Education - What will it take?

[rastuscat]

I've been reading a lot over the years about what the gubbermint needs to do to educate drivers to make the roads safer. I work in enforcement, and people frequently tell me that there should be more effort given to education. Normally when I'm giving them enforcement, specifically.

Ironically, when I ask them what education they have bought themselves, they almost always think it's other people who need to education.

Anyway, that aside, what do you think is needed in terms of education? I almost think I am asking for two separate answers i.e.

What education should we give to other people?, and
What education do you think you need yourself?

Is advertising education e.g. the ads on telly. The newspaper ads telling us that the faster we go the bigger the risk. Is that education?

So, tell me what education is, coz until we can actually define it, it just ain't gonna happen.

Bring it on..............

[Blinkwing]

Is advertising education e.g. the ads on telly. The newspaper ads telling us that the faster we go the bigger the risk. Is that education?

That's propaganda, pure and simple.

[rastuscat]

That's propaganda, pure and simple.


Cool, so that rules the ads out.

But you haven't answered the question.........what is the education I keep having people bang on about?

[cheshirecat]

My 2 cents.

It goes down to the driving test. It should be much more comprehensive and show how to take pride in road craft - practical. The current multichoice is a farce

The driving age is far too low

Plus the road rules are badly written, treating us in a somewhat officious patronising manner and stuck in the 1950's

Bigtime fines and disqs for things like running traffic lights, crossing centerlines, pulling out into oncomming traffic (so they have to brake)

Oopps went on a bit - the education would be the driving test part.

[bogan]

been thinking bout it myself a bit, it's very difficult to force education on people, far easier to educate the willing. Therefor it's the attitudes towards driver education that need to change, as you say most think its the others that need educating.

The targetting must stop, speed alcohol etc, everyone needs to look at thier driving habits. Targetting speed and alcohol only makes those who don't do it more assured that thier driving is perfect.

Practical suggestions from me would be to increase the level of driving skills required to gain, and hold a license. Serious driving infringements (basically anything causing a crash) to require retesting, retesting for every license holder every 10 years (maybe just choose one class of license to do it if they hold more than one).

Make upskilling much more accesible, cheap and widely and standardised providors in all regions etc.

[Hitcher]

Government officials are philosophically opposed to driver/rider education and training. They believe that it makes drivers/riders "overconfident". I have heard them say such in as many words. I kid you not.

[rastuscat]

There is education already available. Driving schools deliver it.

So if we all want more education, why don't we just go and buy it?

Just trying to get some thoughts running here, as I'm worried that it's basically a dead duck, trying to get people to educate themselves.

Whoops, that's right, it's OP that needs education. Yes, OP. Other people.

[ckai]

That's propaganda, pure and simple.


Cool, so that rules the ads out.

But you haven't answered the question.........what is the education I keep having people bang on about?

Not all ads are uneducational (see, I made up a word so I'm ejdamacated). I recently heard some of the best ads on the radio. One of them was a chick going on about me, me, me. It ended saying there are other road users as well.

Pretty much the thing that is lacking from all the types of education...respect. This is should be the first thing taught.

EVERYONE needs more education. If someone thinks they have learnt all they need to know or it's others that need the education, they should be in the front of the classroom.

Which makes another point. Driver education should be both classroom/theory based and practical. The current theory based education should be more comprehensive and we just need more practical practical. Why can't we have something like driver-ed like the states in school? It doesn't matter if you want to get your license or not, you should still need to do it.

As for educating us existing drivers...lets sit a driving test every 10 years we have to re-apply for license?

A license is privilege not a right. I feel pretty strongly about our large number of muppets on the road (that includes me sometimes) and if I had my own business, the first thing I would do would be to put money towards driver-ed programs for staff at the very least. Being 30 yo, it's something I'm aiming for, less talking and more action...gotta start somewhere though.

EDIT: For the record, I did advanced driving when I was a younger lad, defensive driving a few years back and several rider training sessions...all paid by myself.

[bogan]

There is education already available. Driving schools deliver it.

So if we all want more education, why don't we just go and buy it?

Just trying to get some thoughts running here, as I'm worried that it's basically a dead duck, trying to get people to educate themselves.

Whoops, that's right, it's OP that needs education. Yes, OP. Other people.

exactly, I'm a good driver, I don't drink or speed so what could possibly go wrong?

realistically people who have been driving for many years will know they are good at it until proven otherwise, learner drivers put in some effort then fall into bad habits over the years. Increase learners skill level so it takes longer to fall into bad habits, and set up a system to re-educate those who fall into bad habits.

