Fully licensed drivers teaching learner drivers.

wertyl

I have full license, but I never ever drive, because I hate it, yet I am still technically responsible for my partners driving, since he is on provisional, but he has been driving way more than me and is actually a better driver. My license is Danish (EU) and I had it for 10 years and testing and drivers education is way stricter than here, but I still hate driving and have not bothered with it since my partner started driving too. I even had to take lessons again over here, because I had practically forgotten how to to do it.
My point is that having a FULL license does NOT qualify a driver to teach other people and this it where this law completely fails. Why did they not come up with a staggered implementation where all new applicants face 16lessons, theory tests and practical tests before they are even allowed on the roads? Then give all the existing learners 1 years to get a license, since the waiting lists are still ridiculously long. Where I come from it takes 2-3 weeks of waiting

Also the driving tests here are bordering on the ridiculous -reversing around a corner does not prove that one can drive on motorways and dual carriageways
There is no education in night driving, skid control etc either, so most people drive too fast in wet conditions and they don't know how to use their lights correctly at night, blinding oncoming traffic - and they are not all L-drivers!!

What can I say - everything here is done in the most awkward and backwards way. And I see loads of full license holders who drive like morons BTW...

wertyl

They average 8.2 weeks.

That is not the purpose of that manoeuvre.[/QUOTE]

I think I better SUM it up for those who don't understand what I am trying to say in my post - I am saying that the Irish driving test is abysmal and does not cover REAL driving situations like Motorway driving etc. And I am saying that I don't think having a full license qualifies anyone to TEACH driving. This should be done by a qualified driving instructor. I don't think you will see any less accidents either because the driving behavior is generally extremely poor. End of story.

MrPudding

wertyl wrote: »

They average 8.2 weeks.

That is not the purpose of that manoeuvre.

I think I better SUM it up for those who don't understand what I am trying to say in my post - I am saying that the Irish driving test is abysmal and does not cover REAL driving situations like Motorway driving etc. And I am saying that I don't think having a full license qualifies anyone to TEACH driving. This should be done by a qualified driving instructor. I don't think you will see any less accidents either because the driving behavior is generally extremely poor. End of story.

This is true. But, and this is a fairly big but, it is all there is. There has to be a way of separating the incompetent from the competent or reasonably competent. It is idiotic to say we should ignore the test because it does not cover everything. We need a method of removing the dangerous people from the road or at least forcing them to learn properly.

I will try to save some time here by pre-empting the usual response to this kind of post and posting my reply in advance.

I am sure you are a fantastic driver and pose no risk to anyone, I am assuming you are a learner but it does not matter if you are. Furthermore, I will allow that there is probably a percentage of learner drivers that are competent drivers. Are you will to bet your life that *every* learner driver is completely competent?

Additionally. I know that having a full licence does not mean a person is an excellent driver. As far as I am concerned it show that a person has the ability to give the impression that they are reasonably competent for a short period of time during a completely inadequate test. The fact the 50% of people still fail is kind of scary.

Looking at it simply, there are two types of bad driver on the road. Learners and full licence holders. The full licence holders are subject to the law, and with a lot of luck they will get caught and hopefully will be forced to improve their driving. Perhaps sometime in the future there might even be some kind of ongoing testing to confirm peoples ability.

So how would you suggest we deal with the learner bad drivers? Just leave them because the test is crap and pointless? Just because you and your mates are amazing drivers without passing a test does not mean that every learner is. We need a way to assess who is reasonably competent and who needs more training. How would you suggest we accomplice this?

MrP

Wishbone Ash

wertyl wrote: »

I think I better SUM it up for those who don't understand what I am trying to say in my post - I am saying that the Irish driving test is abysmal and does not cover REAL driving situations like Motorway driving etc...... .............End of story.

You stated that the test waiting times are ridiculously long. They are not.

You queried what reversing around a corner has to do with dual carriageway/motorway driving. It has little to do with driving on a motorway/dual carriageway and I responed that it was not the purpose of the manoeuvre.

If you are going to make a point, try to do so clearly and concisely. Throwing in red herrings and changing the subject because you are challenged doesn't give you much credibility nor does ending a post with "End of story".

wertyl

MrPudding wrote: »

This is true. But, and this is a fairly big but, it is all there is. There has to be a way of separating the incompetent from the competent or reasonably competent. It is idiotic to say we should ignore the test because it does not cover everything. We need a method of removing the dangerous people from the road or at least forcing them to learn properly.

I will try to save some time here by pre-empting the usual response to this kind of post and posting my reply in advance.

I am sure you are a fantastic driver and pose no risk to anyone, I am assuming you are a learner but it does not matter if you are. Furthermore, I will allow that there is probably a percentage of learner drivers that are competent drivers. Are you will to bet your life that *every* learner driver is completely competent?

Additionally. I know that having a full licence does not mean a person is an excellent driver. As far as I am concerned it show that a person has the ability to give the impression that they are reasonably competent for a short period of time during a completely inadequate test. The fact the 50% of people still fail is kind of scary.

