Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • TSR Community Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    From the BBC: the latest government ideas on road safety and young drivers:

    Young drivers could face a curfew as part of government efforts to prevent accidents and reduce "sky-high" insurance premiums.

    They could also be made to spend a year learning before taking their tests.

    And after they pass, their "probation period", during which six - rather than the usual 12 - penalty points results in disqualification, could be extended.
    BBC

    According to the Beeb's article, these were among the key suggestions considered for a full green paper set to be published later in the spring:

    • A curfew for drivers aged 17 to 24
    • Limit on the number of passengers young drivers can carry in their car
    • A zero-alcohol limit.
    • A minimum learning period for drivers once they turn 17, so they get more on-the-road experience.
    • Motorway lessons for learners
    • Extension of the six-point probationary period from two to three years
    • Driving tests changed to include more unsupervised driving time


    As someone who's already got their licence, this doesn't affect me directly but I do find it interesting. Out of all the points, I think the minimum learning period makes most sense. I turned 17 and passed my test within six weeks - far too soon, in retrospect. More time on the road = better drivers. Got to be a good thing.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shooks)
    From the BBC: the latest government ideas on road safety and young drivers:


    BBC

    According to the Beeb's article, these were among the key suggestions considered for a full green paper set to be published later in the spring:

    • A curfew for drivers aged 17 to 24
    • Limit on the number of passengers young drivers can carry in their car
    • A zero-alcohol limit.
    • A minimum learning period for drivers once they turn 17, so they get more on-the-road experience.
    • Motorway lessons for learners
    • Extension of the six-point probationary period from two to three years
    • Driving tests changed to include more unsupervised driving time


    As someone who's already got their licence, this doesn't affect me directly but I do find it interesting. Out of all the points, I think the minimum learning period makes most sense. I turned 17 and passed my test within six weeks - far too soon, in retrospect. More time on the road = better drivers. Got to be a good thing.
    I think there should be motorway driving, but can see how this would be a problem for people in rural areas.

    Yeah I can see with how making a year mandatory as it would be good for the extra practice, but with the cost of driving I wouldn't have been able to afford a years worth of lessons.... Maybe that's just the government getting less young drivers? :/

    The curfew one is silly, that was one of the main reasons for me learning to drive, so I could drive to and from work, but I regularly work till 11 after college, and I'm assuming the curfew would be between 11-6, when I turn 18 there's a possibility of me staying in work till gone 1 in the morning, I would have no way of getting home again.

    Alcohol limit fair enough, but what are the stats for accidents with young drivers where it wasn't their fault? Where it was someone else who had had a bit too much to drink.

    I don't really have anything to comment on extending the 6 points, but tbh I don't really see what affect it would have.

    Yeah maybe the driving test should have a bit more independent driving, problem is people get very flustered over this and therefore fail. Hmmm


    Idk really, some points are good, but a bit unplausable?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shooks)
    • A curfew for drivers aged 17 to 24
    • Limit on the number of passengers young drivers can carry in their car
    • A zero-alcohol limit.
    • A minimum learning period for drivers once they turn 17, so they get more on-the-road experience.
    • Motorway lessons for learners
    • Extension of the six-point probationary period from two to three years
    • Driving tests changed to include more unsupervised driving time
    You can't have a zero-alcohol limit otherwise you'd have no drivers. I think what they mean is the minimum possible alcohol limit. Humans naturally have a certain amount of alcohol in their blood which isn't as a result of drinking an alcoholic beverage.

    Motorways are statistically by far the safest roads. They account for a considerably higher volume of traffic per mile of road compared with other road classes, yet only account for around 5% of road deaths.

    I also think the curfew is a stupid idea. I'd be interested to know how many people die on the roads when it's dark, compared with how many when it's light. Further, are the times arbitrarily set or do they reflect whether it's actually dark outside or not. For instance, in Winter; will young drivers be allowed to drive beyond 3pm if it's dark outside?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Unless there are ways to accurately check blood alcohol content, it would be unfair on the drivers. I have had a few drinks on the night before driving somewhere. I can count the units and try and flush out the alcohol with lots of water, but if I sleep for 8-10 hours and go and drive, how can I be sure that I'm at 0.00% and not at 0.01%? It seems incredibly unfair to punish for that. I never drive if I don't feel safe to do so, but unless I left it for a good 24 hours, how can I be absolutely certain?

    The problem with selling alcohol testers is that although 0.08% may be the legal limit, you may get people who think it's safe to drive on 0.07%.


    A curfew just sounds idiotic. I was working until 2.30am a few months after passing my test and I would drive home afterwards. I never caused a problem, I never hit anything, I never crashed and I never broke the law (despite being very easily able to).


