Zero alcohol for drivers under 20.

[Mikkel]

Summary:

In short your entire argument about why these young people should not have a driver's lincence is based on safety. My entire point is that the issue is about MORE than safety though I know safety is an important part of considerations. As I have said the statistics you cling to do not take into account any positive externalities and that in all your posts you have failed to acknowledge any problems that would arise from a change seems to indicate that you have not considered this issue as a whole. The options in NZ are limited - Kiwirail has trouble keeping a service going in Wellington alone let alone the whole country. And the population distribution is such that it would not be viable to have an extensive train or bus service into low population density areas. Also given that the AA doesn't think the age rise is a solution and they probably know more about it than most, and generally public opinion is against it (as per http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...forms-attacked).

So you concur that there are valid safety concerns in regards to letting young kids drive, but believe that the pros outweighs the cons?

You ever wonder if that was happening to teens regarding driving?

Of course it does - and the same is also valid for drink drivers. That doesn't make it acceptable.

By that logic it would seem you don't believe in putting criminals in jail. See, with good reason rights such as freedom of movement should be revoked. If you see a higher than normal proportion of a particular nationality committing crime, would you advocate to have all people of that nationality put in jail? or just othe ones that do the crime?

Hanging is a valid punishment for repeat offending of a serious and anti-social nature. Let's leave it at that. And no, I do not advocate painting every individual within a specific group with the same brush.

What I really dislike about your argumentation is that you consider raising the legal driving age a punishment imposed upon those who will have to wait another year or three. That argument is patently ridiculous and in stark contrast to your otherwise fairly reasonable points. An inconvenience to kids in rural areas I'll happily grant that it is, but a punishment, no.

And yet you have barely acknowledged that there is any issues other that safety. People in general should be able to cope with driving on NZ roads and a high proportion do. But you are advocating for changes.

Well, seeing as many of these initiatives are driving by the fact that the road-toll in NZ is disproportionately high compared to other western countries, I'd argue that road-safety is the primary concern for any proposed changes. That's not to suggest that a holistic approach shouldn't be applied.

Raise the bar on testing - ok. Raise the bar on age will only make some people's lives a lot more difficult and create an older class of learners.

An older, and generally more mature, group of learners - yes, that is what I have been saying all along. And you "some" should be "a few". Hell, if we removed the dole tomorrow that would make life a lot more difficult for quite a few people - still I'm sure we could easily find a large number of people who would readily subscribe to the idea without considering the possible ramifications.

Surely you're not making assumptions things here?

Yes, I was making the assumption you were being honest in relating your driving experience - was that an unreasonable assumption or do I need to consider all of your input to be of questionable integrity?

That sounds good and simple but our government is about taking a sledgehammer to what could be adjusted with a screwdriver

Maybe, and such an attitude needs to be done away with as well!

Bad drivers who have attended good classes are still bad drivers.

At least they won't have an excuse and chances are that there will be less bad drivers coming out of the classroom than went into it. Otherwise, why would you even bother with the lame excuse for a licensing system here in NZ? Why not just say "do whatever the fuck you want, no-one gives a flying fuck!"? (And for the record, that is exactly what the current licensing system says - maybe without the exclamation mark and expletives - and as a result quite a few of the people who go through it don't give a flying fuck either.)

[Patrick]

She has now had her learners for 2.5 years!

Which is another issue.... Why are learners able to sit on their scratch and win for up to 10 years. Why not give them an expiry, say after 1 year if they haven't had a crack at the restircted by then? Or 2yrs if they have... (but perhaps ban them if they can't pass the restricted...)?

[crazyhorse]

Which is another issue.... Why are learners able to sit on their scratch and win for up to 10 years. Why not give them an expiry, say after 1 year if they haven't had a crack at the restircted by then? Or 2yrs if they have... (but perhaps ban them if they can't pass the restricted...)?

I totally agree. Although it is total laziness LOL not that she hasn't passed her restricted, more that she hasn't carried on driving/riding.......