Tougher conditions tipped for teen licences

**Ixion** · 9th August 2009, 18:27

Originally Posted by bogan

It'd work in cities, but i grew up on a farm, had a number of jobs over 25km away, the first 5 of which was gravel. Do you expect people in that situation to cycle to work every day, rain snow or shine (theres no buses in the wops), it'd be an extra hour and a half commute every day.

..

Yes .

**p.dath** · 9th August 2009, 18:36

Originally Posted by bogan

I see where you're coming from, but I don't think the possibility of saving a few lives, justifies inconveniencing the masses. Its a slippery slope that one, one I think we're too far down already. In this case I reckon theres better solutions than banning driving for young-uns altogether.

Here's a good question for you then. How much would you be prepared to pay to save someone else's life?
And I guess you had better hope they would be prepared to spend as much to save yours.

**crazyhorse** · 9th August 2009, 18:43

I don't believe it is the age of the driver - lets face it, there wouldn't be too many of us that did NOT get our licence at the age of 15!!!

Look at the vehicles out there, that the younger generation have at their fingertips. When I grew up, we were driving things like Morris minors, Hilman Imps, Mini's etc. Very safe cars compared to the boy racer shit out there that these kids drive - and some of them are faster than our cars.

So I believe that they should put restrictions of the kind of vehicles the young kids drive, not the age thing. Won't make a difference if they get their licence at 18 or 20. The cars are still fast and deadly.

**bogan** · 9th August 2009, 18:50

Originally Posted by p.dath

Here's a good question for you then. How much would you be prepared to pay to save someone else's life?
And I guess you had better hope they would be prepared to spend as much to save yours.

Well itd depend on who and why i was saving them, as well as my financial circumstances, which wouldn't be too flash if id been an hour late for work every day

The theme here seems to be that survival must be placed above all else, getting out taking risks where necessary and living it up is a far better option in my opinion. Its why I ride.

**James Deuce** · 9th August 2009, 19:01

Originally Posted by bogan

Well itd depend on who and why i was saving them, as well as my financial circumstances, which wouldn't be too flash if id been an hour late for work every day

The theme here seems to be that survival must be placed above all else, getting out taking risks where necessary and living it up is a far better option in my opinion. Its why I ride.

That's not the theme at all. The theme is actually earning a living, struggling to get to a better place, learning the value of things.

Not ticking up an R34 Skyline to drive 25kms to work.

Being an hour late to work every day just means you're lacking a decent work ethic. It's not because you don't have a car, it's because you're lazy and unmotivated.

**Genestho** · 9th August 2009, 20:00

Originally Posted by p.dath

I wonder how many of those 37% of fatal accidents statistics also involved alcohol. I don't know, but perhaps the determining factor may not be just the age but the use of alcohol as well.

Perhaps maybe in reviewing the age limit for getting a licence we also look at introducing an alcohol limit of zero for those on a learner licence.

I think it might be an idea to make the age of eligibility to buy alcohol, get a drivers licence, and enter the armed services all be made the same ...

According to the stats......page 6 splits up the causes.

**p.dath** · 9th August 2009, 20:30

Okay from the stats then young drivers mostly have accidents involving alcohol, speed or drugs.

Making alcohol harder to get will help with one of the issues. But what do you do about speed?

Maybe make the penalties for young speeders more severe? Perhaps an automatic 7 day suspension on your first speeding offence while on a learners? 2nd offence 30 days, 3rd offence 1 year and confiscation of vehicle for 30 days.
Perhaps make the penalty so severe that leaners wont risk speeding?

**James Deuce** · 9th August 2009, 20:36

Someone's forgotten what it is to be young I see. The tougher the penalties, the more attractive the verboten substance.

**bogan** · 9th August 2009, 21:13

Originally Posted by p.dath

Okay from the stats then young drivers mostly have accidents involving alcohol, speed or drugs.

Making alcohol harder to get will help with one of the issues. But what do you do about speed?

Maybe make the penalties for young speeders more severe? Perhaps an automatic 7 day suspension on your first speeding offence while on a learners? 2nd offence 30 days, 3rd offence 1 year and confiscation of vehicle for 30 days.
Perhaps make the penalty so severe that leaners wont risk speeding?

