Rules proposed to be changed for new fully licensed drivers

Wishbone Ash

Learning from experience is what's important not experience itself. I'm sure we all know the elderly aunt' types who have been driving around for years but never really got the hang of it. In saying that, they are probably statistically 'safer' than many other drivers!

It's interesting now to see what excuses people come up with. Until recently, those 'experienced' Learners always used the waiting times as an excuse.,I always found that somewhat suspect as, even at their peak, only one third of Learner Drivers had applied for a test.

Berty

javaboy wrote: »

I wouldn't be opposed to that idea although I think if they sorted out the original driving test it wouldn't be necessary.

Drivers Ed in schools could sort much of the problems out.

A lot of what is discussed on this forum relates to poor driving discipline. Lane positioning, correct use of the vehicles controls, how to change a wheel, headlights, check oil etc etc.

If they are considering teaching 5 years old sex education then surely they can consider teaching drivers ed.

Orla K

For the driving experience thing I personally think it should be more like flying licences where you have regular check ups with an instructor. I've thought this since I before I was legally allowed to drive because of my father, he was an awful driver, he had all the bad habits. My brother then started driving and instantly picked up all of his bad habits (six years on a prov licence)

Luckly since then both have gotten better, my father because of his girlfriend she was terrifed of his driving, she'd be in the front screaming. My brother because he wants a full licence, in fairness to him he get unbelievely nervious days before the test, he's normally calm when driving.

My uncle also said that driving should be checked the same as flying, he has a pilot licence and used be be a garda.

I also know people that never did any test they just ticked a box to get the licence they wanted.

Wishbone Ash

Orla K wrote: »

I also know people that never did any test they just ticked a box to get the licence they wanted.

Nothing particularly unusual about that Orla. It was standard practise before the introduction of driving tests in 1964. Many drivers over the age of 61 may not have done a driving test.

Voodoomelon

I think I broke all records in regards learning to drive. Bought a tincan 1997 Polo in February, never sat behind a wheel EVER, not a clue how to drive. Applied for my test and got 5 or 6 lessons in the mean time, whilst doing the usual out and about on a provisional (well in those days anyways). Got my test in early May 12 weeks later and passed with 3 ticks, instructor said i was "truely excellent" . Got my licence a few days later and the next day I flew to England and brought home a 7 series BMW.

999cc to 2800cc in 12 weeks, I could see that bothering a few politicians alright. However I am a very conservative driver, I hate excessive speed, take pleasure in letting people out and manoevering well. That's why it maddens me to see so much bad driving from OLDER drivers. You can't just tackle new drivers when there are so many bad drivers out there for 20 years and more. The whole system needs a total overhall.

GreeBo

I think we all agree that passing the test doesnt make you a good driver, but there has to be some sort of initial testing to weed out the hopeless.
I also dont know how you would measure experience. You could have a full licence for 5 years only using it on weekends, or have it for 1 year but use it everyday. How do you account for that in the restrictions?

I think the easiest way to do it is with Drivers Ed. If people are forced to take 1 or 2 years works of Drivers Ed classes while in school etc then at least everyone has that level of experience of controlled driving. If your first 2 years of driving are only ever with an instructor then you are less likely to develop the bad habits that people get when they are out practicing on their own.

Climate Expert

Traumadoc wrote: »

Where statistics ever provided that show that people on provisional licenses were more likely to be involved in RTAs?

Statistics point to the opposite, ie. they are involved proportionally less. This was reported a few years back.

Wishbone Ash

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I just find it extremely difficult to believe that someone could pass a driving test without L plates displayed. It's one of the most basic requirements and the first thing the examiner checks when brought out to the vehicle.

Maybe L plates would be pushing it but my sister had her test a few months ago. I went with her to the test centre so was watching when she came out to do her test. Now she had a female tester and the other two lads doing tests at the same time had men. It was pouring rain and the two men did all the checks on the cars, made them open the bonnet etc. Then out came my sis. her tester took one look at the rain and jumped straight into the car and they took off she didnt look at anything except maybe the discs. It was quite funny actually. She was first to leave and was back 20mins before one of the lads and we were gone before the other lad got back and she passed! The tester you get can make a big difference imo.

Orla K

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Nothing particularly unusual about that Orla. It was standard practise before the introduction of driving tests in 1964. Many drivers over the age of 61 may not have done a driving test.

The worst thing is that there is nothing unusual about it, I know one of these people that doesn't see anything wrong in stopping on a roundabout to ask directions! Another never knows what lane to be in, panics and ends up confusing everyone on the road.

Experience only really counts in reaction time.

Yakult

Im not for this, if you have bad habits from day one, your more than likely still gonna have them at day 23829. Its just putting more crap on top of good good drivers.

Also, as for the guards. They barely enforce the new L drivers law, the whole R plates would just mean alot more on their plate and just more hassel.

superjosh9

R_H_C_P wrote: »

Im not for this, if you have bad habits from day one, your more than likely still gonna have them at day 23829. Its just putting more crap on top of good good drivers.

