Just how bad are drivers, in general?

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Have you reviewed the Wimbledon tragedy? School children, eating lunch, not even on the road.

The driver was a 46 year old who had an epileptic fit. Her epilepsy was previously undiagnosed.
What this has to do with young drivers and GDL, I'm not sure.

Would a smaller vehicle caused so much tragic loss of life? Possibly - but that depends on many factors, including how the structural integrity of the a building is compromised. Taking out a support pillar could still cause an upper floor to collapse. If the size of the vehicle was a contributing factor to the scale of the incident, that incident makes a case for banning SUVs, not GDL.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Have you reviewed the Wimbledon tragedy? School children, eating lunch, not even on the road.

I hadn't heard the outcome of that - epileptic seizure according to Wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wimbledon_school_crash

[Edit: crossed with above]

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Is this a sensible basis for law-making? I mean, if Mossad choose to hunt everyone on this thread down and kill us in our sleep with AK47s/semtex, that's hard to stop with simple legislation; but I still think we should have laws against carrying weapons, and against shooting/stabbing people.

My argument is that the most risky cohort should be prevented from obtaining a full driving license in the first place unless their attitude can be improved - and that legislation should support that.

The comparison you are making makes no sense.

On Edit: Society in general does not need vehicles that do 0-60 in less 4 seconds, electronically limited to 155 mph. I'd much rather sensible restrictions were placed on all drivers.

 

[matticus]

The comparison you are making makes no sense.

Does too.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Does too.

We banned handguns and automatic weapons. We didn't introduce graduated gun licenses.

 

[matticus]

We banned handguns and automatic weapons. We didn't introduce graduated gun licenses.

And yet some people are licenced to drive cars, but not HGVs. Some are licenced to drive both. Can you explain that?

 

[Profpointy]

After one terrible accident involving a mini-bus the clamped down on mini-bus driving requiring extra tests and so on.

However I read that the safety record of travelling in a minibus was actually better than cars, so for a lot of casual mini bus users the consequence was likely three cars (individually more dangerous) rather than one minibus doing the same trip

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

And yet some people are licenced to drive cars, but not HGVs. Some are licenced to drive both. Can you explain that?

You are adding nothing to the debate.

Please explain to me how GDL will reduce instances of dangerous driving and cut collision and mortality rates?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than banning more powerful and larger vehicles outright?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than installing 'black boxes' in vehicles that warn drivers when they are driving dangerously and automatically report continued bad driving?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than more visible enforcement to deter bad driving and more stringent penalties, including short duration driving bans and mandaory education for first offences?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than improving the standard of driver training and improving examination standards?

Please explain to me why GDL is not a soft measure that will not change much?

 

[matticus]

Yes, but were Hamas in the wrong?

 

[matticus]

You are adding nothing to the debate.

Please explain to me how GDL will reduce instances of dangerous driving and cut collision and mortality rates?

Bigger and more powerful vehicles make more of a mess - often killing lots of people - than other vehicles. Comprendez?
(and common sense suggests it's easier to have those accidents in the first place)

 

[Profpointy]

You are adding nothing to the debate.

Please explain to me how GDL will reduce instances of dangerous driving and cut collision and mortality rates?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than banning more powerful and larger vehicles outright?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than installing 'black boxes' in vehicles that warn drivers when they are driving dangerously and automatically report continued bad driving?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than more visible enforcement to deter bad driving and more stringent penalties, including short duration driving bans and mandaory education for first offences?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than improving the standard of driver training and improving examination standards?

Please explain to me why GDL is not a soft measure that will not change much?

Insurance companies, based on their carefully gathered statistics, are convinced that bigger and / or more powerful cars represent a greater risk so charge higher premiums or refuse to cover younger drivers at all. This is a de-facto age-graduated licence

All the rest of your post is a list of false choices on unrelated measures which may or may not be of merit in and of themselves and have nothing to do with whether more graduated licensing would be of benefit or not. Remember we do already have graduated licences - cars, minibuses, heavier trailers, several levels of trucks and so on.

 

[slow horse]

I'm constantly amazed how many motorists, presumably having had instruction and passed a test, still don't know how to use roundabouts.

 

[Alex321]

You are adding nothing to the debate.

He is adding as much as you are.

Please explain to me how GDL will reduce instances of dangerous driving and cut collision and mortality rates?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than banning more powerful and larger vehicles outright?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than installing 'black boxes' in vehicles that warn drivers when they are driving dangerously and automatically report continued bad driving?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than more visible enforcement to deter bad driving and more stringent penalties, including short duration driving bans and mandaory education for first offences?

Please explain to me how GDL is better than improving the standard of driver training and improving examination standards?

Please explain to me why GDL is not a soft measure that will not change much?

Why would anybody want to "explain" any but the first and last of those, since nobody has suggested it is inherently better than any of those other measures.

So far as the first is concerned, a GDL would reduce the chances of severe accidents among those newly qualified. If you can think of any reason that would NOT reduce instances of dangerous driving, I'd like to see the logic. And certainly mortality rates.

As far as the last goes, I'm not too sure what you mean by a "soft measure". It is just as "hard" IMO as any other legislative measure. It might not change very much, but every little helps, and I am sure it would reduce the number of severe accidents. Newly qualified (and particularly yojbng) people make mistakes. The consequences of those mistakes are likely on average to be less severe than if they were driving larger, more powerful vehicles. There will also be less tendency to show off if they aren't driving something worth showing off in.

 

[mjr]

I'm constantly amazed how many motorists, presumably having had instruction and passed a test, still don't know how to use roundabouts.

That's a big presumption: "It is estimated that around 470,000 drivers on Britain's roads do not possess a valid driving licence[58] and that 5% of drivers are uninsured.[59] In addition, "unlicensed drivers commit 9.3 per cent of all motoring offences. It can also be seen that unlicensed drivers committed nearly a quarter of all insurance offences and almost half of all theft or unauthorised taking offences."[60] " (source)

Another site reckons 470,000 is about 2% of drivers.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Insurance companies, based on their carefully gathered statistics, are convinced that bigger and / or more powerful cars represent a greater risk so charge higher premiums or refuse to cover younger drivers at all. This is a de-facto age-graduated licence

All the rest of your post is a list of false choices on unrelated measures which may or may not be of merit in and of themselves and have nothing to do with whether more graduated licensing would be of benefit or not. Remember we do already have graduated licences - cars, minibuses, heavier trailers, several levels of trucks and so on.

You are almost making my point for me.

I see GDL as a distraction and as we do already in effect have that, legislators would be better spending their time researching other measures - which I would speculate as being more effective.

GDL is tinkering around the edges, whilst maintaining the status quo and placating the motoring lobby.

What we need, is the road safety review that was promised by Government an age ago.