    There is just a sense that they're constantly trying to crack down on all young drivers, yet my record is far better than many others my age. It's ridiculous to do this to everyone. If they want to enforce a curfew, they should have a reason to do so first. For instance, if you're caught breaking the law first. It's completely unfair to punish everyone.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    There's always alcohol, reckon they'll make a lower threshold or that's what they're implying.

    I think all new drivers should be getting this, not just 17-24 personally. What is the difference between a 23 and a 25 year old? Hardly anything so why does one have to spend longer to learn because of their age. Personally the probation period should be done for everyone.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    So if you ate a cake with Bailey's double cream on the side, then decided to drive, would you get nicked because you ate the Bailey's double cream, which contains some alcohol????
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James A)
    So if you ate a cake with Bailey's double cream on the side, then decided to drive, would you get nicked because you ate the Bailey's double cream, which contains some alcohol????
    They mean a minimum threshold. Either that or none of those idiots in parliament have a science education after year 10.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jam277)
    I think all new drivers should be getting this, not just 17-24 personally. What is the difference between a 23 and a 25 year old? Hardly anything so why does one have to spend longer to learn because of their age. Personally the probation period should be done for everyone.
    The 23 year old is more likely to have an accident. Extending the probationary period for all new drivers would be a good idea as would a limit on the number of people a new driver can take in the car.

    There are other things that can be done like fitting monitoring devices http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...t-parents.html

    Personally I'm in favour of voluntary restrictions to cut insurance premiums.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    F*** off

    That is all :rolleyes:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by parentlurker)
    The 23 year old is more likely to have an accident. Extending the probationary period for all new drivers would be a good idea as would a limit on the number of people a new driver can take in the car.

    There are other things that can be done like fitting monitoring devices http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...t-parents.html

    Personally I'm in favour of voluntary restrictions to cut insurance premiums.
    Hardly that much of a difference don't you think. 2 years is hardly anything. The probationary period should be longer for all new drivers like you said.

    If it cuts insurance premiums then fair enough, didn't look at it from a financial view. Because my brother doesn't have money for a car and he's getting to 22, been in a job for a couple of years while in uni and is now around 20k after uni but insurance is a problem for him since my mum won't pay for it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    They will keep on oppressing the young so long as the young refuse to consider themselves part of Europe.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Some of those recommendations are cracking. However, the whole curfew thing is a little silly and not all that well thought out. As others have said a lot of jobs have people finishing/starting at odd times of day and a blanket ban on young drivers driving at odd times of day just isn't practical.

    Not only that but it doesn't take into consideration those of us that, you know, actually drive for a living. Driving is a major componant of my job and I work all hours of the day on a rotating shift pattern. I wonder how those changes would affect me (or those like me as I'll probably be older than 24 when/if anything changes).
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tycho)
    I also think the curfew is a stupid idea. I'd be interested to know how many people die on the roads when it's dark, compared with how many when it's light.
    It was in my paper this morning, but it's The Times so behind a paywall online, but there is a marked increase in 'after dark' fatal accidents involving young drivers which is driving this particular part of it.
    Might not be popular [well, definitely won't be...] but it is at least targeted with the right intentions.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jam277)
    Hardly that much of a difference don't you think. 2 years is hardly anything. .
    Between 17 and 19 2 years brings a lot more sense, between 23 and 25 not so much. Accidents - and hence insurance costs - are much higher at 17 than at 23 and still higher at 23 than at 25.

    Most stupid thing is that it's no longer possible to discriminate between male and female drivers when young male drivers have far more accidents.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James A)
    So if you ate a cake with Bailey's double cream on the side, then decided to drive, would you get nicked because you ate the Bailey's double cream, which contains some alcohol????
    I can't think of a country where the alcohol limits are actually set at exactly zero as like you say it's just not practical. Even in those countries with a zero rating they do allow a minute percentage to account for alcohol in food.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shooks)
    From the BBC: the latest government ideas on road safety and young drivers:


    BBC

    According to the Beeb's article, these were among the key suggestions considered for a full green paper set to be published later in the spring:

    • A curfew for drivers aged 17 to 24
    • Limit on the number of passengers young drivers can carry in their car
    • A zero-alcohol limit.
    • A minimum learning period for drivers once they turn 17, so they get more on-the-road experience.
    • Motorway lessons for learners
    • Extension of the six-point probationary period from two to three years
    • Driving tests changed to include more unsupervised driving time


    As someone who's already got their licence, this doesn't affect me directly but I do find it interesting. Out of all the points, I think the minimum learning period makes most sense. I turned 17 and passed my test within six weeks - far too soon, in retrospect. More time on the road = better drivers. Got to be a good thing.
    Motorway driving is the only thing I fully support in the list.
    I can get on board minimum learning period - although I think to balance that possibly drivers should get to start earlier (e.g can start when 16 and 9 months, must have 6 months learning period).
    I wouldn't mind a lower alcohol limit, but I think that an extremely low limit (e.g. 10mg/100ml blood) - this allows them to have very low alcohol products such as a couple of chocolate liqueurs and the such (or go driving immediately after swallowing their mouthwash by accident).
    I don't know how effective the unsupervised time is in determining a driver's ability, so on the fence about that.
    Am against a curfew, and mostly against a passenger limit. I would support these being as a punishment (e.g. if you get a SP30 in your first year, you can only carry two passengers) or similar, but not enforced on everyone.
    I am on the fence about the 6points 2/3 years thing. Could be a good idea to keep people careful I guess

    (Original post by jam277)
    There's always alcohol, reckon they'll make a lower threshold or that's what they're implying.

