Makes much more sense... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by LotusElise
But regular retesting should be considered. It would certainly sharpen up people's skills and make them value their licence more.
Printable View
Makes much more sense... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by LotusElise
But regular retesting should be considered. It would certainly sharpen up people's skills and make them value their licence more.
Good point Caroline. Also raising the age to 18 wont make the slightest difference, all that will happen is that people wait longer. Simply before even being allowed a prov they should do a maturity test to see if they are up to learning to drive :)
I'm dead against the retest idea. It cost me so much money, time and effort, not mention mental and emotional torture to pass the damn thing, I'd like to think that's me past that stage. :s
Or are you like my dad and are worried that you wouldn't pass now because you have forgoten how to drive properly and got into bad habits? :p :
So if this rule passes, what happens to the people who are not yet 18 but have passed their driving tests and have a license.
Make them take the test again(for free) when they're 18.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaikkonenRules
I should like to point out with all of this that society expects its members by some degree to become fully functioning citizens by the time they are 18. At age 18 the Inland Revenue relaxes the dependancy rules, and people have the right to vote.
By raising the driving age to 18, in effect you're confining people who might be qualified to work, to a life of scrounging and using public transport, which might sound useful in theory, but what if you happen to be an apprentice for a plumber or a sparky? What of the young parents with kids who may need to cart them around? If you're working at Tesco until midnight, how are you supposed to get home after the trains and buses stop?
By the time I was 18 I was independent from my parents and was already driving from Blackpool up and down the highways of the realm. I had a job and was "mature" enough to pay bills and upkeep on it even though it was crap.
How do you reconcile that to the removal of freedoms that would be considered normal elsewhere?
Raising the age limit won't make a tiny bit of difference. I see a lot of young drivers come thru my doors and I know damn well after teaching them everything I know about safe defensive driving, 50% of them will be driving like tits within a month. It makes no difference if they are 17 and a half or 18 and a day.
Personally I favour a system similar to the french, whereby driving is taught in stages. Perhaps as young as 15 as part of school education and can be passed in stages from private road training to master basic skills, onto day time driving, night, motorway etc. Regulation could be achieved by enforcing the use of P plates (linked to the insurance and number plate recognition) of different colours to denote how qualified any particular driver is, therefore the police or an automated camera could detect any driver using roads beyond their level.
I don't favour the limitations on vehicles, we have all seen enough 106's or saxo's filled with teen's driving flat out - even a 1.0L can hit nearly 100mph. Its the driver attitude that needs adjusting not the cars they can drive.
On a related issue, I think the Government ought to consider some kind of legal definition of what constitutes a 'minor', for want of a better word. The inconsistency between different aspects of life in this respect does seem unnecessary. How can some public events, for instance, state that a child is 'under 12' for the purpose of their entry fees, while others take the relevant age to be 16? There are other, better examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
True. I remember having to pay full fare on the train to the cinema, but not being allowed to see an 18 film!
I'm actually with you here. I got so nervous during the driving test that I found it really stressful and difficult. Driving normally, this does not happen. The on-the-spot nature of driving tests doesn't replicate real driving experience very well. The presence of the examiner was distracting for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain
Structured driver training, with learning in stages, sounds very sensible. I would include compulsory night lessons and additional motorway training after an initial test pass in this as well.
Perhaps the rules can be changed in such a way that you can get a provisional licence at 17 years, and thus be able to drive supervised and learn, but you can't sit your test and get a full licence until your 18th birthday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Well I have to go through it all again tomorrow for the 3rd time :s
:uhoh:
Good Luck!Quote:
Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow
Just be calm and steady and you will passQuote:
Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow
And remember to drive on the correct side of the road. Add that to being calm and steady, and you won't go far wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Seriously, good luck.
I am pleased to announce that I have passed it! :up:
Happy as Larry!! :D
:beer:
Good stuff :) Now get prepared for people to tailgate you and cut you up and so on :mark:
Well done Jon. :)
Dammit, I was hoping you'd equal my record to make me look a bit better. ;) :p :
Well done. :)
I haven't been out on my own yet, but did anyone find the thought of going out on the road by themselves a little worrying? :s
First drive I ever did was to a karting track :) A little strange at first but it's good to be on your own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow
Well done Jon!
Going out on your own feels a bit weird at first, but you get used to it really quickly! If you haven't been out already, get out there as soon as you can. You won't regret it.
For my first solo drive, I surprised my mum with a visit to her work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow
Not at all. It was great! the ultimate 15 year old (Texas motorcycle license age) freedom! A candy apple red Honda Motosport SL 90, a pack of Camels, gas at $0.18 a gallon and camping on the beach in Galveston. Oh yeah, liability insurance....$16.00 a year.
Didn't bother kme at all on either the motorcycle or in the car.
