'N for novice' plate in new learner driver laws

Little My

I was told that the R driver scheme was introduced in the North as a trial for the rest of the UK. They then decided it make no difference so never brought it over to the UK.

Many people in the North take the plates down when on motorways etc. I don't know anyone that has been caught.

emul8ter25

kneemos wrote: »

There was no time or resources spent on it,they just changed a ruling.

Man hours are resources. Nothing gets decided overnight in this country.

HeyThereDeliah

2 stroke wrote: »

What we need next is a plate for those drivers that got free licenses without passing any test. I suggest an L with an X drew accross it to designate drivers that never learned to drive.

How many of these were given out and what year was it? People go on about this as if half the country got them.

Death and Taxes

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

How many of these were given out and what year was it? People go on about this as if half the country got them.

It was decades ago!

emul8ter25

Let's not forget the recent introduction of mandatory driving lessons which is a significant cost to learners. Now they will be punished before and after the test?

Death and Taxes

emul8ter25 wrote: »

Let's not forget the recent introduction of mandatory driving lessons which is a significant cost to learners. Now they will be punished before and after the test?

Its not a matter of punishment, it is a matter of fact that younger inexperienced drivers are disproportionatley responsible for crashes, injuries, and deaths on our roads.
Obviously you would prefer a return to the good old days when we had 400-500 deaths on the roads every year.

Capt'n Midnight

The Irish Riddler wrote: »

My particular grivance is the N plate.

It should be an R plate like they've had a few miles up the road for ages, cross-border cooperation and all that.

Up there you will get done for driving with L plates on a full licence btw, enforcement is different.

Jimoslimos wrote: »

I do have a problem with the higher penalty points. What it does is excessively penalise newer drivers who are more prone to making errors compared to those who should know better.

Because it's Ireland. Look at how many people didn't even bother taking the test , driving around on 10 year old provisionals.

Also because it's best practice elsewhere.

In Canada and parts of the US young drivers have a curfew. They can't drive late on weekends.


TV installers are going to be mad busy this week because people here don't do stuff till they have to.

2 stroke wrote: »

What we need next is a plate for those drivers that got free licenses without passing any test. I suggest an L with an X drew accross it to designate drivers that never learned to drive.

That was 1979 , so they would be at least 50 by now.

El Weirdo

Threads merged.

phasers

I don't put up my L plates, I'm not putting up a fcuking N plate

fight da powa fuk da gardz


Seriously though, 4 points for speeding and a disqualification at 6 points? That's ridiculously unfair, it should be one or the other. Morons.

JohnMarston

This is the kind of thing that going to put people off ever getting behind a wheel in the first place.

Capt'n Midnight

davet82 wrote: »

They should also have 'W's for the wánkers on the road...

and big yellow illuminated signs on the roof to warn you about drivers who stop or make sudden changes in direction at random without warning because they think hazard warning lights are the same as indicators :mad:

Capt'n Midnight

Lando Griffin wrote: »

A few weeks back I got driving behind a L driver. She had nobody in the car with her.

In which case she was not a driver under instruction.

Either has a full license (you can done for that up north),
or is self certified :mad:

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I'd be quite happy to have some sign in my car which lets people know "Hey, I know what I'm doing, but I'm still new-ish, so back the **** off".

In the UK people use green L plates for this.
Here they remove L plates before they pass the test.

pickarooney wrote: »

There should be lessons in driving while texting, tipsy and tardy for the advanced licence as well. Why punish the good multitasking drivers for the deficiencies of the narrowband strugglers?

Oddly enough some research has suggested that people who use phones are more crash prone in general even when not on the phone. Which means that careless idiots are careless.

emul8ter25

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Its not a matter of punishment, it is a matter of fact that younger inexperienced drivers are disproportionatley responsible for crashes, injuries, and deaths on our roads.
Obviously you would prefer a return to the good old days when we had 400-500 deaths on the roads every year.

Perhaps after implementing the mandatory driving lessons for learners, a bit of time should have been given to see if there were positive effects as a result before implementing another measure that seems to unfairly single them out?

2 stroke

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

How many of these were given out and what year was it? People go on about this as if half the country got them.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/committees30thdail/pac/additional_documents/20100930-3.12.pdf There was no driving test before 1964 and 60,000 drivers recieved their licences during the amnesty in 1979. Many ticked all the boxes and work as professional drivers

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

That was 1979 , so they would be at least 50 by now.

And many wouldn't pass the test today

Death and Taxes

2 stroke wrote: »

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/committees30thdail/pac/additional_documents/20100930-3.12.pdf There was no driving test before 1964 and 60,000 drivers recieved their licences during the amnesty in 1979. Many ticked all the boxes and work as professional drivers

And many wouldn't pass the test today

Bullsh*t, they were only granted licences for the catagory in which they held their provisional licence, but sure dont let the facts get in the way of a bit hype!

emul8ter25

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Bullsh*t, they were only granted licences for the catagory in which they held their provisional licence, but sure dont let the facts get in the way of a bit hype!