[98tls]

Fwiw start them all off on motorcycles,2 years minimum then they can move on to 4 wheels if so inclined,at the very least it will teach them a few road skills.

[NinjaNanna]

Customs is already using face recognition software, this should be deployed in Driver License testing, by automating the process it will then become cost effective to instigate a license re-newal policy that requires theory exams every 2 yrs.

For the punter it would be the simple matter of rocking up to an automated booth, entering their license number, a new photo is taken and compared against the online record, a random selection of questions from the road code would need to be answered. Pass and your license is extended for 2years, fail and you get 2weeks in which to achieve a pass. Fail to pass a test within 2 weeks and your license is suspended until you've passed.

Any traffic violations could also trigger the 2 week period in which you must pass a theory test. Likewise if a police officer issues you with a warning this could also trigger the re-test.

This system could be implemented cost effectively as its only a standard office pc and a webcam plus some software development. Under this proposed model I see no need for a testing fee to be charged, it should be fully government funded.

Equally important the software would include sufficient anti-cheating mechanisms to stop people substituting themselves once they've been identified, motion detection via the webcam could do this, likewise a microphone would detect if somebody was reading the questions out to somebody else in order to get the answer. Similarly as the tests would be randomly generated then people can't have cheat sheets.

In addition to ensuring that all licensed drivers are engaged in consistent and ongoing self education this system could also have the capability to allow the authorities to tailor or prioritize the exam questions such that they focus directly on specific traffic offence trends that the police are identifying on a town by town basis.

Further it would also be possible to add a reaction test module which could be used to great effect in hammering home the importance of leaving sufficient gap in which to react and start breaking.

Whilst this does not address poor driving skills of some people I can't help but believe it would make a marked improvement to driving over all.

[Swoop]

So if we all want more education, why don't we just go and buy it?

It should be mandatory before getting a licence.
We (currently) have 15yr olds getting taught the bad habits of parents. Lessons from a capable driving school should be top of the list.

It dosen't matter what category of licence (H.T., bike, car, etc).
Correct instruction from the beginning (primacy in learning, etc) backed up with a competent testing programme. No "scratch-and-win" bullshit, either.

[NinjaNanna]

Fwiw start them all off on motorcycles,2 years minimum then they can move on to 4 wheels if so inclined,at the very least it will teach them a few road skills.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment - smidsy moments would all but disappear - the problem with this is that you are starting the most vunerable road users off on the most dangerous form of transport.

If the majority of accidents were in fact due to smidsy, then I'd whole heartedly agree, but unfortunately the majority of accidents are not smidsy's.

[Goblin]

Fwiw start them all off on motorcycles,2 years minimum then they can move on to 4 wheels if so inclined,at the very least it will teach them a few road skills.I agree 100%! But it will never happen. What gets me is the fact that a learner on a bike is restricted to 250ccs and 70kph. Car learners should have more restrictions too. And ACC levies should be higher on people movers than 600cc+ bikes because honestly, look at the carnage teenagers are causing on our roads.

[satchriossi]

I agree 100% with the guy above. I took driving lessons with a qualified instructor shortly after turning 17. I'd already been riding a restored 1974 Garelli Tiger on a CBT (Compulsory Basic Training - which trains you on using round abouts, when and how to indicate, lane discipline and all the fundamental stuff) whilst i was 16 and had had good road positioning, blind spot checking, forward planning (reading the road) etc hammered into by my Dad before i started learning in a car. I learnt 10 times more useful and extremely important stuff from my instructor too. Without which i wouldn't have stood a chance of passing my test. In which i got 5 minor faults i think - mostly due to not checking my mirrors often enough (every few seconds - he times you) and letting my speed pick up too much when coasting down a hill. You have to learn about 8 advanced maneuvers and you get tested on 3 random ones on the day (i think). I got; reverse around a corner, reverse park and parallel park. I'd had so much practice with my instructor that i nailed them. If you fail to do them perfectly you fail the whole test by the way. If you pass first time then you've done very well - alot of people don't.

I later took my bike test (after 9 lessons with another qualified instructor) which is similar in structure, only you have the guy following you on another bike, talking through an intercom. I had to do my test in Nottingham city centre traffic... I was shitting myself. Passing first time was important to me so i didnt want to fuck it up. Got three minors on that one - i cant remember why. But there are alot more 'life saver' glances into your blind spots and road position is very important - there's much more to learn and remember on the bike test. I also learned about target fixation and always looking where you want to end up when cornering.

You come out of the whole system fairly clued up.

[MaxB]

If we raise the bar on passing the driving test to make the roads 'safer' we must accept that a significant number of us will never be good enough to get a licence.

