Driving test again for breaking rules? - Good/Bad idea

rebel.ranter

Would you support an idea where you would have to re-sit your test for some or all of the following reasons?

- Htting 12 points on your license
- Proven to have caused a serious RTA
- Periodical re-tests, a NCT for the driver if you like (evry 10-20 years)

I know there are huge delays in getting driving tests completed at the moment but assume that this could be resolved. If a scheme like this were to be implemented a whole industry woudl spring up to support it. I believe that removing provisional license drivers is only part of the solution, there are still many other bad drivers out there that pose a risk to us all.

I think a decent starting point is important, driving should be a full subject in schools now. Plenty of training should be compulsory before you even see a public road. I believe this has been the case in Germany for years.

I know some people will say that they need their licenses for their jobs & the potential of failure or the inconvenience of getting a test done are reasons not to enter into this.
You go to the doctor to get a regular check up to try prolong your life, why not look at safe driving as the same sort of check-up?

It could in reality only be introduced for drivers sitting their tests now, existing license holders would probably have to be exempted (unfortunately) but in time the benefits woudl be seen in my oipinion.
What do you think?
Just an idea for debate....

S.I.R

you can only hold a leisence for 10 years max full then you gotta renew it but if you have your leisence say , 20 years go , you just need to do the driving test all over again ( no written exam ) , peice of p*** if you driving that long...

L1011

I'd suspect most people who've been driving for 20 years would fail both the theory and practical tests if they took them again! Over confidence, 20 year ingrained habits, etc.

djimi

I agree with retests every few years, say 5 or 10 years. It would be a PITA as a driver, but the standard of driving is so bad in this country at the moment, it might be the only solution. I also agree that anyone who has been suspended from driving (be it for 12 points or for drunk driving or the likes) should have to resit the test.

I also think there should be different liceses for different classes of cars. For example, I think there should be a seperate license for cars such as Type Rs, Evolutions, Skylines etc which you should not be able to take until you are 25. Same with super cars such as Supras and the likes, call it an S license if you will. I believe that this would dramatically reduce the amount of little dickheads driving cars that they do not have either the skills or the brainpower to control.

djimi

MYOB wrote: »

I'd suspect most people who've been driving for 20 years would fail both the theory and practical tests if they took them again! Over confidence, 20 year ingrained habits, etc.

I took the theory test on my girlfriends computer the other day and failed! First time Id ever taken one tho.

cabrwab

Good idea
however i don't know if i would like to have to resit my test in 10years time!
I had to wait nearly ten years to get it the first time around!

The three areas you pointed out with regards the people who had 12 points, people banned after a DUI, bad crash.
Would be worthy of a retest further punishment for being stupid in the first place.

I don't think our testing system is good enough anyway, reversing around a corner into a side road kinda dangerous IMO!

Interesting debate bit of a thinker, head over heart debate, my heart don't want to have to resit, head knows its a good idea

Ferris

Even doing a theory retest would make a difference imo. You can't rely on the population to remember the ROTR for a 50 year term of driving.

It would mean a change in attitude by people too, that you have to earn the right to drive, no bad thing.

Marcus.Aurelius

With the current testing system designed to spew out useless cowards without a whit of manners or ability, I wouldn't want that nonsense reinforced in any way.

Test must be reformed and advanced driving skills added as a second mandatory test.

S.I.R

djimi wrote: »

I took the theory test on my girlfriends computer the other day and failed! First time Id ever taken one tho.

ive been getting concistant 39's out of 40 with no real study , i know the rules of the road off the back of my hand i just have to get used to driving cars at 30 mph in 4th gear ( taxi style :cool: )

rebel.ranter

I agree that the test has to be reformed.

For a start dual carriageway & motorway driving (where practical) shoud, be mandatory to observe lane discipline. Poor lane discipline is not only annoying but it can be really dangerous.

Again assume that the test is reformed adequately, after all if we go to the trouble of mdifiying the system so much to intriduce this much of a sea-change, surely improving the actual test itself would be an automatic inclusion?

Marcus.Aurelius

rebel.ranter wrote: »

surely improving the actual test itself would be an automatic inclusion?

this is Ireland

blackbox

I think the periodic test is probably an overkill, but I definitiely think that anyone who gets disqualified should have to do a test before they can get a license again.

i.e. if the courts determine that someone is unfit to drive for a period, when that period expires they should have to prove their ability.

E92

All new drivers should be made take at least 10 driving lessons by an appropriately qualified driving instructor.

The Tory party in the UK came up with the idea of "positive points" for people who passed advanced driving tests. It's not nearly as daft an idea as it sounds.

If people drove properly or more to the point, were made learn to drive properly, then our accident rates would tumble down pretty quickly.

As for speeding, well the only time I tend to obey speed limits is when traffic is so bad that you can't go fast. I obey them if it's really wet too, if visibility is bad or in built up areas where there are kids around(often I'd be doing only 30 even when the limit is 50 if the streets are really narrow or there are kids around).