When I was doing my first lesson a customer in the bar where I worked got all 'me man, you pathetic woman' on me and said most women never drive on motorways their entire life, so I passed first time and drove first time out alone along the motorway just to prove him wrong. Having passed my bike test, I wasn't new to motorways, otherwise I wouldn't recommend copying me. The man, by the way, lost his licence soon after :laugh:
My daughter had her 1st lession last year at 12!!! and about to have her 2nd lession.
OK so it's not on the road but at Rockingham race circuit in a mini with a proper instructor. I am hoping to get her to have a couple more before she is 18 so when she does pass she will have respect for driving and being on the road.
I've always thought the limit for alcohol, 18 films, driving, voting and so on should be lowered to 16. Afterall you're allowed to fight for your country and leave school to work, legally have sex, why not the rest? But I understand why people have problems with that :)
It's all well and good if you live in London, with good public transport, but if you live in the country or most other places you're screwed.
I would tend to agree. This is one of the main reasons why I think there should be a uniform national age for everything — and better rural public transport too, of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew
It seems to be swaying to 18. To buy fags soon you'll have to be 18 and I think I heard plans to change the school leaving age to 18 too?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I think that's pretty hard to do. It wouldn't be commercially viable for any company and subsidies would only last for so long.
What, taking the age to 18 or setting a uniform age? If you mean the latter, I'm not sure it would be too difficult. As Dave pointed out earlier, some of the discrepancies are rather ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew
The difficult thing is the argument that 'if 16, why not 15'. Well, I understand that totally, but I think there does have to be some sort of age limit, and 16 seems sensible. However, when I was 16, I don't remember being irritated that I couldn't vote or so various other things, so it's a difficult conundrum.
How do you intend to pay for this improved rural public transport? Additional taxes and fees?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Increased professionalism on the part of existing operators would be a good start. There also needs to be the realisation that rural transport is a necessary service even though it may not be commercially viable all the time. Not everyone in rural areas can be expected to have access to a car, and those under the driving age or who choose not to drive need some form of regular, affordable transport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
I meant about the buses :) For example from the town I live near, to get the bus to Plymouth takes 45 minutes and costs something like £4.50 return, the train 15 minutes and about £2 return and the car is about 10 minutes and parking is pretty much £1 = 1 hour.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
In rural areas, buses are going to have to make more stops to make it viable and use low quality roads to do so = more expensive and longer. People would still use the car :)
At 16 you are given certain responsibilities, such as you can fight for the country, leave school, get a job and pay taxes to a government that you have no decision in. If the school leaving age is raised, then 18 will become a fair age to raise it all to - even if I don't really agree with it. With regards to voting, that's all subjective.
You didn't answer the question. How is it going to be paid for and by whom? Those that could drive but merely choose not to drive should feel to make other arrangements on their own.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Were you equally adverse to accepting the government tax money that paid for your schooling and medical needs for 16 years, while you contributed little or nothing in the way of taxes? How often are you allowed to directly vote on taxes or fees anyway? Do they come out and have a public vote about raising VAT taxes, or income taxes, or road use fees?Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew
I had no choice in the matter. We could go onto other things that waste tax money, but that'd just go around in circles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
Rarely do the public get to vote on individual matters anyway, tax or not.
You're right. I wonder why we aren't allowed to vote on individual tax matters? Could it be that taxes would be far lower and a far higher level of accountibility would be expected for those taxes that were collected?Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew
How many of us have seen politicians of one party or another shouting loudly to the world while pushing for a new program that will do all sorts of wonderful tricks and best of all, it won't cost us a penny in new or additional taxes or fees only to come, hat in hand later on, mumbling about overly optimistic projections and errors in the base calculations, etc, oh, and by the way, we are going to have to raise taxes to pay for this mess? My feeling on that is that any politician that was dumb enough to vote for the project in the first place should be billed, along with his other "yea" voting buddies, his share of the deficit, to be paid out of his personal wealth. Now that would be a major step forward in political accountability.
No it wouldn't. It would be grossly unfair. Unlike you, I do not think that taxation is automatically a bad thing. I tend not to worry about it, because I believe I pay a fair amount of tax.
What's your solution to funding improved local public transport, then?
And not have transport provided for them? No, I can't agree with that at all. What other arrangements do you think would be practical? Personal helicopters? Jet packs? Expensive taxis? Public transport links are vital for many local communities from which, for one reason or another, people have difficulty travelling to elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
As for my answer not having been clear, I think it was good enough. Some of the improvements would not require extra funding. Local authorities could also use existing transport subsidies more effectively. I don't think it would take a massive injection of extra funding.
Now that I can drive I wouldn't even consider using public transport, because it is FAR too expensive, inconvenient, slow, dirty and less pleasurable than driving. My house to work is a 8 minute journey in a car, on a bus it is a 20 minute one and costs over £3 or a single :mad: Also, because it is only an hourly service I would either be 10 minutes late or 50 minutes early.