Driving & licensing: A generation Z perspective

[Scuba_Steve]

I think the ability to drive starts as a kid.
When I was at primary I'd walk to school, thus giving me an appreciation for pedestrians, crossings, & how dangerous 2 tonne pieces of steel are.
College I deadly peddley'd giving me the basics of the road, teaching me basics of bikes & in future driving teaching me to watch the left.
Then I started driving I was taught by me dad with the "clip round the ear" method which taught me "DON'T fuck up" and my whole driving life I haven't.

I think todays driving problem stems alot from a lack of the above. No-one walks to school anymore they're dropped off by SUV's, they don't deadly pedley again it's SUV's, & parents don't teach their kids anymore & certainly not with the "clip round the ear" method (they outlawed that) they pay someone else to teach them, badly!.

Then theres the licence system itself, IMO it should be
Learners - 2yrs on 2-wheels (power-weight restricted), you will learn the road & about other users before you are allowed to operate a 2-tonne killing machine.
Restricted (only for cars) - Will be almost the equivalent of learners car now, 1yr with supervising driver at all times.
Full - Well, full!. Bikers can graduate to full bike after learner period, cars will have to do restricted first

Getting your licence would be different to
Learners - You should be learning on this one so questions about the rules (proper questions to not the crap we have now) maybee a basic demonstration of checking/filling tyres, checking oil, filling gas etc
Restricted - A basic round town test done on 2-wheels to show you know the basics of the road before you can get restricted
Full - The final "weed-out", this test would include
Merging - This would be a big part, any significant hesitation, "giving way", stopping etc would be instant fail you must "merge like a zip".
Keeping left - Any failure to "keep left" would be instant fail
Intersections - You would be taken through a few of different type to show you understand how they work/ what to do, again fail if unable to operate them.

Failure to pass will set you back 3 months 3 failures will set you back a licence.

Well thats my take on it & how I'd run it, I may have missed/shortened some stuff there but thats the gist. Welcome to the Empire! :yes:

[Parlane]

Are you saying that anyone who wants to drive should have to spend 2 years on a bike ? Or are we specifically talking about bikes here?

IMO, there should be more training and testing required for the motorcycle learners licence. I came away from it knowing how to do small turns, indicate and stay stable. I did not know how to ride at speeds of more than 30km/hr.

[Scuba_Steve]

Are you saying that anyone who wants to drive should have to spend 2 years on a bike ? Or are we specifically talking about bikes here?

Anyone & everyone



IMO, there should be more training and testing required for the motorcycle learners licence. I came away from it knowing how to do small turns, indicate and stay stable. I did not know how to ride at speeds of more than 30km/hr.
See but thats kinda a prob in itself the learners is there for you to learn, knowing how to ride/drive beforehand makes the learners somewhat redundant.

[Ferkletastic]

I think there's something to be said for the idea that you start learning road craft as a kid walking and riding (a bicycle) around.

Do kids outside of cities still walk everywhere? Nobody in Orkland seems to let their kids do any of the stuff that we used to get up to back in the 80's. Quite honestly I doubt it's any more dangerous now than it was then.

[Luckylegs]

Are you saying that anyone who wants to drive should have to spend 2 years on a bike ?

yeh i wondered that too. Ive seen a couple of people suggest that. Frankly i think its dumb and possibly a reason for so many accidents (injury) in learner riders that you expect someone to learn good road craft in a vehicle that will fall over as soon as you stop concentrating. I dont think you can successfully learn the mechanics of motorcycle control and road awareness at the same time

...i think all riders should have held a class one first

FLAME AWAY

[Scuba_Steve]

yeh i wondered that too. Ive seen a couple of people suggest that. Frankly i think its dumb and possibly a reason for so many accidents (injury) in learner riders that you expect someone to learn good road craft in a vehicle that will fall over as soon as you stop concentrating. I dont think you can successfully learn the mechanics of motorcycle control and road awareness at the same time

...i think all riders should have held a class one first

FLAME AWAY

I think it's better than learning in a vehicle that kills someone as soon as you stop concentrating, but thats the thing if your in control of a motor you should Never stop concentrating.
And I would also expect people start to learn on their own property or on "dead" roads I don't expect people to be in peak traffic 1st time out, Hell I wasn't even allowed to start the engine till I learnt where the clutch took up or where the gears were

[bogan]

I think there's something to be said for the idea that you start learning road craft as a kid walking and riding (a bicycle) around.