    I think all new drivers should be getting this, not just 17-24 personally. What is the difference between a 23 and a 25 year old? Hardly anything so why does one have to spend longer to learn because of their age. Personally the probation period should be done for everyone.
    The 2year 6 points period is for everyone afaik.

    (Original post by JC.)
    I can't think of a country where the alcohol limits are actually set at exactly zero as like you say it's just not practical. Even in those countries with a zero rating they do allow a minute percentage to account for alcohol in food.
    According to various travel websites, France has a 0 limit for new drivers - it says that is exactly 0, however I would assume they allow a small give and take.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    It was in my paper this morning, but it's The Times so behind a paywall online, but there is a marked increase in 'after dark' fatal accidents involving young drivers which is driving this particular part of it.
    Might not be popular [well, definitely won't be...] but it is at least targeted with the right intentions.

    I wonder what has caused this "marked increase"? Perhaps the best solution would be to find and fix the source of the problem. What makes young people want to drive too fast, and what can be done to prevent it. Simply stopping them driving at night is an admission that they've run out of ideas on solving the source of the problem (i.e. if we stopped everyone driving all the time then there would be zero road deaths).

    I'd be far more interested in seeing onboard computers installed into cars to record (and perhaps in some ways control) how people drive. Coming from a background in aviation, I've had hands-on experience of how computers have made flying considerably safer and easier. It's time to see such technology move into wide circulation in cars as well.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmhumphries)
    Motorway driving is the only thing I fully support in the list.

    Why waste time training people to drive on our safest roads (motorways), which - incidentally - are also the easiest to drive on, when that time would be better spent teaching them how to drive in adverse conditions on our most dangerous roads (country roads)?

    Head-on collisions are the biggest killers in car-on-car accidents. Neither these, nor the other big killer (car-on-pedestrian collisions), occur very often on motorways. Therefore, it's no surprise that motorways account for approximately 5% of road deaths.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tycho)
    I wonder what has caused this "marked increase"? Perhaps the best solution would be to find and fix the source of the problem. What makes young people want to drive too fast, and what can be done to prevent it. Simply stopping them driving at night is an admission that they've run out of ideas on solving the source of the problem (i.e. if we stopped everyone driving all the time then there would be zero road deaths).

    I'd be far more interested in seeing onboard computers installed into cars to record (and perhaps in some ways control) how people drive. Coming from a background in aviation, I've had hands-on experience of how computers have made flying considerably safer and easier. It's time to see such technology move into wide circulation in cars as well.
    I'd wager it's a mix of lack of experience [how many driving instructors have lessons at 11pm?], complacency and getting too far ahead of themselves/carried away with people inside.


    That's all well and good, things likes TCAS, transponders, ATC and autopilots do make flying safer, but at considerable cost. How many new drivers are going to be willing or able to pay £100,000+ on a car with systems like that built in? And where does the rest of the infrastructure come from to make systems like that viable?
    Having a 'black box' to record what's going on is fine. But control? The tech isn't there yet, especially not for single vehicles that are being run on a shoestring budget.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tycho)
    Why waste time training people to drive on our safest roads (motorways), which - incidentally - are also the easiest to drive on, when that time would be better spent teaching them how to drive in adverse conditions on our most dangerous roads (country roads)?

    Head-on collisions are the biggest killers in car-on-car accidents. Neither these, nor the other big killer (car-on-pedestrian collisions), occur very often on motorways. Therefore, it's no surprise that motorways account for approximately 5% of road deaths.
    Myself excluded, then a lot of new drivers are afraid or worried about going on the motorway for the first time. Country roads are covered when learning to drive (or at least my instructor covered them). Also, then I assume that 'motorway lessons' will basically mean that learners can drive on the motorway while learning (most likely under heavier restrictions, such as having to be with a registered instructor or similar). I see no harm in doing so - just because motorways are safer than other roads doesn't mean that learners should pass their test without any experience on them - as they are a distinct type of road.

    One thing which you could introduce is a curriculum, where learners *must* cover certain elements before they can take their test. However, you then have to consider how you can prove that you have covered each element, etc.

    At the end of the day, the test itself is meant to assess if you are a competent driver or not. So, back to your original point, maybe there needs to be more country road driving in the test?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.