So far Govts. have been unwilling to deal with this for fear of upsetting the voters.

[DarkLord]

Fwiw start them all off on motorcycles,2 years minimum then they can move on to 4 wheels if so inclined,at the very least it will teach them a few road skills.

Yes, I agree, except it will never happen as has been stated.

I was driving cages before I became a biker and if you would have asked me to name hazards while I was driving (like they do in the full license test), I could have pointed out a few obvious ones at best.

Ask me now after a couple of years of riding and I could name a whole lot more. When I did my full bike test, the tester asked me if I could define any hazards I had seen on the route we had just done. My reply was "I'm a biker, everything is a hazard".

It would teach them some road skills and hopefully give them a bit more awareness as to what is really happening around them when they drive. It can be very easy to tune out completely while driving a car, where as with riding a bike, after a bit of experience you tend to find it is more ingrained into your thinking to be more aware of your surroundings.

[davereid]

I've been reading a lot over the years about what the gubbermint needs to do to educate drivers to make the roads safer. I work in enforcement, and people frequently tell me that there should be more effort given to education. Normally when I'm giving them enforcement, specifically.

Ironically, when I ask them what education they have bought themselves, they almost always think it's other people who need to education.

Anyway, that aside, what do you think is needed in terms of education? I almost think I am asking for two separate answers i.e.

What education should we give to other people?, and
What education do you think you need yourself?

Is advertising education e.g. the ads on telly. The newspaper ads telling us that the faster we go the bigger the risk. Is that education?

So, tell me what education is, coz until we can actually define it, it just ain't gonna happen.

Bring it on..............

Another rider died yesterday in Taranaki, when a ute turned right across his path. I am pre supposing alcohol and drugs were not a factor.

The driver of the ute will live with that for the rest of his life. No amount of increased enforcement, or training will stop that kind of accident, but I am sure that particular driver will never turn across the path of another vehicle again.

Headlights on may help, but trains are big, bright yellow, and they have headlights on, yet cars still cross in front of them.

This is one area that education, by way of advertising can help. Like trains, motorcycles are there to be seen. For some reason, drivers just don't see bikes. I'd suggest a campaign about looking for bikes. Old hat, but I guess its been done before, as we have noticed the problem for years.

I don't think advertising can help motorcyclists get around corners, or stop in an emergency without falling off.

This is where we need to offer training.

Not balls out race day stuff. A day where you can just rock in on your Harley or Honda, and spend a few hours casually practising braking, and cornering techniques, with tuition from professionals. You can lead a horse to water, so there will be those who never attend. But targeting clubs, like Ulysses would work.

And we should set realistic targets as a measure of our success.
I guess that if we managed to get 30% of riders to a course every 5 years, and we managed to halve the rate at which they fall off under brakes, or take 20% off their emergency stopping distance, then we would have done pretty well.

If a cop who could ride like this offered me training, I would be there in a flash. I'd even get a rego sticker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ-pTyQZJng

[Pixie]

Government officials are philosophically opposed to driver/rider education and training. They believe that it makes drivers/riders "overconfident". I have heard them say such in as many words. I kid you not.

Yes,I have heard this many times.On one occasion voiced by Dave Cliff,the then head of road policing.

The TV ads are intended to work against gaining confidence,e.g. frighten the plebs into being scared on the road.

[Pixie]

There is education already available. Driving schools deliver it.

So if we all want more education, why don't we just go and buy it?

Just trying to get some thoughts running here, as I'm worried that it's basically a dead duck, trying to get people to educate themselves.

Whoops, that's right, it's OP that needs education. Yes, OP. Other people.

Current NZ training consists of teaching to pass the test.
Not teaching to be a safe driver.

[Pixie]

I agree 100% with the guy above. I took driving lessons with a qualified instructor shortly after turning 17. I'd already been riding a restored 1974 Garelli Tiger on a CBT (Compulsory Basic Training - which trains you on using round abouts, when and how to indicate, lane discipline and all the fundamental stuff) whilst i was 16 and had had good road positioning, blind spot checking, forward planning (reading the road) etc hammered into by my Dad before i started learning in a car. I learnt 10 times more useful and extremely important stuff from my instructor too. Without which i wouldn't have stood a chance of passing my test. In which i got 5 minor faults i think - mostly due to not checking my mirrors often enough (every few seconds - he times you) and letting my speed pick up too much when coasting down a hill. You have to learn about 8 advanced maneuvers and you get tested on 3 random ones on the day (i think). I got; reverse around a corner, reverse park and parallel park. I'd had so much practice with my instructor that i nailed them. If you fail to do them perfectly you fail the whole test by the way. If you pass first time then you've done very well - alot of people don't.

I later took my bike test (after 9 lessons with another qualified instructor) which is similar in structure, only you have the guy following you on another bike, talking through an intercom. I had to do my test in Nottingham city centre traffic... I was shitting myself. Passing first time was important to me so i didnt want to fuck it up. Got three minors on that one - i cant remember why. But there are alot more 'life saver' glances into your blind spots and road position is very important - there's much more to learn and remember on the bike test. I also learned about target fixation and always looking where you want to end up when cornering.

You come out of the whole system fairly clued up.

This is why the NZ "Scratchy questions and cursory drive around the block" style of testing is allways doomed to failure.

[Banditbandit]

I'm not sure that education will solve the problem. (I work in education and don't see it as the solution to all the world's problems). I'm an educated driver/rider. I've done training courses in cars back last century - and done bike rider training as well. Many people, including enforcement people, consider that I ride in a dangerous manner - and quite likely, by many measures, I do. That's my concious choice.

Education aims to both give knowledge to people and to change behaviours. Driver education aimed at giving people the knowledge of how to drive/ride vehicles properly will not necessarily change the risky behaviours they indulge in. Educating people about the dangers of smoking has only partially reduced smoking rates. Smokers, myself included, make a conscious choice to continue smoking. Road rule breakers will continue to break the rules.

Teaching people to handle vehicles better will only make some of them driver faster - more riskily. Maybe they'll be safer at it, but the risk still exists.

What is needed is a massive culture change, so bad driving is not socially acceptable. The problem, of course, is who defines "bad driving" and I would argue that speed is not the only sign of bad driving. Now, culture change does not come about through law enforcement, nor through education. It might come about through the mass media propoganda system (advertising), which has to be much better and more targetted than it currently is. The "gotta do something about your drinking" and the anti-domestic violence ads are good examples of how targetted advertising might bring about social change.

But while the majority of New Zealanders do not see breaking the road laws in the same light as breaking other laws, that culture change is not going to happen.

[Number One]

My 2 cents.

It goes down to the driving test. It should be much more comprehensive and show how to take pride in road craft - practical. The current multichoice is a farce

The driving age is far too low

Plus the road rules are badly written, treating us in a somewhat officious patronising manner and stuck in the 1950's

Bigtime fines and disqs for things like running traffic lights, crossing centerlines, pulling out into oncomming traffic (so they have to brake)

Oopps went on a bit - the education would be the driving test part.

ha ha ha I concur with you on all the above and especially the bit aout the driving test part. I did my BHS at the same time as a friend...she was able to stall and drop the bike falling off it quite spectacularly (while doing her braking on light gravel test) YET she was walked away from the 'test' (term used lightly) with a wee certificate that said she had passed...yeah right :rolleyes:

Thankfully she had the wisdom to realise she really wasn't ready to go anywhere near actual roads and spent another month or so trying to get it all sorted - in the end she gave up as she just couldn't seem to suss it. YET she was given license to go for it...someone less cautious might have just got out there and hammered around....Seems a bit off to me

[Clockwork]

I can remember a time when TV advertising space was used to pass on practical advice on safe and courteous driving.

I'd happily see a return of such advertising, No shock and horror, nothing that's likely to alienate the viewer just useful reminders such as how to:-
Use of and signaling at a traffic island.
Safely passing on the open road.
Keeping left and correct lane discipline.
Maintaining your speed on a passing lane if you are not passing.
Common road courtesy.

That sort of thing would be a start, maybe even enough to encourage people to think about the way the drive and treat other road users.


I'm sure

[bogan]

What is needed is a massive culture change, so bad driving is not socially acceptable. The problem, of course, is who defines "bad driving" and I would argue that speed is not the only sign of bad driving. Now, culture change does not come about through law enforcement, nor through education. It might come about through the mass media propoganda system (advertising), which has to be much better and more targetted than it currently is. The "gotta do something about your drinking" and the anti-domestic violence ads are good examples of how targetted advertising might bring about social change.

hasn't the smoking culture changed drastically cos everyone has been educated to the consequences?

[Banditbandit]

hasn't the smoking culture changed drastically cos everyone has been educated to the consequences?

To a certain degree it has. I'm not convinced it's all because everyone is educated about the consequences. I think advertising aimed at changing the image and decreasing the social acceptablity of smoking has had more effect than straight education about the consequences.

[avgas]

Compulsory skid pad days. Because morons can't ride/drive in rain.
Brief retests (5-10min) every 5 years for EVERYONE. Pass the test or else you have up to 1 week to pass. Otherwise your license is taken off you for 1 month.