Looking at it simply, there are two types of bad driver on the road. Learners and full licence holders. The full licence holders are subject to the law, and with a lot of luck they will get caught and hopefully will be forced to improve their driving. Perhaps sometime in the future there might even be some kind of ongoing testing to confirm peoples ability.

So how would you suggest we deal with the learner bad drivers? Just leave them because the test is crap and pointless? Just because you and your mates are amazing drivers without passing a test does not mean that every learner is. We need a way to assess who is reasonably competent and who needs more training. How would you suggest we accomplice this?

MrP

Thanks for replying - but you should read my post and previous posts properly and not make assumptions about me and my status before responding. Firstly I am not saying that learners should be left as they are, but I am critical towards the current testing system. I am also saying that making full license holders responsible for teaching is not the right way to do it, since holding a license does not in itself make one a proper driving instructor (I myself hold a full license but I actually feel my partner (learner) drives way more than me and is actually a better driver - yet I have to "teach" him - this is only an example).

I think they should completely change the system and NOT allow any new learners on the roads until they have undergone proper driving education of min. 16 lessons, theory lessons + test, skid control course, night driving classes and passed FINAL driving test and - this is the way we do it in Denmark.
It is not perfect either, but at least this way it is ensured that at least all new drivers have proper education and have learned hazard perception etc.

This should be imposed for all new applicants, and then current holders of provisional licenses should be given a year or so to pass.


So, basically I think this "new" law is doing nothing new for driving safety at all, other than making it difficult for L-drivers, who depend on their cars. Yes, they need to be tested, but give them a bit of leeway and a chance to pass, while implementing a new and better system and a better test.
Waiting list of 8 weeks is way too long - should be 3-4 weeks maximum.
In order to make changes, you have to do it gradually. Also, it is impossible to check everyone on the roads anyway and they will soon forget all about it and we will be back to square 1 - people will still be driving alone, I think, because they are depending on their cars to go to work etc. and not everyone has access to a full license holder with at least 2 years of experience either. So how will they learn to drive??


Another thing - your speed limits here are all over the place, sometimes it looks like they scattered the signs about randomly, and it also appears that people are unable to judge for themselves which speed is appropiate according to the road conditions. If the sign says 80 they go 80, even if the road is wet, dirty, winding - there are cars in the ditch where we live EVERY time it rains.
Also what is with the tailgating and overtaking in bends? I see so much retarded driving behaviour that it is unbelievable there are not more fatal accidents than there are.
I think everyone here needs education to be honest - not just the current learners.

MrPudding

wertyl wrote: »

I think they should completely change the system and NOT allow any new learners on the roads until they have undergone proper driving education of min. 16 lessons, theory lessons + test, skid control course, night driving classes and passed FINAL driving test and - this is the way we do it in Denmark.
It is not perfect either, but at least this way it is ensured that at least all new drivers have proper education and have learned hazard perception etc.

I think it should be something like this as well, as I am sure a lot of people on this board also think. But seriously, do you think that is likely to happen? It might, but that is a long term goal.

wertyl wrote: »

This should be imposed for all new applicants, and then current holders of provisional licenses should be given a year or so to pass.

Simply not workable at the moment. The facilities do not exist to allow it to happen. More importantly, there simply is no political will to make it happen. The would be uproar if the government tried to put something like this through. Baby steps.

wertyl wrote: »

So, basically I think this "new" law is doing nothing new for driving safety at all, other than making it difficult for L-drivers, who depend on their cars.

I have little sympathy for a person that finds themselves dependent on something they are not entitled to use.

wertyl wrote: »

Yes, they need to be tested, but give them a bit of leeway and a chance to pass, while implementing a new and better system and a better test.

Yes, a bit of leeway. Perhaps they should have given 7 months notice of the new regulations instead of bringing it in overnight. Oh wait, they did.

wertyl wrote: »

Waiting list of 8 weeks is way too long - should be 3-4 weeks maximum.

Why? What is wrong with 8 weeks? Why is 3 to 4 better? How about 2 weeks? No 15 minutes? Does it really matter how long the wait is when most of the learners were not even applying for a test? Besides, you want people to do 16 lessons, a theory test, a skid control course and night driving classes. If they had to do this 8 weeks would probably be too short.

wertyl wrote: »

In order to make changes, you have to do it gradually.

That is what they are doing. The entire system needs to be overhauled, you said this yourself. They have changed one thing and given 7 months notice of their intention. Exactly how gradual to you want it to be?

wertyl wrote: »

Also, it is impossible to check everyone on the roads anyway and they will soon forget all about it and we will be back to square 1 - people will still be driving alone, I think, because they are depending on their cars to go to work etc. ??