Couldn't disagree with you more. All I know is that when I was younger, and my friends were younger, we all drove like morans - and that was with a full license. You telling me that someone in their 40s, married with kids, will drive like they're 17??????????? No dice.

Every single day I learn something new on the roads, and I think back to all those 'near misses' that make me a better driver. It's these 'near misses' that count for experience, which those straight out of the learner school don't have. In fact, they have absolutely nothing coming out. I've come across a few kids in my time that have been given high-powered cars straight after they get their test, and they kill themselves, or worse, someone else. Now I don't want to generalise that, some kids are great drivers and can handle speed and have good coordination, but not all of them do/can, and everytime I see a 17 year old in a brand new Mini Cooper S Works, my head falls. It should not be allowed, for any money.

So, I reckon it's about f-ing time something like this was done.

Anyway, a 17-21 year old should be happy they're driving *anything*.

Edit: I seem a bit angry here, don't mean to be - and not directing this at anyone.

Voodoomelon

I agree with you to an extent, however you're generalising the fact that all young drivers drive like morons, which isn't true.

I would agree that young people have it too easy these days, as soon as you're 17 now, you get a car. I know of students in secondary school driving to school. Is the world gone mad?

geoff29

superjosh9 wrote: »

Now I don't want to generalise that, some kids are great drivers and can handle speed and have good coordination, but not all of them do/can,...

Voodoomelon wrote: »

I agree with you to an extent, however you're generalising the fact that all young drivers drive like morons, which isn't true.

was he?

btw, I agree with both of you!

Voodoomelon

Well that's what I got from the line about him and all his friends driving like morans, and now that hes older is now a better driver.

javaboy

Simeon Old Pellet wrote: »

Now she had a female tester and the other two lads doing tests at the same time had men. It was pouring rain and the two men did all the checks on the cars, made them open the bonnet etc. Then out came my sis. her tester took one look at the rain and jumped straight into the car and they took off she didnt look at anything except maybe the discs. It was quite funny actually. She was first to leave and was back 20mins before one of the lads and we were gone before the other lad got back and she passed! The tester you get can make a big difference imo.

Funnily enough I had a female tester too and it started raining midway through the test. When it came to the technical checks, she made sure to pick ones that could be answered without having to get out and demonstrate anything. She asked about checking the oil. I asked if she wanted me to show her and she said "Nah no need. It's raining. Just talk me through it."

seanybiker

restricted license sounds like a good idea. Bikers have to drive crap bikes for two years after passing test

towel401

javaboy wrote: »

It might be free WiFi all right but WiFi doesn't stand for Wireless Free Internet.

it does now.
its actually better than the old thing it used to stand for

javaboy

seanybiker wrote: »

restricted license sounds like a good idea. Bikers have to drive crap bikes for two years after passing test

Yet you don't have to actually ride a bike between the time you pass your test and the time you lose the restrictions. The same way you don't have to drive during the 6 months that people on 1st learner licences cannot apply for their test.

If the test was decent enough, there would be no need for delays or restrictions.

towel401

ah yes keep making it harder so in a few years all we're left with is driverless electric cars that won't go past 40 mph. all in the name of safety and the environment

ninty9er

Voodoomelon wrote: »

I agree with you to an extent, however you're generalising the fact that all young drivers drive like morons, which isn't true.

I would agree that young people have it too easy these days, as soon as you're 17 now, you get a car. I know of students in secondary school driving to school. Is the world gone mad?

Who's generalising now?

towel401 wrote: »

it does now.
its actually better than the old thing it used to stand for

I pay for my WiFi and the network is locked, so it certainly doesn't stand for Wireless Free Internet....it does however stand for Wireless Fidelity.

Oh and since when is there a 4th test centre in Limerick City??

Marcus.Aurelius

I can't imagine the R plate idea being passed. The last thing we need is another bunch of drivers limited to a lower speed clogging up our roads. If irish drivers had a shred of common decency to each other, then it would be a useful idea.

As it stands, it's ridiculous.

Voodoomelon

ninty9er wrote: »

Who's generalising now?

Point accepted, however I was referring more to the fact that once you're 17, you're fast tracked by your parents or your mates to get driving as soon as possible. Perhaps that's a generalisation of the country, however its certainly true of my area where most of the 17-18 years olds I know of are at least learning to drive, if not driving already.

Flyer1

If it ain't broke.......

L1011

Voodoomelon wrote: »

Point accepted, however I was referring more to the fact that once you're 17, you're fast tracked by your parents or your mates to get driving as soon as possible. Perhaps that's a generalisation of the country, however its certainly true of my area where most of the 17-18 years olds I know of are at least learning to drive, if not driving already.

Its a country thing. Same in the northwestern scions of my family but in work theres people pushing 30 starting to learn now.