Do kids outside of cities still walk everywhere? Nobody in Orkland seems to let their kids do any of the stuff that we used to get up to back in the 80's. Quite honestly I doubt it's any more dangerous now than it was then.

Yeh, but outside cities there isn't so much traffic, so you wouldn't learn as much in that respect. However, I knew a lot about driving cars and bikes before I was ever on the road, so it probably evens out. Assuming the oppourtunities are actually used in either case.

I think New Zealand tries to copy other countries who have far better roads, we can't afford to keep all our roads in such a condition to significantly reduce accidents like other countries do. We should follow the Finnish, and ensure all road users are highly trained before letting them loose.

[Usarka]

Quite honestly I doubt it's any more dangerous now than it was then.

I was listening to an expert from the USA a while ago who said studies back that up.

If I become dictator then it would be illegal to drive your kids to school if you live within 5kms or are near a bus route.

[Zedder]

I think there's something to be said for the idea that you start learning road craft as a kid walking and riding (a bicycle) around.

Do kids outside of cities still walk everywhere? Nobody in Orkland seems to let their kids do any of the stuff that we used to get up to back in the 80's. Quite honestly I doubt it's any more dangerous now than it was then.

I don't know about outside the cities but I do know the "walking school bus" has got kids out of cars and stopped major conjestion happening at a lot of schools in the cities.

Parents do seem a bit paranoid about a lot of things these days though.

[bluninja]

yeh i wondered that too. Ive seen a couple of people suggest that. Frankly i think its dumb and possibly a reason for so many accidents (injury) in learner riders that you expect someone to learn good road craft in a vehicle that will fall over as soon as you stop concentrating. I dont think you can successfully learn the mechanics of motorcycle control and road awareness at the same time



Perhaps then, the vehicle control should be taught off road first ....Compulsory Basic Training with a trained and ceritified instructor before you get to go on road, again with an instructor, to apply your machine control in the real world and add in some basic roadcraft.

I think this should be the way it's done, whether you pilot something with 2,3,4, or 16 wheels.

I thnik the OP is being idealistic, but not practical. There are some people that cannot ride a motorbike (physical disability is a prime example).

However if we made everyone that was physically able, ride motorbikes then we'd have a big road toll whilst Darwin removes the idiots from the gene pool. Though at least it will be in 1's and 2's and not a whole van load :blink:

In case you are reading this far, the last paragraph was very much tongue in cheek :woohoo:

[avgas]

I think the problem is not the roads or the licensing.
I think the problem is the riders/drivers.

They go through the whole process tick all th boxes......but never find out what their own limits or the vehicle's limits are.
I know 40+ year olds who are like this.

They have never slid out in the mud, never power-slid a vehicle in gravel, never slammed the brakes on to sliding point.

Guess what happens when they suddenly find themselves outside their comfort zone............thats right folks, they crash.
Yet the lesson could have been learnt far earlier, in far safer circumstances.

[Swoop]

Have to agree with the starting point of walking. Attack some of the "obesity problem" by not letting mummy drive the POS SUV to school.
I remember the local plod teaching "roadcraft" at primary school, with basic pedestrian intelligence requirements needed... (perhaps thats wht psyclists hate me when they ride across pedestrian crossings...)

Our lerners are taught SOME skills to pass the scratch-and-win test, but no more.
Shit training and shit testing = shit drivers.

[Banditbandit]

I think part of the problem is the vehicles available today ... When I learnt to ride back in the early 1970s I had a BSA Bantam ... and a quick one at that - it was timed at 60mph .... and cars .. shit I was doing well to get my A40 Farina to more80mph ... (had 85mph on the speedo down the Wellington motorway from Tawa to Johnsonville) ..