Life is full of little rules full compliance of which is not possible. Should we ditch them all or just the ones you don’t like? They can’t breathalyse every driver. Perhaps we should drop the drink driving laws?

wertyl wrote: »

and not everyone has access to a full license holder with at least 2 years of experience either. So how will they learn to drive

<SNIP> How do they do it in your precious Denmark? Or any other <SNIP> country that is not retarded enough to let someone on the road without any training? If you can’t drive legally don’t get yourself into a position where you need to drive.

wertyl wrote: »

Another thing - your speed limits here are all over the place, sometimes it looks like they scattered the signs about randomly, and it also appears that people are unable to judge for themselves which speed is appropiate according to the road conditions. If the sign says 80 they go 80, even if the road is wet, dirty, winding - there are cars in the ditch where we live EVERY time it rains.
Also what is with the tailgating and overtaking in bends? I see so much retarded driving behaviour that it is unbelievable there are not more fatal accidents than there are.
I think everyone here needs education to be honest - not just the current learners.

Exactly. And you think we should just let the learners get on wit it on their own.

MrP

wertyl

MrPudding wrote: »

I think it should be something like this as well, as I am sure a lot of people on this board also think. But seriously, do you think that is likely to happen? It might, but that is a long term goal.

Simply not workable at the moment. The facilities do not exist to allow it to happen. More importantly, there simply is no political will to make it happen. The would be uproar if the government tried to put something like this through. Baby steps.


I have little sympathy for a person that finds themselves dependent on something they are not entitled to use.

Yes, a bit of leeway. Perhaps they should have given 7 months notice of the new regulations instead of bringing it in overnight. Oh wait, they did.

Why? What is wrong with 8 weeks? Why is 3 to 4 better? How about 2 weeks? No 15 minutes? Does it really matter how long the wait is when most of the learners were not even applying for a test? Besides, you want people to do 16 lessons, a theory test, a skid control course and night driving classes. If they had to do this 8 weeks would probably be too short.

That is what they are doing. The entire system needs to be overhauled, you said this yourself. They have changed one thing and given 7 months notice of their intention. Exactly how gradual to you want it to be?

Life is full of little rules full compliance of which is not possible. Should we ditch them all or just the ones you don’t like? They can’t breathalyse every driver. Perhaps we should drop the drink driving laws?

Fcuking hell. How do they do it in your precious Denmark? Or any other fcuking country that is not retarded enough to let someone on the road without any training? If you can’t drive legally don’t get yourself into a position where you need to drive.

Exactly. And you think we should just let the learners get on wit it on their own.

MrP

What is with the aggression? I can only speak for Denmark, since that is where I learned to drive --it is not about it being "precious".
You obviously cannot read because your are reading things into my post that I never even said. Why do you hold a grudge against anyone who has a different opionion than yours. Quote:"Life is full of little rules full compliance of which is not possible. Should we ditch them all or just the ones you don’t like? They can’t breathalyse every driver. Perhaps we should drop the drink driving laws?" I don't think we will get any valid discussion here with all this aggression.

I think that the notice was too short - it was not 7 months BTW (only for 2nd provisional holders).

I am staying off this thread - why bother...life is too short of crap like this.

Wishbone Ash

Less aggression please Mr P - there's no need for it.

Wishbone Ash

wertyl wrote: »

it was not 7 months BTW (only for 2nd provisional holders)

It was 8 months for 2nd Provisional Licence holders.

Those on 1st,3rd and subsequent licences were always required to be accompanied (in category .

MrPudding

wertyl wrote: »

What is with the aggression? I can only speak for Denmark, since that is where I learned to drive

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Less aggression please Mr P - there's no need for it.

Apologies. This subject get me really wound up for some reason.

wertyl wrote: »

You obviously cannot read because your are reading things into my post that I never even said. Why do you hold a grudge against anyone who has a different opionion than yours. Quote:"Life is full of little rules full compliance of which is not possible. Should we ditch them all or just the ones you don’t like? They can’t breathalyse every driver. Perhaps we should drop the drink driving laws?"

I can read just fine. You seemed to be implying that as they could not check every driver to see their licence status, there was no point in checking at all. I was simply trying to point out that there are a lot of rules already out there that we can't ensure compliance is 100% for, but we still have them.

wertyl wrote: »

I think that the notice was too short - it was not 7 months BTW (only for 2nd provisional holders).

What was it then? Remember, only 2nd provisional licence holder were entitled to drive unaccompanied.

I am still confused about why you are saying 8 weeks is too long to wait for a test when your ideal training programme for new drivers is unlikely to be realistically completed within 8 weeks for most people...

MrP

louis626

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

They average 8.2 weeks.

That is interesting considering i just did my test and it took 4 months. I know its average...different lengths of time in different places but i still have my doubts about this. In actual practise from what i have seen it takes quite a bit longer.

Wishbone Ash

louis626 wrote: »

That is interesting considering i just did my test and it took 4 months. I know its average...different lengths of time in different places but i still have my doubts about this. In actual practise from what i have seen it takes quite a bit longer.

Many people on this Forum claim to have got called in a week.

louis626

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Many people on this Forum claim to have got called in a week.

Fair enough i havent heard of anyone getting it that quickly but i take ur point

bigpinkelephant

Mr. Pudding you are exactly right, could not agree more.:cool: