Young drivers more dangerous then they'll admit.

Sleipnir

From d'indo.

So from what I can see they're saying "We're great drivers but very dangerous motorists"
Well done lads, see you on the (side of the) road!




YOUNG drivers are far more dangerous than they are prepared to admit, a new survey reveals.

While nearly nine-in-10 rate themselves as "good" or "very good" drivers, a substantial number admit they drive "fast" or "dangerously".

The authors of the survey, conducted on behalf of the RAC Foundation, say the figures underline the serious threat these drivers can pose to other road users.

They suggest that important safety messages are not getting through to those in the 17-24 age group because the perception of their driving abilities contrasts starkly with the facts.

Road casualty statistics for here and the UK show this age group suffers the highest number of road deaths and serious injuries.

Almost 90pc of young men consider themselves "good" or "very good" drivers despite the fact that 62pc also describe their driving as "fast". A quarter admit their driving is "aggressive".

The extensive study involved 1,525 young drivers; 85pc were under 25 and 86pc held a full driving licence (59pc for fewer than two years).

RAC Ireland managing director Robert Taylor last night said the figures highlight a huge gap between driver perception and reality.

He said: "This survey confirms that many young motorists seriously underestimate the risks involved with driving.

"Remember, our shambolic licencing system allows drivers on the road with no experience or training of any kind.

"Pick up any newspaper on a Monday morning and you'll read about the latest young victims who have died on our roads that weekend. Most of them probably thought they were good drivers."

He said that while the figures are drawn from a survey of young drivers across the UK, it was safe to assume that the "same mindset" exists among young drivers in Ireland.

When the drivers were pressed on whether they would benefit from further training, they were supportive of the idea.

Most recognised the potential benefits of further driver training, with 75pc believing they would be safer drivers as a result.

BUMP!

He said that while the figures are drawn from a survey of young drivers across the UK, it was safe to assume that the "same mindset" exists among young drivers in Ireland.

Yup - every youngfella has a union-jack taped to the ass of his car!!!

I love these informative and well researched articles - funny how they always agree with commonly held perception.... Still it is just easier to write a sweeping generalisation than research the truth!! How come you never see this: Young people, driving their daddy's car on their first provisional are more likely to be a danger to others - those driving 7 years without so much as a speeding ticket probably arent....

Imposter

Originally posted by BUMP!
Yup - every youngfella has a union-jack taped to the ass of his car!!!

I love these informative and well researched articles - funny how they always agree with commonly held perception.... Still it is just easier to write a sweeping generalisation than research the truth!! How come you never see this: Young people, driving their daddy's car on their first provisional are more likely to be a danger to others - those driving 7 years without so much as a speeding ticket probably arent....

Or what about an article on the demographics of those who drink and drive. In my experience this is mostly the older generations.

Sleipnir

Originally posted by BUMP!
Yup - every youngfella has a union-jack taped to the ass of his car!!!

I love these informative and well researched articles - funny how they always agree with commonly held perception.... Still it is just easier to write a sweeping generalisation than research the truth!! How come you never see this: Young people, driving their daddy's car on their first provisional are more likely to be a danger to others - those driving 7 years without so much as a speeding ticket probably arent....

It's a survey of young drivers attitudes. The article simply refers to the facts and figures of said survey.
The "truth" as you put it is in the opinions given by the survey respondants and the resultant statistics.
Research was done; IT'S A SURVEY - THAT'S THE RESEARCH, GEDDIT???
A survey of young people's opinions of their own driving, okay?

Would you say that there are great differences between a group of 20 year old drivers in the U.K. to a group of 20 year old drivers here?
What would those differences be?

It's not a commonly held "perception", young people are statistically more likely to be involved in a collision than older people
Again, that not a "commonly held perception" it's a fact.

Or what about an article on the demographics of those who drink and drive. In my experience this is mostly the older generations.

Explain your views on the demographics to this victim. I'm sure knowing that she was permanently brain-damaged by a young person and not by one of those in 'your experience' will help reassure her.



A YOUNG single mother whose drunk driving left a student with permanent brain damage was jailed for 18 months yesterday.

Faye Sherlock (23), originally from Highland Grove, The Park, Cabinteely, and now of Bray, was sentenced to 18 months in jail for dangerous driving causing actual bodily harm, six months for drunk driving, and banned from driving for 10 years.