Today learners can get bikes 250cc or less that will top 160 klicks (100mph) and cars that will get close to 200kph ...

It's simply not safe. If I was learning to ride or drive now and did what I did back then I would probably be a road fatality - and so would many here (if they were honest and admitted it ...) Those of us who survived learnt to ride and drive quite well ... but with modern vehicles less of us would have survived ...

And yes - it's the rider/driver .. I'll admit I was crazy and lucky to survive - I have no idea what might have changed my attitutde back then .. having mates killed on bikes and cars certainly did not .. Hell, I got pissed and road my bike (at high speed) the night my best mate was killed on a bike ...

And I can still be a little crazy on the road on a bike (I also have a 4x4 and it's hard to be crazy in that ...)

So yes, attitude is a problem .. and the speed of modern vehicles.

(ANd yeah .. I walked everywhere as a kid - or rode pushbikes ... until I could afford to own cars and bikes ... so I don't see that makes a huge difference ...)

[Indiana_Jones]

The one thing I loath about the licencing rules is that bike learners have a power to weight ratio limit (or so we've been told now, and about bloody time), but car drivers have no such limit. Billy Blogs can get some silly fast rice burner..... :facepalm:

Power to weight ratio for cars as well.

And don't limit it to certain makes/models etc. Do it the UK way, where you can own a 600cc bike as long as it's been restricted to a certain BHP. Once you get your full take it off and away you go. Of course people would say "what's to stop you from taking it off in the first place", nothing just like there's nothing stopping you riding a 1000cc bike on your learners, or no licence.....

-Indy

[Banditbandit]

The one thing I loathe about the licecing rules is that bike learners have a power to weight ratio limit (or so we've been told now, and about bloody time), but car drivers have no such limit. Billy Blogs can get some silly fast rice burner..... :facepalm:

Power to weight ratio for cars as well.

And don't limit it to certain makes/models etc. Do it the UK way, where you can own a 600cc bike as long as it's been restricted to a certain BHP. Once you get your full take it off and away you go. Of course people would say "what's to stop you from taking it off in the first place", nothing just like there's nothing stopping you riding a 1000cc bike on your learners, or no licence.....

-Indy

yeah ... I agree ...

[Oblivion]

Learning on a 250 single is a neat way to keep all that manly throttle twisting in check. I mean, no matter how much you twist it, you wont be going insanely fast. You'll just be wasting petrol.

I've given up on car drivers. What a lost cause......

[Zedder]

I'm not sure what the total answer is because I fully believe in the mind behind the throttle as being the biggest problem but several things worked for me in the time before I got my full licence. In those days it was just a provisional before a full one.

Firstly, I had a couple of mates with dirt bikes which I got to ride in various off road situations. I think it's a very good skill to have.

Secondly, I had a couple of scares which made me cautious.

Thirdly, I saw my provisional as a licence to learn only. I renewed it twice before I had the guts to get a full one and I'm sure traffic wasn't so heavy back then.

[Scuba_Steve]

Power to weight ratio for cars as well.
-Indy

I don't think that quite works the same as bikes, do you really want them driving round in 3,4,5 tonne killing machines rather than the standard 2 tonne just because they meet power to weight ratios??? they're all capable of the speed limit & much faster, they're all gonna get there at a reasonable rate they'll only do it at a greater weight/impact

[Pseudonym]

yeh i wondered that too. Ive seen a couple of people suggest that. Frankly i think its dumb and possibly a reason for so many accidents (injury) in learner riders that you expect someone to learn good road craft in a vehicle that will fall over as soon as you stop concentrating. I dont think you can successfully learn the mechanics of motorcycle control and road awareness at the same time

...i think all riders should have held a class one first

FLAME AWAY

If you stop concentrating on a bike it can bite you.
But if you do the same in a car, where there are so many more distractions it can, and as evidence shows, will still bite you.
But the added advantage with a car is the other people you can injure or kill at the same time.
I started on a bike (about 5yo), I didn’t drive a car until I was nearly 17 and I didn’t like it.
I still don’t.