[MSTRS]

There is education already available. Driving schools deliver it.

So if we all want more education, why don't we just go and buy it?



Because there is no 'recognition' in the form of discounted rego/insurance/whatever. This country and it's people are $ driven. Few do anything they don't have to, if there is no gain in the pocket.
And as far as becoming a better driver and avoiding roadtax - well, you have to be caught being bad to get smacked.

[Banditbandit]

Because there is no 'recognition' in the form of discounted rego/insurance/whatever. This country and it's people are $ driven. Few do anything they don't have to, if there is no gain in the pocket.
And as far as becoming a better driver and avoiding roadtax - well, you have to be caught being bad to get smacked.

It was suggested that the ACC levy be linked to driver training - lower fees if you did driver training - this was totally rejected.

[bogan]

To a certain degree it has. I'm not convinced it's all because everyone is educated about the consequences. I think advertising aimed at changing the image and decreasing the social acceptablity of smoking has had more effect than straight education about the consequences.

true, but would we have allowed the advertising to change the image if we didn't know smoking is bad for you?

[Banditbandit]

true, but would we have allowed the advertising to change the image if we didn't know smoking is bad for you?

No, but what's your point ?

[bogan]

No, but what's your point ?

my point is that some road safety campaigning is a load of bollocks, and doesn't educate that the road rules are absolute and must be heeded, guy crashing due to excessive speed for the visibility into a corner means doing the same speed on straights is dangerous?
And the rules will never be absolute, safe is always going to relate to the circumstances, so people driving with safety in mind are far better than those driving with rules in mind.

To instigate a massive culture change, the masses must first realise (be educated) that they are better off to do so. I don't think that has happened yet.

[MarkH]

Anyway, that aside, what do you think is needed in terms of education? I almost think I am asking for two separate answers i.e.

What education should we give to other people?, and
What education do you think you need yourself?

Is advertising education e.g. the ads on telly. The newspaper ads telling us that the faster we go the bigger the risk. Is that education?

The people that get education themselves are not those in most need of it. Many people get a license and then forget about learning (or good driving for that matter). The ads do very little, too easy to tune out.

When I got back on 2 wheels after ~20 years of only driving cars I quickly booked myself into an RRRS course to help find out what I didn't know and what I was doing wrong. Better to find out on a course than in an accident.

I'd like to see much less focus on fining the misbehaving drivers and much more of making them take classes and learn better driving behaviour. 100 demerit points and you lose your license for 3 months - I think that is retarded, many people need their license to get to work and 3 months break from driving isn't going to magically make them better at it. 100 demerit point = 100 hours mandatory driver training - that's both punishment and education! The errant driver will have to pay for it too, so that is 100 hours of their time and however much of their money it has cost them.

The compulsory education should teach useful stuff like:
Being aware of others on the road and showing consideration.
Using indicators so others know what the fuck you are trying to do.
Merging properly and considerately allowing others to merge.
Driving on multi-lane motorways does not mean sitting in the right lane 100% of the time, EVEN if your speedo reads 100kph.
On-ramps are for speeding up to match the traffic on the motorway, not tootling along at 40kph.
At intersections: LOOK PROPERLY!
U-turns are not to be taken lightly or done carelessly! Much care and careful looking (with eyes actually open) is required. If you can't manage that then don't do them.
When driving - pay attention to the driving (not texting, playing with the radio, conversing with passengers, etc)
etc.

[PeteJ]

Tired Old Cynic here.

Tired Old Cynic who first held a NZ motorcycling instructor's ticket in 1978, created the first civilian advanced riding school for road riders (and, as far as I am aware, the only one ever to have Ministerial approval), and who still instructs at advanced rider training days.

Riding skills are one thing, and can be taught and caught, and that's where a lot of us start and finish in talking about education.

The trouble is this: my audience, one would think, is the converted. I instruct at a place where people pay their own money and turn up voluntarily. But as soon as I mention attitude, and try to introduce the thought that now they have some physical skills which are second nature, they can start on the important attitudinal things for road riding: thinking, observation, the whole ball of wax the Poms call "roadcraft", I see the eyes glaze over.

Most riders just want to go faster than their mates. Not all the time, just when they want to show off. But most don't want to engage in proper organised racing, either. Worst of both worlds.

So, in summary, the problem is attitudinal; and no amount of attempts at education short of cognitive behaviour therapy (one-on-one with therapists) is going to achieve anything.

[Blinkwing]

Cool, so that rules the ads out.