The single mother was more than three times the legal limit when she crashed into a car causing Yvonne Nutuhle (23) to be flung out the rear side window and thrown 26ft away. The victim landed on the opposite side of a dual carriageway at Blackrock in August 2002. Ms Sherlock broke a red light and smashed into the car carrying Ms Nutuhle who suffered severe brain injuries and will require 24-hour supervision for the rest of her life. Judge Michael White said he did not give a longer jail sentence because the defendant had a young son that needed care. The court had been told the child was emotionally disturbed and that the child's father was medically unwell.

A conviction for driving without insurance was taken into consideration. The judge ordered that the prison warrant not be issued until August 3 so Ms Sherlock could make arrangements for the care of her seven-year-old son.

He said: "This was a a seriously aggravating case of dangerous driving and despite the defence's long plea for a non-custodial sentence the court must impose a custodial sentence. The medical reports on Ms Nutuhle make for very sad reading.

"The sentence would be far greater but for the difficulties surrounding Ms Sherlock's son such is the seriousness with which I regard this case. The aggravating factors far outweigh the mitigating circumstances and the sentence of the court will still be a significant one."

The victim's father, Godfrey Zireva, said afterwards his daughter's life had been shattered and her whole family devastated.

He said his his daughter had arrived in Ireland from Zimbabwe in 2002 seeking refugee status. She was looking forward to the future and was about to begin an accountancy course at Dun Laoghaire Senior College.

But now she was a patient at the Royal Hospital in Donnybrook in need of 24-hour constant care. The brain damage was very severe, he said.

He said the length of the jail sentence was not an important matter for him as his main concern was his own daughter.

Ms Sherlock had told the court that she was the victim of a sexual assault by a very close friend three months before the accident.

She had not told any of her friends but on the night a friend of the offender had joined their group in the pub and told everybody about the incident.

Ms Sherlock had written a letter to the Nutuhle family to express her total remorse at what had occurred and said it would be with her for the rest of her life.

Cerberus

Boys will be boys your honour! Of course the majority of young males are reckless, drive too fast for the conditions, take more risks, are over confident and do not drive within the limits that their experience allows. Why is this news? Last time I checked, young males are like this in every aspect of life - not just driving. It's what young males do.

The system allows little Johnny GTi to hop into a car once he turns 17 and assumes that he is fit to drive and expects him to drive with the same caution and skill as a family man with 20 years driving experience. When little Johnny GTi is caught going down the motorway in his Peugot 106 flat out at 77 mile an hour we nail his ass with 2 points and a 80 euro fine. Next week little Johnny GTi is caught going down the same stretch of motorway at 77 mph and the man with the hair dryer and shiny shoes nails his ass again with 2 points and 80 euros. Now Little Johnny GTi can't afford insurance again til he's 20. Does he deserve the points and fines? Yes. Does he learn anything from his punishment? Yes - buy a radar gun detector next time.


The only way you are gonna teach us young fellas is by proper driver instruction from the age of 15 upwards and a long, variable weather condition test in the day and night, in city and country roads - like what they do in Germany. You have to show them why it takes so much longer to stop at 70 than at 50. Why it takes twice as long to stop in the wet as the dry. Why their 15 year old rust bucket is not fit for racing Beemers. Why to always wear seat belts front AND back. In Ireland, your average 21 year old will pay over €4000 to insure a 1.6 litre car. In Germany, the average 21 year old will pay around €400. That is because of the comprehensive driving instruction and testing procedures they have.

The points system is a ****ing money racket and a slight of hand trick to make it look like the guberment is doing something about the young 'thugs' on the road. If they really want to do something constructive then they should teach us how to drive the way they want us to drive, instead of punishing young fellas for driving the only way a young fella knows how to drive...

seamus

He said that while the figures are drawn from a survey of young drivers across the UK, it was safe to assume that the "same mindset" exists among young drivers in Ireland.

Well, actually, I'd disagree. It's not safe to assume. Irish and British drivers have very different mindsets. I'm not saying that Irish kids would be any safer, but different, localised conclusions can be drawn. I personally would believe that a lot of Irish would rate themselves as good or very good, but wouldn't admit to being fast or aggressive or dangerous.

(59pc for fewer than two years).

See? Pure fluff. He's talking about young drivers and presenting their lack of experience as if it's unexpected.

Imposter

Originally posted by Sleipnir
Explain your views on the demographics to this victim.

This is an isolated case. I don't doubt that there will be cases in all demographics. Are you saying it's mostly younger females who drink and drive?

Originally posted by Cerberus
If they really want to do something constructive then they should teach us how to drive the way they want us to drive, instead of punishing young fellas for driving the only way a young fella knows how to drive...

I agree the licensing system and the way people learn to drive in Ireland needs changing but by what you just said it seems that all 'young fellas' are like this. So how do you think things change as they get older, after all the 'auld fellas' learned the same way and they are 'statistically' better drivers?

leeroybrown

Are you saying it's mostly younger females who drink and drive?

I think it's reasonably clear that he's just making an illustrative point that statistics/demographics don't matter to victims, and not inferring anything about female drivers.

Posted by Cerberus:
In Ireland, your average 21 year old will pay over €4000 to insure a 1.6 litre car. In Germany, the average 21 year old will pay around €400. That is because of the comprehensive driving instruction and testing procedures they have.

While I agree that a reasonable portion of the difference can be apportioned to driver training, an equal weighting can be placed on the size of claims here and the percentage of every premium that is payed to solicitors/barristers due to legal fees.

Sleipnir

Originally posted by Imposter
Are you saying it's mostly younger females who drink and drive?

Yeah, of course that's exactly what I'm trying to say. I'm six. :rolleyes:

Imposter

Originally posted by leeroybrown
I think it's reasonably clear that he's just making an illustrative point.

And I was making a point when i first mentioned drink driving.

To expand the point further I think that it's highly unfair that the media portrays young drivers the way they do while not conducting research and publishing stories that would reveal other demographics to be in a majority for different offences. Focusing in on young drivers and young males in particular might be matching their readers point of view but it's hardly balanced journalism.

I'd love to dee proper statistics on all driving related offences and accidents, broken down by age, licence type, sex, number of years insured and cost of claim (if one exists). Also some idea of same with cases that were settled privately and not put through insurance. While this is hardly possible to do accurately (especially the last bit) I would imagine that yes young male drivers might cost more to insure (if all accidents are claimed for) but not by much and I would also say I don't think they'd be the biggest offenders in terms of driving offenses.

Slephnir posting an article which is clearly an isolated case is hardly valid when we are making generalisations on different demographics. As I said earlier there will be people in all demographics that can be used as examples of people not in the relevant demographic.

Cerberus

Boys will be boys your honour! Of course the majority of young males are reckless, drive too fast.....

Sorry, I didn't say all young fellas, I said the majority. It's just a bit awkward typing 'the majority of young male drivers' 20 times in the one post.

So how do you think things change as they get older, after all the 'auld fellas' learned the same way and they are 'statistically' better drivers?

The way it is now, 'stone-mad-young-fellas' turn into 'sensible-careful-auld-fellas' through time and experience. They've had enough close ones to realise that taking it just that bit easier on the road will save your ass and still get you to your destination in time. Hell, it ain't fun-driving, but killing yourself or someone else ain't fun either. Proper driving instruction and tests that I mentioned earlier would cut the amount of time and experience necessary to become a responsible and careful 'auld fella'.

Cerberus

leeroybrown, that's very true. Our legal system with regards claims for compensation is permanently bent over taking it.

leeroybrown

Afaik (correct me if I'm wrong), Germany have a fixed list of compensation levels for specific injuries resulting from accidents.

Hopefully, when the PIAB comes into force here for motor accident claims it will be offering fair but not excessive settlements. I think this will require the Judiciary to place a very high weight on the opinion/ruling of the PIAB, otherwise the ambulance chasers will be running stalls outside the PIAB assesment offices.

BUMP!

2 points:

First when people say that 'most' young males are wreckless it is a sweeping generalisation derived from the blunt stat that (apparently) more young males end up in accidents than any other demographic. If you had access to all the raw data detailing the amount of hours/miles clocked up per week and in what kind of areas (i.e. bad accidents happen more often on 60mph stretches than in towns) and under what kind of circumstances you might find that while most accidents involve males they also clock up much more (fast) miles than most other demographic. (although insuresrs would have you believe there is no correlation between miles travelled and accidents)

Second, there is a need for serious training measures to be brought in in this country as basically the majority of people, whether they be full licence or provo, are NOT good drivers. SHOCK! When I did my test, all I had to prove was that I could get around a town without killing anyone but the real skill in driving comes in driving at night, driving at an appropriate speed for the car and conditions (not too fast and def not toooo slow) and understanding how to overtake. The reason young people crash simply is because if your not thought then you have to learn and unfortunately that can involve mistakes...