If it was compulsory to ride for two years it would weed the unlucky and stupid out.
But that happens in cars where they have friends along for the ride now anyway so statically little would change.

As for road craft, what road craft?
People read the road code before the test and never pick it up again!
Road awareness is so remote in a car in comparison to a bike you won’t learn enough driving to help that much anyway.

Riding a bike is not too removed from the pushbike you blatted about on when you were a kid.
And a few low speed offs will sharpen the concentration, bruises heal.
It’s the training, we just don’t do enough of it.
IMHO

[Indiana_Jones]

It’s the training, we just don’t do enough of it.
IMHO

Agreed.

Also an attitude shift. For most teens it's a rite of passage, which is true; But so many of them think it's their God given right to have a car/bike.

If we make it something that's hard to earn (i.e training requirements) then there's a slim hope they might actually want to keep their licences. But then again teens will be teens :woohoo:

-Indy

[Luckylegs]

If you stop concentrating on a bike it can bite you.
But if you do the same in a car, where there are so many more distractions it can, and as evidence shows, will still bite you.

We're talking about learners here who for the most part in the very early days are likely pootling around local streets and or perhaps commuting to work. Generally when a situation presents that the brain cant handle, what's the normal reaction... Slam the brakes on. Now if you do this in a car, it stops (you may have someone come up the arse of you but technically thats their problem). If you do this on a bike (and as is described over and over on this site) you "Grab a fistful of brake", lose the front and crash and in a lot of cases injure oneself (and bike).

...Yes I realise there are the those who will take a more boy racer approach while learning and have high speed crashes however those werent what I was referrring to in my original post and, as your post eludes to, theyre likely to do it anyway both on the bike and once allowed in a car.



I started on a bike (about 5yo), I didn’t drive a car until I was nearly 17 and I didn’t like it.
I still don’t.

Perhaps this says something about your ability, or at least mind set, then ?



If it was compulsory to ride for two years it would weed the unlucky and stupid out.


I'd have said this would do for motorcycling exactly the opposite of what is needed. The number of accidents causing injuries and deaths in motorcycles would go through the roof meaning the current ACC levy would look like loose change down the back of the sofa compared to what it would become to cover the injuries. That of courise if it wasnt scrapped or bikes werent outlawed.



As for road craft, what road craft?
People read the road code before the test and never pick it up again!

Again this perhaps speak volumes about your own abilities and/or ignorance. Roadcraft has fuck all to do with the road code. Its about an ability to read and in a lot of cases predict and respond to situations. Some of this can be taught but it is an experience thing, you have to do it repeatedly (albeit you need an open mind and need to want to do and not be a mindless drone).



Road awareness is so remote in a car in comparison to a bike you won’t learn enough driving to help that much anyway.

Bullshit. Typical biker arrogance. If a driver wants to they can become every bit as aware as a rider. Equally there are a number of riders who dont have the foggiest whats going on around them.



...It’s the training, we just don’t do enough of it.
IMHO

To finish on a positive... CANT DISAGREE WITH THIS AT ALL!!! (Both bikes and cars)

[Luckylegs]

Learning on a 250 single is a neat way to keep all that manly throttle twisting in check. I mean, no matter how much you twist it, you wont be going insanely fast. You'll just be wasting petrol.

I've given up on car drivers. What a lost cause......

time and time again though, we see that its not the throttle (and speed) that is the key, its the inability to handle things like a need to go around an object suddenly or to stop quickly that causes the noobs to have issues.

[Luckylegs]

I think it's better than learning in a vehicle that kills someone as soon as you stop concentrating, but thats the thing if your in control of a motor you should Never stop concentrating.
And I would also expect people start to learn on their own property or on "dead" roads I don't expect people to be in peak traffic 1st time out, Hell I wasn't even allowed to start the engine till I learnt where the clutch took up or where the gears were

Sounds like you had the right approach to your learning. Its the cautious (I started learning when I was old and had lost my im eighteen and bulletproof) approach i took too, but...

what you suggest strikes me as akin to the 70km/r speed limit placed on learners. This should mean that they stay off any road requiring them to do that speed. Now in my opinion this means you stay off the highways until yoiuve clocked some decent time at lower speeds. (this is the same as your back or dead roads suggestion).

But whats happened, instead of taking the opportunity this presents to learn in a safer enviroinment people want to do what they want so suggested its unfair and that it should be scrapped.

[Scuba_Steve]

Sounds like you had the right approach to your learning. Its the cautious (I started learning when I was old and had lost my im eighteen and bulletproof) approach i took too, but...

what you suggest strikes me as akin to the 70km/r speed limit placed on learners. This should mean that they stay off any road requiring them to do that speed. Now in my opinion this means you stay off the highways until yoiuve clocked some decent time at lower speeds. (this is the same as your back or dead roads suggestion).

But whats happened, instead of taking the opportunity this presents to learn in a safer enviroinment people want to do what they want so suggested its unfair and that it should be scrapped.

I can see your point but like with the 70km/h limit that should have never been, if you have the skills to hit the highways or move out from the "dead" streets into traffic you should be able, you have to take the plunge sometime but I would just suggest they get the skills before trying. Admittedly there will be people who think "they are the man" & try straight away, but in general the only one they'll be hurting is themselves & pain helps people learn quick. You cannot protect people from themselves & we need to stop trying to.
Also that's why I'd have it 2yrs so people have the time, 3months "dead"/low traffic streets, 6 months round town, the rest your out and about. Some will take less, some will take more but 2yrs should give everyone enough time to learn the bike & the road, if they haven't they probably shouldn't be using it.

[oneofsix]

I can see your point but like with the 70km/h limit that should have never been, if you have the skills to hit the highways or move out from the "dead" streets into traffic you should be able, you have to take the plunge sometime but I would just suggest they get the skills before trying. Admittedly there will be people who think "they are the man" & try straight away, but in general the only one they'll be hurting is themselves & pain helps people learn quick. You cannot protect people from themselves & we need to stop trying to.
Also that's why I'd have it 2yrs so people have the time, 3months "dead"/low traffic streets, 6 months round town, the rest your out and about. Some will take less, some will take more but 2yrs should give everyone enough time to learn the bike & the road, if they haven't they probably shouldn't be using it.

it is often not a case of wanting to move out on to the faster road but having to and do so at 70k is deadly. Also the motorway, with all traffic moving in the same direction, is often safer than the urban streets with side streets and parked cars.

[Banditbandit]

Ya'all miss an importsnt point ...

I was a rebellious teenager .. and a rebellious bike rider and car driver .. (fuck the rules, I never agreed to follow them ... )

Bikes especially (long hair, no helmet, black leathers, cut off denims, high bars, speed) .. total rebellion ... and my mates were the same .. some of us lived some of us died ...

You are never going to take away the rebellion .. just watch the shots of "boy racers" ... drunken teenage rebels ...

I'm still a rebel, even nearing 60 years old (fuck the rules, I never agreed to follow them) .. I've just learnt that true fredom comes from not coming to the attention of the authorities ... and I follow the rules required to stay out of sight ('cept when I do get caught ...)

Attitude change hell - would take a Chinese Communist style reeducation centre and heaps of brainwashing the change me ...

I'm much more with the car culture and biker crazies than with the straights ...

Leave us alone ... it's our life .. let us die if we want .. it's our life to risk ... (my only problem is the ones who do take out innocent people .. and I don't mean passengers .. who drives the car that kills them all is often a random matter .. they are all the same ...)

As the spokesman of the 1960s said ...

"White-collar conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me.
They're hoping soon my kind will drop and die,
But I'm gonna wave my freak flag high . . . HIGH!

Hah, hah
Falling mountains just don't fall on me
Point on mister Buisnessman,
You can't dress like me.
Nobody know what I'm talking about
I've got my own life to live
I'm the one that's gonna have to die
When it's time for me to die
So let me live my life the way I want to."

Hendrix, If 6 was 9

[Luckylegs]

it is often not a case of wanting to move out on to the faster road but having to and do so at 70k is deadly

nope! You do not HAVE to ride a motorbike in a +70km/r zone ever. It is purely your choice.

...Anyway, I guess its moot, as whether I agree with the decision or not its being removed anyway, so... :woohoo: for all the learners!

[BOGAR]

Why is it after 10 years I only have to go in to the AA, pay some money, have a photo taken and that's it? The road code has changed in that time so it should be at the least a re-sit on the test to make sure you still now the rules and the current ones at that. Otherwise it just looks like a money generating system.

[oneofsix]

nope! You do not HAVE to ride a motorbike in a +70km/r zone ever. It is purely your choice.

...Anyway, I guess its moot, as whether I agree with the decision or not its being removed anyway, so... :woohoo: for all the learners!

BS you tell me home to get from Parm to Welly without, actually from Parm to anywhere. And parm is too small a pond to learn to ride properly in. I had the same issue when in Plimmerton, no where to go without hitting a 70k + zone.

[Luckylegs]

BS you tell me home to get from Parm to Welly without, actually from Parm to anywhere. And parm is too small a pond to learn to ride properly in. I had the same issue when in Plimmerton, no where to go without hitting a 70k + zone.

How is it bullshit. I was very careful to word it so dick-heads like you couldnt come back with a predictable answer like yours. Re-read it.... You have choices!!!

FWIW... Those of us from civilisation are unaware of what backwater shit hole you refer to when you say 'Parm'. Perhaps put a little bit of effort in eh?

FWIW (Some more) I assume you mean Palmerston North, in which case I presume the are some 70-80k roads on the fringes of the city before you hit the 100k zones?

[Scuba_Steve]

Why is it after 10 years I only have to go in to the AA, pay some money, have a photo taken and that's it? The road code has changed in that time so it should be at the least a re-sit on the test to make sure you still now the rules and the current ones at that. Otherwise it just looks like a money generating system.

fuck don't get me started on that utter extortion of money.

[Luckylegs]

Why is it after 10 years I only have to go in to the AA, pay some money, have a photo taken and that's it? The road code has changed in that time so it should be at the least a re-sit on the test to make sure you still now the rules and the current ones at that. Otherwise it just looks like a money generating system.

Because... They decided your license should carry a shot of your ugly mug (presumably to stop the instances of misuse of licesnses etc etc). Now, like the rest of us, yours Im sure gets uglier and uglier as the years roll by and the ability to recognise you now from a photo ten years ago is probably quite low, so....

...Nah, Im with you on this one actually. Its a money grabbing scheme. I know when they did my class six on my existing license they took three photos a few months apart and charged accordingly which seems a bit shit.

[oneofsix]

How is it bullshit. I was very careful to word it so dick-heads like you couldnt come back with a predictable answer like yours. Re-read it.... You have choices!!!

FWIW... Those of us from civilisation are unaware of what backwater shit hole you refer to when you say 'Parm'. Perhaps put a little bit of effort in eh?

FWIW (Some more) I assume you mean Palmerston North, in which case I presume the are some 70-80k roads on the fringes of the city before you hit the 100k zones?

typical Jaffa. Head so far up your own arse you think the rest of NZ has arces of super city to play in. So you can travel for a whole day with out exceeding a 70 k zoen, bully for you. Any civilised person, that includes most Aucklanders btw know a bit more about the country they live in and are more aware of the issues of their fellow citizens. Was Plimmerton too hard for a poor little jaffa to google? The 70 k learners limit was BS when it was introduced and is still BS now. The pollies even realised having cars towing trailers at 20k below the limit is crap so too is forcing a motorcyclist to ride at 30 k below the limit especial when their width is so small as to encourage the following driver to look past them and even force their way past.