But you haven't answered the question.........what is the education I keep having people bang on about?

Nonexistent, really.

Because there's no practical skills test or classes that we're 'forced' to take in order to gain our licenses. You could say that there's the defensive driving course but that's optional.

In some European countries, it's really hard to get your license and is a cause for celebration if you do. Here, you just study the test for a couple of hours and rock on up to the centre & pass the test.

1. Theory tests - needs to be much more comprehensive. The current theory test is too easy. All you have to do is remember the answers to the questions and you're fine.
2. Practical tests - The restricted/full are specified as 30m/60m but I often hear that the instructors only do the test for 10-20 minutes before telling the person they've passed. There's no 'hazardous driving' test when the car is purposefully put out of control (skidding, sliding, etc) in a controlled environment and you have to get the car back in control.

[Katman]

What is needed is a massive culture change, so bad driving is not socially acceptable.

Congratulations - that almost sounds like something I would say. :2thumbsup

[mashman]

Because there is no 'recognition' in the form of discounted rego/insurance/whatever. This country and it's people are $ driven. Few do anything they don't have to, if there is no gain in the pocket.
And as far as becoming a better driver and avoiding roadtax - well, you have to be caught being bad to get smacked.

Who gives a shit when my no claims bonus is protected for life :), i can crash as much as I like and still pay the same premiums...

Anyhoo, my take...

I'd like to see some form of educational "film" that explains the top 10 crashes for motor vehicles. A "film" that maybe runs for 2 - 3 minutes, unless you can run a series of progs a year... The idea is to EXPLAIN what's causing the crashing, whilst NOT alienating the viewer by LECTURING them (well not directly anyway)... yes some of us understand that it's us that's the problem, but as mentioned elsewhere, if we have a clean(ish) driving record then it's other people that are crashing...

Base it on the stats, real crashes, real investigation reports, plonk in a little re-enactment if necessary, but explain it :).

Crash 1, running wide on corners... have the potential CAUSES explained by a KNOWN and respected face... crap on roads, excessive speed, dodgy road surface, rain (paint and snakes) and my favourite incorrect motorcycle setup, tyres up to temp, suspension setup correctly etc...

Crash 2, intersections... visibility, road conditions, SMIDSY, poor judgement, guesstimation of other traffic speeds, other traffic intent, etc...

that's just my 0.2c

[ukusa]

The tv ads are all shit. I honestly don't know of anyone who whilst out driving/riding are thinking about that ad they saw on tv. People know they will hurt themselves if they fall off/crash, it's not rocket science. Pointless in my opinion.
The biggest improvement in education for road users must come at high school level. I cannot believe that in this day & age that drivers licences are not a part of the school curriculum, either compulsary or as an option when kids reach the age of 15/16.
Driving is something a huge percentage of the population do everyday of their life, and is more important in a lot of working situations than some of the other rubbish they teach in schools these days.

[Swoop]

The tv ads are all shit. I honestly don't know of anyone who whilst out driving/riding are thinking about that ad they saw on tv.
Brocky: "Only a fuel breaks the two second ruewl", &
"Brake on the straight, before it's too late".

Bring back Brock!... err. Hang on a sec.:scratch:

[bogan]

Who gives a shit when my no claims bonus is protected for life :), i can crash as much as I like and still pay the same premiums...

Anyhoo, my take...

I'd like to see some form of educational "film" that explains the top 10 crashes for motor vehicles. A "film" that maybe runs for 2 - 3 minutes, unless you can run a series of progs a year... The idea is to EXPLAIN what's causing the crashing, whilst NOT alienating the viewer by LECTURING them (well not directly anyway)... yes some of us understand that it's us that's the problem, but as mentioned elsewhere, if we have a clean(ish) driving record then it's other people that are crashing...

Base it on the stats, real crashes, real investigation reports, plonk in a little re-enactment if necessary, but explain it :).

Crash 1, running wide on corners... have the potential CAUSES explained by a KNOWN and respected face... crap on roads, excessive speed, dodgy road surface, rain (paint and snakes) and my favourite incorrect motorcycle setup, tyres up to temp, suspension setup correctly etc...

Crash 2, intersections... visibility, road conditions, SMIDSY, poor judgement, guesstimation of other traffic speeds, other traffic intent, etc...

that's just my 0.2c

I'm for this, but it seems too much like honesty for it to ever get done.