....I love these rants - you'd swear I wasn't supposed to be working......

Sleipnir

Originally posted by BUMP!
2 points:

First when people say that 'most' young males are wreckless it is a sweeping generalisation derived from the blunt stat that (apparently) more young males end up in accidents than any other demographic. If you had access to all the raw data detailing the amount of hours/miles clocked up per week and in what kind of areas (i.e. bad accidents happen more often on 60mph stretches than in towns) and under what kind of circumstances you might find that while most accidents involve males they also clock up much more (fast) miles than most other demographic. (although insuresrs would have you believe there is no correlation between miles travelled and accidents)

NO! A sweeping generalisation would be to say that all young male drivers are wreckless. 'Most' is not a sweeping generalisation which you can clearly see from young drivers own opinions of their own driving.

Almost 90pc of young men consider themselves "good" or "very good" drivers despite the fact that 62pc also describe their driving as "fast". A quarter admit their driving is "aggressive".

Note the phrases "consider themselves" and "describe their driving"
This isn't an article making generalisation, this is young people talking about their own driving, yah?

they also clock up much more (fast) miles than most other demographic

Are you seriously using that as an excuse/reason?!?
They do more fast miles? Oh well then, we were all wrong, you're grand!
Ah ha! That's why you have more accidents!

I FEEL LIKE I'M TAKING CRAZY PILLS HERE!

Imposter

Originally posted by Sleipnir

Almost 90pc of young men consider themselves "good" or "very good" drivers despite the fact that 62pc also describe their driving as "fast". A quarter admit their driving is "aggressive".

Note the phrases "consider themselves" and "describe their driving"
This isn't an article making generalisation, this is young people talking about their own driving, yah?

The phrases "consider themselves" and "describe their driving" were hardly put there by the young drivers. The 'journalist' could phrased it very differently and not painted young drivers in such a bad light.

The 'fast' bit doesn't look good but what was the question and what were the options. The report has a bias against young drivers. How many older drivers would say they were aggressive? How many older drivers have a provisional or have their full licence for less than 2 years? How many older drivers have never done a driving test? I could go on...

BUMP!

NO! A sweeping generalisation would be to say that all young male drivers are wreckless. 'Most' is not a sweeping generalisation which you can clearly see from young drivers own opinions of their own driving.

Semantics. And its not their own opinions of their own driving - its someones interpretation of a survey. Seriously though, if 90pc consider themselves good or very good then why would a 'substantial' (what is substantial) number say they drive fast or dengeroulsy? (Thats like saying I'm a good footballer but keep giving away the ball!) It mentions drivers being fast and it mentions being aggressive without ever elaborating into what they consider those 2 things to be. To a point I'd consider myself fast and aggresive - not because I live the other side of 80 or sit on peoples asses - but because I travel at 65 when possible and if there is someone in front of me at 45 then I'll overtake at the first safe opportunity. Never had trouble with the law as I am also a safe (or so I hope after 7 years without a bump or a ticket) driver.

This isn't an article making generalisation, this is young people talking about their own driving, yah?

No its just another piece of propaganda ensuring that young people get written off without even consideration. Its because of crap like this that your ins is so high as it lends itself toward the notion that young drivers deserve to be screwed without an independent and open evaluation of the facts.

They do more fast miles? Oh well then, we were all wrong, you're grand

Apologies, I should have written it more SSLLOOWWLLYY so you could understand. If a demographic spends more time travelling between towns (more often that not on bad roads) then they are travelling at the higher speed limit (60 in case you dont know) and shockingly it appears that mistakes (and everyone makes mistakes - especially when learning) at that speed have worse consequences than one at 30mph. My point is that if you factor this stuff in then all of a sudden males aren't all lunatics (although here are some in every category) they are just the ones who travel more ... if your not on the road you cant have an accident and the longer your on the road the more likely an accident.

Sleipnir

It's not biased because it's a survey of taken by young drivers.
It would be biased if other people outside of the "young driver" demographic took part in the survey.