[Parlane]

Why is it after 10 years I only have to go in to the AA, pay some money, have a photo taken and that's it? The road code has changed in that time so it should be at the least a re-sit on the test to make sure you still now the rules and the current ones at that. Otherwise it just looks like a money generating system.


And seeing as the tests are now done on computers, there would be little to no cost in implementing such a system.

[oneofsix]

And seeing as the tests are now done on computers, there would be little to no cost in implementing such a system.

totally agree but the pollies wont see it that way and that is the bit that worries me. They will likely see it as a goods idea because they will spin doctor factious cost into it so they can charge more. IMO what you pay for a new photo and a simple eye test should include a virtual test drive or at least multi-choice. I like the virtual test drive as people tick the right answers in multi-choice but are likely to show there bad habits in a virtual test drive.

[onearmedbandit]

The one thing you can't change (not yet anyway) is the teenage brain. How many teenagers clearly think out the consequences of their actions? It's why you have 18yr olds signing up to the army, not 30yr olds.

[Banditbandit]

typical Jaffa. Head so far up your own arse you think the rest of NZ has arces of super city to play in. So you can travel for a whole day with out exceeding a 70 k zoen, bully for you. Any civilised person, that includes most Aucklanders btw know a bit more about the country they live in and are more aware of the issues of their fellow citizens. Was Plimmerton too hard for a poor little jaffa to google? The 70 k learners limit was BS when it was introduced and is still BS now. The pollies even realised having cars towing trailers at 20k below the limit is crap so too is forcing a motorcyclist to ride at 30 k below the limit especial when their width is so small as to encourage the following driver to look past them and even force their way past.

You'e completely missing Lucky's point. You have choices!!! Choose to obey the law or choose not to ..

I'm with Lucky on this one .. I exercise my power to choose every day ... sometimes I choose to stay at or under the speed limit - sometimes I don't ...

[oneofsix]

You'e completely missing Lucky's point. You have choices!!! Choose to obey the law or choose not to ..

I'm with Lucky on this one .. I exercise my power to choose every day ... sometimes I choose to stay at or under the speed limit - sometimes I don't ...

You think it fair to load that choice on a learner? How arrogant.

Lucky's only point was learners should stay off higher speed roads ignoring that the lower speed roads can be more dangerous.

[Luckylegs]

You think it fair to load that choice on a learner? How arrogant.

Lucky's only point was learners should stay off higher speed roads ignoring that the lower speed roads can be more dangerous.

No! My only point was that you made a stupid statement and were wrong.

[oneofsix]

No! My only point was that you made a stupid statement and were wrong. FACT

you confuse fact with opinion which show how stupid you are. Fact is the 70k limit has been recognised as stupid and is being removed. Therefore you be stupid to argue it is good

[Voltaire]

I learnt to drive 35 years at 15, in a Morris 1300.
Tought myself to ride a motorbike at a mates as my parents hated them.

I'm teaching my son to drive in a 1970 VW....started off in the industrial estates and within a couple of weeks doing a bit of motorway and busy traffic.....40 HP, no power anything and manual......in fact I like it so much I leave the bike/van at home and drive the dub.....watch the world scurrying past to the next set of lights....
I taught him to ride a dirt bike....but I can't say I'm keen on him riding a road bike.
Cars now are too powerful, feel too safe and probably too cheap and cheap to run.

[Luckylegs]

you confuse fact with opinion which show how stupid you are. Fact is the 70k limit has been recognised as stupid and is being removed. Therefore you be stupid to argue it is good

Not at all... You appear to be confusing having access to a keyboard and the internet with assuming you have a basic comprehension of the english language!

1. No where have I written that I outright agree with the limit, nor have I suggested that I have an 'issue' with people who chose to break it.
2. What I have stated about your first post is fact! Y.O.U D.O N.O.T N.E.E.D T.O R.I.D.E A M.O.T.O.R.C.Y.C.L.E I.N A 7.0.K.+ Z.O.N.E IT IS YOUR CHOICE. You have other choices, Bus, train, car, bicylce, etc etc) Whether these are practicle is not the question.

[Luckylegs]

...Anyway, I didnt come in here to shoot fish in a barrel and since it aint increasing my post count, meh !

Back to the general question (from the original post) of whether the idea that someone should do time on two wheels before moving to a car. I simply dont see it making a difference.

My suggestion, and probably just as impracticle (spelling?) to implement is two have compulsory time at a morgue, hospital to see the results of road accidents... As per OAB's post above, this mean fack all to a teenager anyway...

[Sable]

I think so. Most people don't even seem to register that motorcycles exist, hence a lot of council roading and transport strategies. It will teach them the respect they should have for being allowed to control a 2 ton steel box where they can hurt other people instead of just themselves.

[Banditbandit]

You think it fair to load that choice on a learner? How arrogant.

Lucky's only point was learners should stay off higher speed roads ignoring that the lower speed roads can be more dangerous.

Load it onto learners???? Fuck .. they have a choice now .. whether you accept it or not ... I certainly made those choices when I was a learner rider .. and probably, from your POV, I made the wrong choices ...

I got my Thunderbird to 100mph when I was on a learner's licence (limit of 30mph from an admittedly poor memory ...)

[Parlane]

Not at all... You appear to be confusing having access to a keyboard and the internet with assuming you have a basic comprehension of the English language!


I have fixed it for you. So in future you can comphrehend the English language slightly more than present.

[Banditbandit]

I have fixed it for you. So in future you can comphrehend the English language slightly more than present.

Oh ... but .. Naaa .. fuck it .. don't get me started !!!

[Parlane]

Oh ... but .. Naaa .. fuck it .. don't get me started !!!

Come on, fix it for me. How else will I learn?!

[Banditbandit]

Come on, fix it for me. How else will I learn?!

What do you think I am a fucking teacher ??? (Oh .. wait ...)

[Luckylegs]

I have fixed it for you. So in future you can comphrehend the English language slightly more than present.

Nah... I'll bite!

In you're haste you've confused comprehension with grammar, punctuation and/or capitlization.

Tell me, who's the moron?

[Parlane]

Nah... I'll bite!

In you're haste you've confused comprehension with grammar, punctuation and/or capitlization.

Tell me, who's the moron?

Now you're trolling, right ?

[Banditbandit]

Come on, fix it for me. How else will I learn?!



I have fixed it for you. So in future you can comphrehend the English language slightly more than present.


Oh all right ... "slightly more than" is an expression of numerical comparison. What you are expressing is around quality not quanity and the correct word is "better".

Comprehend only has one H in it.

"It" is the incorrect use of the pronoun. The correct word is "that" as it refers specifically to the sentence you have quoted.

And there needs to be an "at" between "than" and 'present"

The correct English sentence should read:

"I have fixed that for you. So in future you can comprehend the English language slightly better than at present."

I hate the language Nazis .. 'cause they are usually as bad as the people they are attempting to correct .. but usually I can't be bothered .. and I use sloppy language in forums anyway ... and who gives a fuck ...

[Luckylegs]

Now you're trolling, right ?

I might bee

[Parlane]

Oh all right ... "slightly more than" is an expression of numerical comparison. What you are expressing is around quality not quanity and the correct word is "better".

Comprehend only has one H in it.

"It" is the incorrect use of the pronoun. The correct word is "that" as it refers specifically to the sentence you have quoted.

The correct English sentence should read:

"I have fixed that for you. So in future you can comprehend the English language slightly better than present."

I hate the language Nazis .. 'caue they are usually as bad as the people they are attempting to correct .. but usually I can't be bothered .. and I use sloppy language in forums anyway ..

I'd rep you again but I can't. Thankyou. (Seriously, the English language is being slaughtered by the internet)

Although I must point out the correction contained my original mistake :P (Or not.. I think you got there in time haha)

[Parlane]

I might bee

Buzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Banditbandit]

Although I must point out the correction contained my original mistake :P

Yeah .. I edited it several times and saved .. you responded while I was still working on it .. to back and read the final version .

Oh yeah .. and I'll admit my spelling is pretty bad ...