Stupid young male drivers: how can we stop them?

OldNotWIse

robbie7730 wrote: »

It seems you did. I am simply saying that knowing them actual stopping distance figures is not of much benefit while driving. I never said it should not be asked in the test.

You have somehow turned that into me saying I dont think they should ask about it in the test.

The useful thing about studying the stopping distances when people are learning in my opinion, is it shows the major difference between wet and dry conditions, more so than knowing the actual figures themselves. And for each doubling of speed when an emergency occurs, it takes double the reaction distance covered before braking starts (obviously enough), but 4 times the braking distance to stop once braking begins.

So you think that the test should ask things that clearly have no benefit while driving? funny type of test...

Bruthal

OldNotWIse wrote: »

So you think that the test should ask things that clearly have no benefit while driving? funny type of test...

I dont remember saying they should ask it, perhaps you can point it out.

They ask if driving testers are exempt from wearing seat belts, which if we go by your post above, must be important to the safe driving of drivers, since the test asks it. Perhaps you could explain how knowing the answer to that will be of use to a driver driving to work in the morning?

OldNotWIse

robbie7730 wrote: »

I dont remember saying they should ask it, perhaps you can point it out.

They ask if driving testers are exempt from wearing seat belts, which if we go by your post above, must be important to the safe driving of drivers, since the test asks it. Perhaps you could explain how knowing the answer to that will be of use to a driver driving to work in the morning?

Well I asked if you thought they shouldn't and you said I had misinterpreted your meaning so I think that only leaves the option of you thinking that they should..

Either that or you dont have an opinion on it either way, but in that case I dont know why you are still talking about it

Bruthal

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Well I asked if you thought they shouldn't and you said I had misinterpreted your meaning so I think that only leaves the option of you thinking that they should..

Either that or you dont have an opinion on it either way, but in that case I dont know why you are still talking about it

You seem confused, here you are asking about it

So you think that the test should ask things that clearly have no benefit while driving? funny type of test...

Now, tell me the benefit of knowing the exact stopping distance of a car going 100kph in the wet? You claim the test asks it, and so it must be important because it is asked.

And if anything the test asks is important like you seem to suggest, tell me why it is important to know whether a tester is exempt from wearing a seat belt or not.

Sindri

robbie7730 wrote: »

And in what driving situation will the answer to that be of any use?

When you're driving on a wet surface at 100km/h an hour?

If you didn't know that you'd fail your driving test.

Bruthal

Sindri wrote: »

When you're driving on a wet surface at 100km/h an hour?

Are you serious? You are driving at 100kph in the wet, and you will need to know from the time you hit the brakes in an emergency, how many meters you will stop in? Tell me a scenario where knowing that exact figure will help you, and not knowing it will leave you in trouble....

Will you know the answer for all speeds, all road conditions? What about 95kph on a road that is greasy from hot sunshine, and is now wet suddenly? Whats the stopping distance then? Or do you only need to know 3 or 4 speeds/stopping distances, and just always drive at them speeds?

If you didn't know that you'd fail your driving test.

Well, the answer varies so widely because of different tyres, road surfaces, weight of car (passengers) etc, that the one given in the book is based on a certain set of criteria. It can vary very widely between different tyre makes on the same car, let alone different car makes and models.

partyatmygaff

robbie7730 wrote: »

Are you serious? You are driving at 100kph in the wet, and you will need to know from the time you hit the brakes in an emergency, how many meters you will stop in? Tell me a scenario where knowing that exact figure will help you, and not knowing it will leave you in trouble....

Knowing the exact figure isn't much help. Knowing that it's a lot more than in perfect conditions keeps you aware that you need to keep some space from the car in front of you.

Bruthal

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Knowing the exact figure isn't much help. Knowing that it's a lot more than in perfect conditions keeps you aware that you need to keep some space from the car in front of you.

Yea I mentioned that earlier....

robbie7730 wrote: »

The useful thing about studying the stopping distances when people are learning in my opinion, is it shows the major difference between wet and dry conditions, more so than knowing the actual figures themselves.

Wee Willy Harris

There's no stopping em. Its like they just drank a 6-pack of Relentless

I'd be in favour of banning under 25s from driving, cos we sure didn't get near one at that age in my time. That is all

Sindri

robbie7730 wrote: »

Are you serious? You are driving at 100kph in the wet, and you will need to know from the time you hit the brakes in an emergency, how many meters you will stop in? Tell me a scenario where knowing that exact figure will help you,

When you're less than 122 metres away from the car in front of you.

robbie7730 wrote: »

and not knowing it will leave you in trouble....

When you're less than 122 metres from the car in front of you.

robbie7730 wrote: »

Will you know the answer for all speeds, all road conditions? What about 95kph on a road that is greasy from hot sunshine, and is now wet suddenly? Whats the stopping distance then? Or do you only need to know 3 or 4 speeds/stopping distances, and just always drive at them speeds?



