present provisional driving system will be always a joke. I would agree with a 10 lesson rule where your driving instructor would give the go ahead for you to drive unaccompanied (at least until your test) based on your performance during the lessons.

That being said, it would be also interesting to implement a system (for fully licensed drivers) where by said driver would have to take a test every 10 years or so. Maybe it might shut the "I've got a full license, I can drive" brigade up and increase driving standards. As a provisional driver, it annoys the fcuk out of me when I see supposedly "safe" drivers (i.e. those with a "full license" forgetting how to use mirrors, indicators etc having total disregard for speed limits and so on) taking liberties on the road.

NiSmO

This post has been deleted.

NiSmO

This post has been deleted.

Anan1

NiSmO wrote:

This post has been deleted.

No, but it's not every other road user's fault either. No offence, but the roads are dangerous enough already without our having to share them with unaccompanied learners.

Guy:Incognito

Keith186 wrote:

It's not fair to ban L driver for driving unaccompanied when you have to wait about 10 months for a test.!

Of course it is. What difference does it make how long the wait is? The rule is your not allowed to drive on your own. Why does it suddenly become a now now now really urgent matter that you cant live without driveing once midnight hits and your 17? Everyone knows theres delays so allow for the fact you cant drive alone for up to a year after getting your provisional. You dont have a god given right to be driving just because you've hit the minimum age.


The Germans seem to get by fine with their drawn out system of having to have a minimum amount of lessons and driving time, written/theory and driving tests before they are allowed a licence to drive alone, I dont see why Irish people think its something they should be given automaticaly.

"banning " them is only forcing them to stop doing something they are not allowed do in the first place.

Holsten

Glad I don't live in Bray.

Pete4779

Keith186 wrote:

It's not fair to ban L driver for driving unaccompanied when you have to wait about 10 months for a test.

True, and many 17 year olds have to wait 12 months (TWELVE!) before they can drink alcohol, so really it's unfair, I reckon they should just go and drink anyway.

Stekelly

Stekelly wrote:

The Germans seem to get by fine with their drawn out system of having to have a minimum amount of lessons and driving time, written/theory and driving tests before they are allowed a licence to drive alone, I dont see why Irish people think its something they should be given automaticaly.

I wouldnt agree with setting a minimum amount of lessons as different drivers have different ability etc. I drove for about 6 months then did two lessons and passed the test first time I would have gone mad if I was forced to spend hundreds of euro on lessons. I did have the advantage of learning to drive at an eairly age though on the farm etc.

Seinas

I never had an accompanied driver with me, and my friends still on provisional licences never drive with a full licence driver... its a law that isnt even enforced properly, so why bother...

woop

just my feckin luck!

TerrorFirmer

Stekelly wrote:

Of course it is. What difference does it make how long the wait is? The rule is your not allowed to drive on your own. Why does it suddenly become a now now now really urgent matter that you cant live without driveing once midnight hits and your 17? Everyone knows theres delays so allow for the fact you cant drive alone for up to a year after getting your provisional. You dont have a god given right to be driving just because you've hit the minimum age.

What about all the people in their 20's that rely on their car to get to work amongst other things? It's not like the only L Drivers in this country are teenagers itching to drive for the hell of it.

I'm not saying that all L Drivers should be permitted to drive alone but when the wait for a test is so disgracefully long there should be at least some sort of leeway rather then 'if I catch you you're banned end of'.

Guy:Incognito

Davis Shrilling Ointment wrote:

I wouldnt agree with setting a minimum amount of lessons as different drivers have different ability etc. I drove for about 6 months then did two lessons and passed the test first time I would have gone mad if I was forced to spend hundreds of euro on lessons. I did have the advantage of learning to drive at an eairly age though on the farm etc.

Which is exactly whats wrong with the country. A minimum number of lessons with a qualified instructor is exactly what is needed for everybody before they should be let near a car alone, regardless of how good they think they are.


Driving lessons should not be a choice.

Guy:Incognito

HavoK wrote:

What about all the people in their 20's that rely on their car to get to work amongst other things? It's not like the only L Drivers in this country are teenagers itching to drive for the hell of it. .

What do all the people in ther 20's etc in other countries do? dont take a job that requires driving, be in in getting to/from work or as part of the job, if you cant drive. It doesnt take a genius to work that out.

HavoK wrote:

I'm not saying that all L Drivers should be permitted to drive alone but when the wait for a test is so disgracefully long there should be at least some sort of leeway rather then 'if I catch you you're banned end of'.

Again I'll use Germany as an example. It takes months to get alicence there because of the need for lessons etc, so just because its the wait for the actual test to come up here instead of mandaotry training, its more or less the same situation.

Seinas wrote:

I never had an accompanied driver with me, and my friends still on provisional licences never drive with a full licence driver... its a law that isnt even enforced properly, so why bother...

Lots of laws can be gotten away with , why bother with any of them so? Why bother getting tax/insurance/nct etc if its not properly enforced. Theres plenty of ways to get an insurance disk without paying for a years insurance, so why not?

The tax man

Accused drank.....
What did they drink,how much and what did they do next?
Oh the suspense.

TerrorFirmer

Stekelly wrote:

What do all the people in ther 20's etc in other countries do? dont take a job that requires driving, be in in getting to/from work or as part of the job, if you cant drive. It doesnt take a genius to work that out.

most other countries have a proper testing system meaning you don't have to wait a significant chunk of your life for one.