[mashman]

I'm for this, but it seems too much like honesty for it to ever get done.

lol, aye.... just thought it'd be better than trying to ram "facts" down peoples throats (we all love being taught to suck eggs)... but "drivers" will be in that situation, making those instantaneous "driving" decisions based on the situation before them... the more they know, or take into consideration, the better the outcome I would have thought... Leading to water etc... It may only work for me :)

[bogan]

lol, aye.... just thought it'd be better than trying to ram "facts" down peoples throats (we all love being taught to suck eggs)... but "drivers" will be in that situation, making those instantaneous "driving" decisions based on the situation before them... the more they know, or take into consideration, the better the outcome I would have thought... Leading to water etc... It may only work for me :)

I would say it'd work for most, there-in lies the problem for TPTB

[Banditbandit]

Congratulations - that almost sounds like something I would say. :2thumbsup

Oh shit ... do we agree ?

Maybe we don't ... I certainly won't take my own suggestion ... I don't want to be part of such a culture change ... My licence comes back next week, and I certainly expect to be breaking the speed limit the following weekend ...

I like being socially unacceptable ... it's one of the reasons I still smoke ..

[bogan]

I like being socially unacceptable ... it's one of the reasons I still smoke ..

Is that like wanting to make sure everyone knows that you don't care what they think? :laugh: :shutup:

[onearmedbandit]

If you want an advert that will educate kiwi drivers and riders, they would need to go a little something like this.

[scene 1 - A car driving at speed along a twisty NZ road]

[voiceover]
This is Michael Schumacher, and even though he is a multiple F1 World Champ, you probably think you are just as good at driving as he is.

[scene 2 - Camera cuts to Michael driving, at obvious pace, the tyres sliding on cowshit, cars hesitating at side intersections etc, when he loses it and rolls the car]

[voiceover]
However even he couldn't handle the crap conditions of our roads and the sheer idiocy of other road users - so what makes you think you can?

Substitute Rossi on a bike for Schuey in the car for a bike ad.

[MarkH]

Bring back Brock!

Yeah - Zombie Brock will set those fools straight!

[Banditbandit]

Is that like wanting to make sure everyone knows that you don't care what they think? :laugh: :shutup:

Yeah .. something like that ... :laugh::doobey: DILLIGAF

[Scuba_Steve]

Education is supplying me with a Super truck equipped with a cattle guard from a train.
If they don't learn how to drive quick they won't be on the road long!

[porky]

Tired Old Cynic here.

Tired Old Cynic who first held a NZ motorcycling instructor's ticket in 1978, created the first civilian advanced riding school for road riders (and, as far as I am aware, the only one ever to have Ministerial approval), and who still instructs at advanced rider training days.

Riding skills are one thing, and can be taught and caught, and that's where a lot of us start and finish in talking about education.

The trouble is this: my audience, one would think, is the converted. I instruct at a place where people pay their own money and turn up voluntarily. But as soon as I mention attitude, and try to introduce the thought that now they have some physical skills which are second nature, they can start on the important attitudinal things for road riding: thinking, observation, the whole ball of wax the Poms call "roadcraft", I see the eyes glaze over.

Most riders just want to go faster than their mates. Not all the time, just when they want to show off. But most don't want to engage in proper organised racing, either. Worst of both worlds.

So, in summary, the problem is attitudinal; and no amount of attempts at education short of cognitive behaviour therapy (one-on-one with therapists) is going to achieve anything.

yup, thats pretty much it. Change peoples attitudes and you are on the way. Problem is ......ive done the course, im ten foot tall and bullet proof and that bit of road belongs to me so go fuck yourself!!

Amazing how an impact crash, not a slide down the road, complete with trip in a meat wagon helps one to reavaluate things. First is "its the other c@@@'s fault and im blame less", over time this changes to "if only i had ......." , but hey WTF would i know.

[Banditbandit]

ive done the course, im ten foot tall and bullet proof and that bit of road belongs to me so go fuck yourself!!



Naa .. f'k off .. it's mine ... :devil2:

[avgas]

Education is supplying me with a Super truck equipped with a cattle guard from a train.
If they don't learn how to drive quick they won't be on the road long!
I second this one.

[MarkH]

Personally I think that fines & license suspensions are the cheap and easy way out. Setting up road safety courses and making them mandatory for people caught displaying a dismal lack of knowledge of courteous driving behaviour - well that would take an effort and cost some money to setup (ongoing costs can be charged to the wayward drivers).

My idea would be different to advanced driving courses - focusing instead on safe & courteous driving. Being considerate to fellow motorists should not be optional - it should be compulsory and anyone found to be driving with a bad attitude showing should be caught & sentenced to my idea of driver training classes. Also new drivers should be trained in considerate & careful driving before getting a license.