Well, the answer varies so widely because of different tyres, road surfaces, weight of car (passengers) etc, that the one given in the book is based on a certain set of criteria. It can vary very widely between different tyre makes on the same car, let alone different car makes and models.

D.O.E.S.N.'T. M.A.T.T.E.R.

It is required to pass the test. Take your complaints to the RSA, not me.

Bruthal

Sindri wrote: »

robbie7730 wrote: »

Will you know the answer for all speeds, all road conditions? What about 95kph on a road that is greasy from hot sunshine, and is now wet suddenly? Whats the stopping distance then? Or do you only need to know 3 or 4 speeds/stopping distances, and just always drive at them speeds?



Well, the answer varies so widely because of different tyres, road surfaces, weight of car (passengers) etc, that the one given in the book is based on a certain set of criteria. It can vary very widely between different tyre makes on the same car, let alone different car makes and models.

D.O.E.S.N.'T. M.A.T.T.E.R.

It is required to pass the test. Take your complaints to the RSA, not me.

Doesnt matter? Other driving conditions dont matter, because the test wants a certain answer written in a book? And an answer that can vary which is part of my point.

Also, you think Im complaining to you? I never complained at all. Simply have the opinion that knowing a figure of 122 meters means little when out driving. Neither does knowing whether a tester is exempt from wearing a seat belt or not. But the test probably asks it. I already said its useful to know, as it compares wet to dry. But my opinion is it is not a figure in drivers minds when driving. Anyone with an ounce of cop on would realise that.

How do you know the car in front is 122 meters ahead? How do you overtake a car? You do it from 122 meters back do you?

What if the stopping distance is 135 meters in todays conditions, but you think it is 122 because the test says so. Doomed are you?

Ever hear of the 2 second rule (4 seconds for wet), for drivers that cant judge safe distances per conditions. Look it up.

OldNotWIse

robbie7730 wrote: »

You seem confused, here you are asking about it


Now, tell me the benefit of knowing the exact stopping distance of a car going 100kph in the wet? You claim the test asks it, and so it must be important because it is asked.

And if anything the test asks is important like you seem to suggest, tell me why it is important to know whether a tester is exempt from wearing a seat belt or not.

I cant believe you are still going on about this, like an entire night has passed lol, I've had to remind myself what the points were

I dont believe I ever actually claimed that these questions are important. I stated that the test ASKS them and therefore I familiarised myself with them in order to PASS said test so that I could (legally at least) get behind the wheel. I hope that is not too confusing for you?? I cannot really break it down into simpler terms tbh

Bruthal

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I cant believe you are still going on about this

And yet, here you are back yourself

I dont believe I ever actually claimed that these questions are important.

No?

OldNotWIse wrote: »

So you think that the test should ask things that clearly have no benefit while driving? funny type of test...

It seemed you thought it was important there^^

I stated that the test ASKS them and therefore I familiarised myself with them in order to PASS said test so that I could (legally at least) get behind the wheel. I hope that is not too confusing for you??

You now say the same as my point was all along, that its not important while driving. And you mention the word "confusing".

Apt username.

I've had to remind myself what the points were

So I noticed.

I cannot really break it down into simpler terms tbh

What, that its only needed for the test, not really when driving? What a revelation. Thanks for the laugh though:pac:

OldNotWIse

robbie7730 wrote: »

And yet, here you are back yourself



No?

It seemed you thought it was important there^^



You now say the same as my point was all along, that its not important while driving. And you mention the word "confusing".

Apt username.


So I noticed.




What, that its only needed for the test, not really when driving? What a revelation. Thanks for the laugh though:pac:

...did you fail your test based on the stopping distance questions?

scamalert

Heres a good one:
what do you do when your car suddenly goes dead in a tunnel.
Spoiler:

Put your seat belt on

This thread went to $hit with all the breaking crap,how do you break on black ice,on diesel patch,on a road full of stone chips ? Im always more concerned when some %^^ker with a horsebox on his tail blocks all the road,makes a tail of 2km cars and cant pull into hard shoulder,i think tractors should be banned from any public roads,instead they drive and drop $hit all over the road and you have to run into it once you just went trough 5 hours of detailing the car.

Bruthal

OldNotWIse wrote: »

...did you fail your test based on the stopping distance questions?

I thought the comedy show was over:p

Bruthal

scamalert wrote: »

This thread went to $hit

Even more so now with tractors and horseboxes in it.

scamalert

robbie7730 wrote: »

Even more so now with tractors and horseboxes in it.

why not :pac: its already 5 pages full off crap,as for breaking the scientists discovered that human brains contain 95% of fluid,in most cases its brake fluid .

