Driver Testing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crl

Unless it became politically fashionable I'm not sure that it would happen.

I think it is a good idea though, not just every 10 years but after licence suspensions also.

---

I don't. I think it is a total waste of money - the problem is mostly not lack of skill but not using them - and drivers are on their best behaviour in a test, and after the test they revert to normal.

But like you I don't think it is going to happen.


The problem is not driver skill or knowledge, but driver behaviour, mostly due to poor attitude. And as I pointed out, road deaths are already the lowest on record and way below some other preventable causes of death and injury.

John

Safety in any form of human endeavour, whether it is driving, flying, surgery or running a nuclear power station, is all a matter of adequate training, attitude and supervision. Of these, given that most licenced drivers in Australia have passed a test of their basic driving skills, and given that supervision is virtually non-existant, attitude is probably the issue that offers most in terms of improving safety. In aviation, we talk about airmanship which combines skill and, most importantly, attitude. And we supervise very very closely to detect less than optimal skills or attitudes. So in my view, additional supervision in the form of a driving and theory test every so often would probably be of some benefit, but probably of less benefit than addressing the attitude issue.

In my adopted home town of Canberra, there is virtually no policing of road rules, and I am frequently tail gated or overtaken by other drivers of all ages when travelling at the speed limit. Even school zones or road works (40 kph) with kids or workers very close to the lanes are ignored by a high percentage of drivers who blithely speed through at 60 or even 80, despite the fact that it significantly increases the risk to the school kids or workers. In one memorable blitz a few years ago, one woman, with school age kids, was booked three times on the same day speeding through the same school zone with the excuse that she was in a hurry. There is a significant number of drivers who believe that speed limit plus 20 is fine, which is probably why in some cases we have speed limits which are unnecessarily low.

Many people justify ignoring speed limits by arguing that speed does not kill. They are correct, but in the same way that it is also true that jumping off the Empire State Building won't kill you. It is the sudden stop that kills. Actually it is the rate of stopping on impact that kills, and that varies with the square of the speed, not the speed itself. Speed makes an accident more likely and increases the likelihood of serious injury or death in the event of an accident. Fact. Yet how many of us can honestly say that we never speed?

As others have said, the less chance there is of getting caught, the more likely we are to stretch what we do until we are driving not just unlawfully but dangerously. Who is then to blame: us or the government?

This has been a very good discussion, but it is time that each of us took personal responsibility for our own attitudes and actions and stopped thinking that a new law will fix the problem. The solution lies in our own hands, but there are sadly those who are psychologically unsuited to safe driving. They usually remove themselves from the gene pool. Sadly, they too often take others with them. And an occasional driving test will almost certainly not identify the problem.

Sorry, off the soap box now.

[FONT=""][COLOR=""][SIZE=""]Older drivers blame young ones for their lack of experience and judgement, and for being crazy as a cut snake. Younger drivers blame older ones for their slowing reflexes and faculties. Many women think men drive aggressively and many men think women drive timidly.
These are all stereotypes but the one truth is that practice will consolidate driving habits. If you practice driving faults they become second nature, but like the vehicle, the nut behind the wheel needs regular maintenance and testing.
If someone tells you they have driven for 20 years without incident, then that tells you that they haven't had their driving examined for two decades and are probably unaware of the rules that have changed in that time.
It's nothing personal.[/SIZE][/COLOR][/FONT]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grumndriva

.........
In my adopted home town of Canberra,.........

---

Sounds as if you drive in the same Canberra that I do from time to time!

The statistical evidence quite clearly shows that alcohol, not speed, is the most important single factor in road deaths, almost certainly followed by road construction - so why the emphasis on speed?

But of course no accident has a single cause, and speed is very often a contributing factor, although when the dead driver has a blood alcohol measurement of twice the legal limit, you have to ask whether it should be listed as a "speeding" death.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pop058

Found this and thought it is was pretty dam good (read bloody awesome ) car control. If only we could develop this level of skill in our new drivers.

YouTube- amazing car control


The "drifting" lads have got nothing on this guy :)

---

That's the last skill road drivers need to develop. The training needed is not car control, it's observation, car sympathy and attitude. The idea is to never get into the situation where you'll need to know how to correct a slide.

What learning anyway about the "inevitable" time when you do? No point. To correct slides consistently and skillfully you need constant practice and where will Joe Average get that?

Pure car control courses give people a false sense of security. Great fun of course, but not what is needed for safer roads.

Also, as stability control is becoming more prevalent and will be mandated by law there will be less need to know how to recover a car in the first place. The wet rounadbout slide situation will become almost unheard of.