Inconsiderate driving:
Today on the motorway I saw a car in the middle lane, nothing in front of him/her for over 300 metres, changed into the right lane where there was nothing in front of that car for over 200 metres. I wondered what the point of that lane change was - my guess is that the driver just liked to be in the right lane and didn't care if they held up traffic. I changed to the middle lane and passed that twat, but really why do I keep having to change lanes and pass cars on the left? Doesn't the law say that you should stay to the left unless overtaking? Cops should pull over idiots like that and send them to driving school to learn why they shouldn't do that. Maybe losing some time & money might make them think a bit about their driving. I wouldn't have thought that keeping to the left to allow faster vehicles to pass you would be too complicated for drivers to understand - but I so often see drivers that just don't seem to understand.

The cops only seem to focus on pulling over vehicles going a bit fast and they only give out a fine - the idiots that drive inconsiderately carry on as they always have, oblivious to the fact that other people are trying to use the road at the same time as they are.

[mashman]

Do Ads for 3D cinema :)... could be an interesting way to grab someones attention for a quick chat?

[Blinkwing]

If we raise the bar on passing the driving test to make the roads 'safer' we must accept that a significant number of us will never be good enough to get a licence.

So far Govts. have been unwilling to deal with this for fear of upsetting the voters.

Public transport isn't good enough to make the switch either.

[Banditbandit]

Personally I think that fines & license suspensions are the cheap and easy way out. Setting up road safety courses and making them mandatory for people caught displaying a dismal lack of knowledge of courteous driving behaviour - well that would take an effort and cost some money to setup (ongoing costs can be charged to the wayward drivers).

My idea would be different to advanced driving courses - focusing instead on safe & courteous driving. Being considerate to fellow motorists should not be optional - it should be compulsory and anyone found to be driving with a bad attitude showing should be caught & sentenced to my idea of driver training classes. Also new drivers should be trained in considerate & careful driving before getting a license.

Inconsiderate driving:
Today on the motorway I saw a car in the middle lane, nothing in front of him/her for over 300 metres, changed into the right lane where there was nothing in front of that car for over 200 metres. I wondered what the point of that lane change was - my guess is that the driver just liked to be in the right lane and didn't care if they held up traffic. I changed to the middle lane and passed that twat, but really why do I keep having to change lanes and pass cars on the left? Doesn't the law say that you should stay to the left unless overtaking? Cops should pull over idiots like that and send them to driving school to learn why they shouldn't do that. Maybe losing some time & money might make them think a bit about their driving. I wouldn't have thought that keeping to the left to allow faster vehicles to pass you would be too complicated for drivers to understand - but I so often see drivers that just don't seem to understand.

The cops only seem to focus on pulling over vehicles going a bit fast and they only give out a fine - the idiots that drive inconsiderately carry on as they always have, oblivious to the fact that other people are trying to use the road at the same time as they are.

Lemme ask you .. was this car travelling at 100 kph ? If so, why did you feel the need to pass ? Just 'cause you was in the fast lane ? And therefore had to be travelling fast ? Or because bikes just have to be faster than cars ?

Who was breaking the rules here ? Who was being discourteous ?

[munster]

I hate the current focus of driver adds, i.e. one on the radio this morning.

You're doing 50, a car pulls out, you brake, you stop
You're doing 55, a car pulls out, you brake, your tyres screech, you hit it
You're doing 60, a car pulls out, you brake, your tyres screech, you hit it, the driver dies, your girlfriend leaves you, you loose your job

All I can think when I hear that is, why aren't they teaching people not to pull out. Why are they punishing the victim? It's like they're condoning bad driver behaviour, "I can pull out anytime, because if you're doing the limit, you'll be able to stop in time"

[MarkH]

Lemme ask you .. was this car travelling at 100 kph ?

No, the car was travelling at ~90kph.


If so, why did you feel the need to pass ? Just 'cause you was in the fast lane ? And therefore had to be travelling fast ? Or because bikes just have to be faster than cars ?

Who was breaking the rules here ? Who was being discourteous ?

Even if the car was going 100kph the driver would still have been discourteous. I think that there are a lot of fuckwits that think if their speedo reads 100 then they can sit in the right hand lane and fuck everyone behind them - this is very poor driving on their part. For one thing it is entirely possible to have your speedo reading 100 and be only travelling at 90kph. For another - even travelling at 100kph you are not entitled to drive in the right lane - if another driver wants to drive along at 105 then that is their business, you don't have a right to move into the fast lane and block them because you think they are being naughty.

Also:
If I ride at 110kph that is not discourteous driving - maybe you just don't understand what courtesy is? Kinda the point I'm making - education is sorely needed.