The problem with the 'stick' solutions is that there are not enough cops to effectively police such laws, they're still struggling away with the DUI's. Some way to change the attitudes, make speeding/dangerous driving be shunned as much as drunk driving, and ensure learners are fully informed of the consequences.

Or do a one other country does (cant member which one) and have scooter licenses available from age 15, and cars a few years later. Could even postpone the car age for any speeding etc infringements given while on the scooter license. Young people would then be mobile and cud get jobs no hassels, but be far less of a risk to themselves and others on the roads

**James Deuce** · 10th August 2009, 07:42

Originally Posted by bogan

Or do a one other country does (cant member which one) and have scooter licenses available from age 15, and cars a few years later. Could even postpone the car age for any speeding etc infringements given while on the scooter license. Young people would then be mobile and cud get jobs no hassels, but be far less of a risk to themselves and others on the roads

Only works in countries with dense urban connurbations like Italy, Spain, or China. They are limited to 50cc scooters in European countries that encourage scooter use, and Italy have introduced a compulsory helmet law which nearly killed Aprilia.

**CookMySock** · 10th August 2009, 07:48

Kids don't need restrictions on what type of car, or where they can go with it. They will find workarounds for that almost immediately.

What they need is a rope around their neck if they fuck up. Then they don't fuck up. You watch.

I think comprehensive insurance should not be permitted for teen drivers - that just allows them to do anything with no consequences.

Instead, they should be put into a compulsory savings scheme - $20 a week. The idea is, if they are involved in any harm at all they are forced to remain in the scheme until it's paid back. If they have no accidents they get all their money back at 25 y/o - a fat ten grand wad of cash - do you think they will be looking forward to this day?

If they DO have accidents, they might still be in the scheme at 35 y/o, paying in whatever the scheme demands. Not nice. The scheme pays out to all and sundry who are interfered with.

It also gets people thinking what a ripoff insurance really is.

Steve

**sunhuntin** · 10th August 2009, 08:06

i dont think scooters are the answer either.
there are a number of high school kids have scooters, and theres a group of boys [i call them the bumble bee brigade due to the noise of their scoots] who are always up and down mainstreet, under and overtaking cars wheres theres no room, under and overtaking each other and causing the other to wobble all over the lane. they also do non moving wheel stands at the lights [revving and pulling the front up without moving] they are almost worse than boy racers cos more of them can fit in the lane in a tight group. most of them are wearing l plates.
im willing to bet that in bigger cities, the packs of scoot riders act worse.

i definately think limiting what they can drive is a good idea, but if someone wants to be a jerk, they will eventually be one anyway. my brother learned to drive in dads lada, and then they bought him a dunger of a mini. he eventually moved on to i think a mazda, which he used to take a 50k corner to fast, rolled it, destroyed a brick fence and nearly killed a couple of his mates and himself. by the time this happened, i was so used to him fucking up every week that i didnt even respond. it did put me off driving however.

**CookMySock** · 10th August 2009, 08:39

Originally Posted by sunhuntin

... the bumble bee brigade

It doesnt do any harm though, it just winds people up who are prone to that, but those people are going to get wound about something anyway, so who cares.

Originally Posted by sunhuntin

i definately think limiting what they can drive is a good idea, but if someone wants to be a jerk, they will eventually be one anyway.

So why is limiting cars a good idea if it doesnt work?

Originally Posted by sunhuntin

my brother learned to drive in dads lada, and then they bought him a dunger of a mini. he eventually moved on to i think a mazda, which he used to take a 50k corner to fast, rolled it, destroyed a brick fence and nearly killed a couple of his mates and himself. by the time this happened, i was so used to him fucking up every week that i didnt even respond. it did put me off driving however.

Here you hit the nail on the head. What kind of car was he driving? A dunger, right?

What are the personal consequences of him trashing it? Nothing? Uh huh. He will just get another shitbox and trash that too, along with someones front fence and teenage daughter.

That is the problem in a nutshell. No consequences. That must change.

Steve

**bogan** · 10th August 2009, 09:20

Dunno bout no consequences, this thread is about the high death rates for young drivers, thats a pretty big consequence. The same mentality of "it'll never happen to me" will probably transfer to "ill never get caught" if the fines etc are increased.
I think the motivation of young people who speed excessively and drive dangerously needs to be thouroughly looked into and addressed.