25% considered their driving to be 'agressive'
Now, you can tell me that maybe the surveyors put
"do you get mildly annoyed every now and then" as a question and then put 'agressive' down on the results but that would be speculation.
i would imagine the questions would have read something like

"would you consider your driving style as agressive?"

"Please tick the box to rate your driving. Bad, good very good etc....

Now, for a survey, you would just count the ticks so it cannnot be biased.
You just end up with a certain number of good, very good etc.



All the other things you mentioned couldn't be part of a specific survey. If you took all those options into account in ONE survey you'd end up with no useful information whatsoever. It's not possible to run a survey of ALL demographics and ALL variations.
That's when you end up with 'generalisations' screwing up your results.


anyway, work, work, work.

BUMP!

Remember doing a bit of stats in college and our lecture telling us that stats and surveys are the best way to convince people of anything you wish. If you are doing a survey trying to get people to say what you wish then you frame the appropriate question with other questions leading to the result you want and then phrase the question you want answered in an appropriate manner. Thats why surveys are rarely released in full, rather just a small portion of the survey is summarised. There are examples of how to do it on the web somewhere and they were actually posted either on this forum or on the motornet forum before.

And questions like do you consider yourself fast, aggressive etc can be quite misleading as it leaves the question of interpretation. Is it better to be too fast or slow, aggressive or placid which depending on the question before could be given any meaning you like.

silly e.g.:
Q1 Whats more annoying? Slow drivers or fast drivers - tick box.
Q2 How would you describe your driving? slow to fast - tick box.

And as for a proper survey into driving habits of certain demographics - it can be done but its just more convenient to rape the entire male pop than to penalise the people that are actually dangerous. (By the way raping any one demographic sort of defeats the purpose of any kind of social insurance...)

mike65

Anyway back to main point. Young drivers are most likely to be killed or injured by thier own bad driving. This can be seen by the large number of single vehicle incidents.

ALL repeat ALL drivers when new drive beyond thier capabilities this does'nt have to mean by driving at faster speeds than they can cope with, it shows itself in any number of ways like overtaking and lane postioning.

Almost no male driver will admit they are not very good, its like saying yor crap at sex or have no sense of humour.

When most ppl killed on our roads are over 25 and have
100,000 miles under thier belts then I'll belive young drivers are'nt the most dangerous.

Mike.

Imposter

Originally posted by mike65
Anyway back to main point. Young drivers are most likely to be killed or injured by thier own bad driving. This can be seen by the large number of single vehicle incidents.

To be pedantic, I see you mention young drivers, not young male drivers, as does this article in all but one example. The article is clearly biased and the survey may have been leading (it may not but we don't know either way). I thought the article was the main point and that is what I am critiscising.

ALL repeat ALL drivers when new drive beyond thier capabilities this does'nt have to mean by driving at faster speeds than they can cope with, it shows itself in any number of ways like overtaking and lane postioning.

I agree with you here about a driver's experience but this is not what this article is saying. To quote the article: "The extensive study involved 1,525 young drivers; 85pc were under 25 and 86pc held a full driving licence (59pc for fewer than two years)."
So now 15% of these young drivers were over 25 so where do their boundaries for young actually lie? What age was the oldest person. 14% have a provisional licence so why not break the statistics down based on the licences held by these people. 59% of 85% or 59% of total? By the way it was written I'd say the former but it was worded to imply the later.

But you are right in that more credible or at least better reported statistics point to younger drivers being a bigger risk but then they don't consider all the variables either.

BUMP!

Young drivers are most likely to be killed or injured by thier own bad driving.

Young drivers are more likely to be killed or injured. Not everyone who crashes is a victim of bad driving - accidents do happen and are unavoidable if you spend alot of time on the road. Its stereotypes, promoted by articles such as this, that render young (male) drivers guilty without trial.
Put it this way - you hear a few blokes were killed the weekend. Does it ever go into the exact details of how the crash happened or who exactly was to blame? No, they just mention that a young male was involved ... implying that the lad was at fault.

Almost no male driver will admit they are not very good

No driver , male or female, will admit they're no good (most people dont really know how good a driver they are - just that they can move a car up and down a street). Anyway its not generally a question of ability (how often have you had to slide round a bend or doughnut out of trouble!!!) but of judgement and experience. Simple fact - if you are experienced then you are less likely to panic if something happens. Less panic - more chance. Its experience that gets you out of danger - not your skill behind the wheel.