I remember getting driving lessons and going down to places like Mahon Point,going along the road to Dublin from town till Kevin O'Leary's, or the Boreenmana Road and there being 50 km/h zones, and I would travel bang on 50, and you would see some queue of cars behind you while the road ahead was so clear, because everyone goes down those roads well in excess of the speed limit. I usually do around 60-65 going down to MP and about 80 on the I think it's called the Glanmire road. I always do at least 110 on a Dual Carriageway. These roads have a design speed of 160 km/h, so I certainly don't see any "safety issue" by travelling over 30 mph(or exactly 50 km/h) under the design speed for the road.

On the one hand you're supposed to stay within the speed limit, but yet you are not supposed to hold up people.

There are lots of places in Cork alone where you end up breaking one of those laws because of inappropriate speed limits.

Whatever happened to the rule where the speed limit should be the 85th percentile of the speed that people choose to drive at on a given road?

Wishbone Ash

MYOB wrote: »

I'd suspect most people who've been driving for 20 years would fail both the theory and practical tests if they took them again! Over confidence, 20 year ingrained habits, etc.

In saying that though, those peope would be statistically safer than other age groups.

djimi wrote: »

I agree with retests every few years, say 5 or 10 years. It would be a PITA as a driver

It would be very inconvenient for those of use who hold multi categories. I have a full licence in 14 categories. If I had to do a restest every 5 years, I could spend half my life in test centres.

djimi wrote:

I think there should be a seperate license for cars such as Type Rs, Evolutions, Skylines etc which you should not be able to take until you are 25. Same with super cars such as Supras and the likes, call it an S license

It could be referred to as a 'skanger' licence!

rebel.ranter wrote: »

For a start dual carriageway & motorway driving (where practical) shoud, be mandatory

Dual carriageway driving is incorporated in some test centre routes.

blackbox wrote: »

but I definitiely think that anyone who gets disqualified should have to do a test before they can get a license again

Agree.

Steve

I'm for a theory test in order to renew after 10 years.

Every household was sent a copy of the new ROTR so there's no excuse for anyone not to know the rules.

Given the present level of idiocy on the roads, few chose to read it.

Maybe they did read it and are just idiots or selfish cnuts, who knows...

ardmacha

You should have to do the theory test when renewing your licence at 10 year intervals. This would not be a problem if you know the current rules of the road and it would mean that you could be sure that any new rules, e.g. motorways kmh etc were known by the public. Such a test could at least include questions on lane discipline etc, even if you can't make people do it. If anyone badly failed the theory test, then make them do a road test too.

rebel.ranter

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

It would be very inconvenient for those of use who hold multi categories. I have a full licence in 14 categories. If I had to do a restest every 5 years, I could spend half my life in test centres.

That is a fair point. I suppose it would have to be a single renewal test for cases with multiple license category holders. Just to prove your competence.
what it does go to show thoguh is that there is a lot of inputs needed to make this type of scheme actually work.
Maybe an interim stage of introducing a full driving re-test could be a theory test at license renewal now? Again only one theory test covering all categories.

Wishbone Ash

ardmacha wrote: »

You should have to do the theory test when renewing your licence at 10 year intervals. This would not be a problem if you know the current rules of the road and it would mean that you could be sure that any new rules, e.g. motorways kmh etc were known by the public. Such a test could at least include questions on lane discipline etc, even if you can't make people do it. If anyone badly failed the theory test, then make them do a road test too.

That would be a good idea but has a slight drawback. It is possible to allow a licence to lapse for up to 10 years before having to resit the test/tests. Some people would simply allow their licence to lapse and manage to get almost 20 years out of it.

(Driving on a lapsed licence is considered to be a very minor offence as opposed to driving without ever having had a licence).

ART6

Personally I would be happy to see a requirement for anyone involved in a blameworth accident, determined by accident investigators, to have their licence withdrawn and be made to take a new driving test before getting it back. I would then like to see an advertising campaign to push the point home. Maybe that might pursuade the lunatics who insist on tailgating me at all speeds up to the max 120k that what they do is not a good idea. Example: Yesterday, driving at 70k on an 80k road, a guy in a blue transit with a mobile phone in his ear was so close to my tailgate that I could only see his windscreen and the upper 6 inches of his bonnet. That put him no more than 10 feet behind me.

Anything that gets clowns like that off the road has my total support:mad:

ardmacha

That would be a good idea but has a slight drawback. It is possible to allow a licence to lapse for up to 10 years before having to resit the test/tests.

Simple solution. When introducing the testing requirement specify that you only have to do the theory test when renewing your licence, if it hasn't expired by more than 6 months or a year. Then give people another year but make them do the full road test. This would discourage delay. They could also have the courtesy to write to you and tell you that your licence is about expired. You could require insurance companies to get the licence number of the main insured driver to keep the contact details up to date.

Effective computer simulators must be possible nowadays and you could be required to do an automatic test in one of these (in a configuration with a wheel, brake pedal etc as in a car).

Steve

ardmacha wrote: »

Effective computer simulators must be possible nowadays and you could be required to do an automatic test in one of these (in a configuration with a wheel, brake pedal etc as in a car).

Fine in theory - however - given the success of electroinic voting machines, there could be a problem.