Bruthal

scamalert wrote: »

why not :pac: its already 5 pages full off crap,as for breaking the scientists discovered that human brains contain 95% of fluid,in most cases its brake fluid .

robbie7730 wrote: »

I thought the comedy show was over:p

Obviously not:D

speedboatchase

Fire? Has anyone suggested fire?

CruelCoin

speedboatchase wrote: »

Fire? Has anyone suggested fire?

Along the "Kill it with Fire!" lines?

No, they haven't, but not a bad idea.

Cantona's Collars

My pet hate is the car sticker "You just got passed by a girl".While not as reckless as their male counterparts there are some loons around Irish roads.

The last time we had a blitz on boy racers here in Enniscorthy,all of the ones who ended up in court were from rural areas,2 were from another county.Sample charges were,defective,unroadworthy cars,no tax & no insurance.All were young male drivers.

12gauge dave

Being a boy racer during the boom and now a little older i realise the way i drove was wreckless but at the time i thought every road as a rally stage! i really do think males under 21 especially should have some sort of restriction of power on there cars!
Boyracers are nearly extinct here since the recession in 2008 cars stopped being imported from japan! Young males losing jobs/going to australia so its not as big a problem as it used to be but boys will be boys wether it's in a ferrari or micra

grenache

ScumLord wrote: »

So now young men can't work, or if they want to work will have to move to the same area so they can take advantage of public transport. Maybe we can make some sort of camp where we can concentrate the numbers of men between the age of 17 and 25. Keep an eye on them and make sure they don't touch anything.

Your suggestion of blocking people from their freedoms is nonsense and would be destructive more than anything.

The only thing that's destructive here is the young males on our roads, who bring death and destruction every week to a family. Let them use public transport if they want to go to work. There are public bus services for every national primary route in the country.

As the statistics show, young men do not in any way deserve to be let near a driving wheel. As I've already said , they prove it every weekend without fail.

Get them off the road and let the rest of us drive in peace.

partyatmygaff

grenache wrote: »

The only thing that's destructive here is the young males on our roads, who bring death and destruction every week to a family.

"Only" because obviously young men are responsible for every single car accident. :rolleyes:

Let them use public transport if they want to go to work. There are public bus services for every national primary route in the country.

And everyone lives on or beside a national primary route?

Public transport is poor in Dublin and more or less non-existent outside of the cities.

As the statistics show, young men do not in any way deserve to be let near a driving wheel.
As I've already said , they prove it every weekend without fail.

Neither do quite a lot of older drivers nor do quite a lot of women. Funnily enough, your age and your gender don't determine your driving ability.

In case you misread your dictionary, "Young man" isn't a synonym for "Bad driver".

Get them off the road and let the rest of us drive in peace.

I really haven't read anything as ridiculous as this for quite some time.

Bruthal

partyatmygaff wrote: »

"Only" because obviously young men are responsible for every single car accident. :rolleyes:

And everyone lives on or beside a national primary route?

Public transport is poor in Dublin and more or less non-existent outside of the cities.

Neither do quite a lot of older drivers nor do quite a lot of women. Funnily enough, your age and your gender don't determine your driving ability.

In case you misread your dictionary, "Young man" isn't a synonym for "Bad driver".

I really haven't read anything as ridiculous as this for quite some time.

Of course, he/she would exempt themselves if they were in the age group they want banned from driving.

ScumLord

grenache wrote: »

As the statistics show, young men do not in any way deserve to be let near a driving wheel. As I've already said , they prove it every weekend without fail.

And once they're out of the way statistics may show that old people cause the most accidents so we should ban them too. Once they're banned we may see that a lot of accidents involved commercial vehicles so they might as well be banned.

_rebelkid

ScumLord wrote: »

And once they're out of the way statistics may show that old people cause the most accidents so we should ban them too. Once they're banned we may see that a lot of accidents involved commercial vehicles so they might as well be banned.

And once commercial vehicles are banned, they'll find that people are the most prominent cause of crashes, so people will be banned

HeyThereDeliah

grenache wrote: »

The only thing that's destructive here is the young males on our roads, who bring death and destruction every week to a family. Let them use public transport if they want to go to work. There are public bus services for every national primary route in the country.

As the statistics show, young men do not in any way deserve to be let near a driving wheel. As I've already said , they prove it every weekend without fail.

Get them off the road and let the rest of us drive in peace.

Bit unfair on all the young men who drive within the rules of the road.
Those stats they produce are not always fair IMO. Lots of older drivers involved in accidents as well. Girls are just as bad for speeding as men are.

ScumLord

_rebelkid wrote: »

And once commercial vehicles are banned, they'll find that people are the most prominent cause of crashes, so people will be banned

Once they get good automated systems this will more than likely happen.

Spread

The opposite of the unofficial Chinese solution!