Changes to the Driver Licencing System Mega Thread

eringobragh

Stark wrote: »

Things change, sometimes you can't have the same toys that your older siblings had.

Well Put

givyjoe81

Stark wrote: »

Oh bless. I seem to remember the law banning people from driving alone on 1st, 3rd of subsequent provisionals being drawn up long before Gaybo had any connection with the RSA. Yet one of your half baked excuses for dismissing those laws was "Wah wah, that RSA guy didn't do his test, why should I have to?". Things change, sometimes you can't have the same toys that your older siblings had.

Where did i say that if he didnt do i shouldnt have to( mistake if i did), i said the opposite, i have to, he should have to.

Calina

givyjoe81 wrote: »

Where did i say that if he didnt do i shouldnt have to( mistake if i did), i said the opposite, i have to, he should have to.

Technically speaking, the law as it related to him differs to the law as it relates to you. In some respects, you might see that as "not fair", but what it boils down to is this:

The law now says you must not drive on your own. In fact, it's said it for quite a while. Therefore, there is no point in you whinging about how things used to be. Face reality. You are in no position to sit down and say "until Gay Byrne does a driving test, I should be allowed break the law with impunity". He has a full driving licence. You don't.

bonkey

givyjoe81 wrote: »

Not going into all the points cos were are gonna be here forever going back and forward, but typical of the banana republic the man fronting the campaign has never sat his test, so who's to say he's competent on the road?

Once you start arguing that should ignore all opinions of all drivers who have either not passed a driving test or who do not hold a current license.....this point has some merit.

Unfortunately, that would mean you should be ignored too.

Or maybe you'd like to argue that when it comes to two drivers who haven't passed their test, then the older one isn't automatically correct. Fine. Let's get the qualified drivers to tell us who to side with. Oh...wait...they're saying your point of view is wrong.

Either which way you look at it, arguing that any non-qualified drivers can have an invalid opinion only leads to the evidence suggesting that your non-qualified opinion is wrong.

The fact that there was a climbdown as regards 2nd Prov drivers proves this was ill thought out, end of.

It prooves no such thing. That a climbdown was effected so quickly, without obvious renegotiation or high-level meetings of the big names involved suggests that it was planned from the start.

A simple basic test that 50% of people fail, my belief that i would not pass was based on these shokcing stats not my driving ability.

Can you show those stats are out of line with international averages in developed nations? No? Didn't think so.

I dont think you can argue that bad drivers can pass and good ones can fail, just read some of the experiences of those that have failed on here and then take a look at some of the idiots with full licences on the road, namely boy and girl racer types.

Passing the test indicates only that you have the ability to drive properly, not that its an ability you will always use when behind the wheel.

Failing the test means you have not established that you have this ability. It doesn't say you don't have it, only that you haven't demonstrated it.

These measures are not going to solve a damn thing,
...
its just reducing the numbers on the road, thereby logically reducing the number of accidents,

Yeah...loss of life isn't worth solving. We should, in fact, remove any existing legislation designed to help minimise carnage on the roads. It doesn't solve a damn thing either. Bring back the drunk drivers - taking them off the roads was just daft!!!

using this same logic why not take all non-commercial vehicles off the road, problem solved, zero road deaths.

I suspect that the problem is that you mis-understand the reasoning and logic.

add this to breathalizer immobilizer in your car, which i think some countries have made mandatory or at least some US states then you start making a difference,

You're advocating taking drivers off the roads because statistics say that some small percentage of them are dangerous. Do you even see the irony in this suggestion?

cos i guarantee these measures are just a drop in the ocean aren't going to make a blind bit of real difference, even if they are a step in the right direction.

The guarantee of an angry young unqualified driver who is railing against rule-changes that will adversely effect them, with little more than anger and emotion as the supporting evidence.......ok......you've convinced me.

Stark

bonkey wrote:

Bring back the drunk drivers - taking them off the roads was just daft!!!

Funnily enough, all this whining reminds me of the same arguments the drunks had when breath testing was brought it. "Wahh, why do they have to do breath testing in the morning? I need my car to drive to work pissed. So what if I'm not capable of handling a vehicle in my inebriated state. My convenience matters more" etc.

Jumpy

givyjoe81 wrote: »

The day i listen to someone like you is the same day you actually give respect to other peoples opinions.

Im an excellent driver. I want to fly QANTAS. Gotta get my boxer shorts at K-Mart.

Jumpy

Are there the same laws in LTD as in feedback? When a single user degrades a decent thread I think you are required to bombard them with lolcats.
I have just read the same argument four times, I am almost ready to call troll. I dont think I have seen anyone take quite so long to 'get it' unless they are seeking to provoke.
That and the very low post count definitely makes me lean towards deliberate troll.

givyjoe81

Jumpy wrote: »

Are there the same laws in LTD as in feedback? When a single user degrades a decent thread I think you are required to bombard them with lolcats.
I have just read the same argument four times, I am almost ready to call troll. I dont think I have seen anyone take quite so long to 'get it' unless they are seeking to provoke.
That and the very low post count definitely makes me lean towards deliberate troll.

not sure what your on about, im new to this registered ages ago but never posted didnt know too much about it, you and you alone have resorted to personal attacks and questioning one's education etc etc. I took it upon myself to delete some of my posts clogging the thread, but what have you done? Continue to post rubbish clogging the posts, i did it last night and apologised immediately, havent seen you do a thing so far. Il apologise again to anyone who thinks im deliberately clogging the threads, but im not, just trying to express my opinion which is what we are all here to do.

Jumpy

givyjoe81 wrote: »

not sure what your on about, im new to this registered ages ago but never posted didnt know too much about it, you and you alone have resorted to personal attacks and questioning one's education etc etc. I took it upon myself to delete some of my posts clogging the thread, but what have you done? Continue to post rubbish clogging the posts, i did it last night and apologised immediately, havent seen you do a thing so far. Il apologise again to anyone who thinks im deliberately clogging the threads, but im not, just trying to express my opinion which is what we are all here to do.

Ok. If you are new to this, then dont assume its just text. Constant repeating of the same argument has the same effect as in normal conversation. Repeating it in multiple threads is the equivalent of walking into multiple rooms. Very soon people who are in the rooms dislike you, and those that now enter now have to talk or 'post' in an uncomfortable environment. Generally you make your point and then make your responses to peoples answers. If it starts to go around in circles then you STOP and you walk away.
Notice that every response you have received lately is negative. It means people do not agree with you. Not a big deal, but you are not making any friends by pushing the point. It is now time to let other people start talking about the original topic of the thread.

Seth Brundle

Can someone give me a reason to keep this thread open?

MrPudding

Jumpy wrote: »

Very soon people who are in the rooms dislike you,

Too late......:D

MrP

Wishbone Ash

kbannon wrote: »

Can someone give me a reason to keep this thread open?

No!