I don't know how that worked, but I know for a fact my wife's father got a free license.

To be honest, I think many people would fail the test if they had to take it again. The way you are taught to drive for the test is not very realistic, and not many people drive like that after they get their license.

intellectual dosser

I dont know whether to Facepalm or Deskface.

If they don't enforce the current law what are grounds for them changing it? Lots of people drive under provisionals unaccompanied or without plates. I remember a few years ago on the RTE news hearing that there was going to be a crackdown on learner drivers breaking the law, it lasted a whole morning and half an afternoon.

The bottom line is that you're not going to improve driving standards by changing the law for people who don't even drive yet.

All drivers should be treated/punished equally.

AudreyHepburn

To be honest I'm not sure how to feel about this one.

One the one hand anything that reduces the number of road traffic accidents can only be a good thing. And if putting an N plate on my car earns me a little more patience and respect from experienced then I'll happily use one.

On the flip side though since does being a newly qualified driver equate with being a bad driver? Why should new drivers be singled out as though they alone cause traffic accident.

Some of the worst, most impatient drivers I've known have been those with decades of experience....you can believe me or not but it's the truth.

It is simply not logical or fair to expect a newly qualified driver to be perfect 100% and to be honest such an attitude would not encourage me to even try getting behind the wheel.

So I really don't know how I feel on it....although I probably lean more towards it being biased and unfair.

Chairman Meow

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

To be honest I'm not sure how to feel about this one.

One the one hand anything that reduces the number of road traffic accidents can only be a good thing. And if putting an N plate on my car earns me a little more patience and respect from experienced then I'll happily use one.

On the flip side though since does being a newly qualified driver equate with being a bad driver? Why should new drivers be singled out as though they alone cause traffic accident.

Some of the worst, most impatient drivers I've known have been those with decades of experience....you can believe me or not but it's the truth.

It is simply not logical or fair to expect a newly qualified driver to be perfect 100% and to be honest such an attitude would not encourage me to even try getting behind the wheel.

So I really don't know how I feel on it....although I probably lean more towards it being biased and unfair.

You dont get much respect or patience from other drivers with an L plate, so an N plate isnt gonna change that. It was so frustrating learning at first when youd stall at the lights and some **** would start beeping you.

As for the rest i agree. I think the longer people are driving for the more bad habits they pick up and the worse drivers they become. Most new drivers are still in the test frame of mind are probably driving more safely than most qualified drivers.

Im not gonna wear any ****ing N plate. Im close to taking my test now and with some luck ill pass it, but im not advertising to the world that im a ****ing noob even if ive passed.

pickarooney

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

On the flip side though since does being a newly qualified driver equate with being a bad driver? Why should new drivers be singled out as though they alone cause traffic accident.

Some of the worst, most impatient drivers I've known have been those with decades of experience....you can believe me or not but it's the truth.

How are you being singled out though? The only difference is you may have to wear a sticker and you may have fewer allowable penalty points but as a good, careful, recently-qualified driver you shouldn't expect to be picking up any penalty points and certainly not over 6 in a couple of years.

emul8ter25

Chairman Meow wrote: »

You dont get much respect or patience from other drivers with an L plate, so an N plate isnt gonna change that. It was so frustrating learning at first when youd stall at the lights and some **** would start beeping you.

Completely agree with you. Having an L plate does not afford you respect from other drivers. Often it causes impatience and aggression.

Chairman Meow wrote: »

As for the rest i agree. I think the longer people are driving for the more bad habits they pick up and the worse drivers they become. Most new drivers are still in the test frame of mind are probably driving more safely than most qualified drivers.

Have to disagree on this one. As a person that held a car, motorcycle, and commercial driving license in the USA for over 15 years before returning to Ireland, my driving history has made me nothing but safety minded.

Trust me, when you drive a motorcycle, you are very aware of whats going on around you. The same goes for trucks. People in cars don't realize it takes you much longer to stop when they cut you off.

I am always looking for dangerous situations and ways to avoid them.


Now saying all that, when I came back to Ireland I failed my first driving test. In my opinion I drove very well, and the tester kept me out for an hour until he had enough bs checks against me to fail me. On my second test, I was now nervous and drove much worse because of it, yet still passed. The testing process is very subjective, and many people believe they fail people just to generate more business. I firmly believe this as well.

OldGoat

I'd be far more entertained if the car had to display how many points the driver has racked up. I would then tease anyone who was close to the edge.

emul8ter25

pickarooney wrote: »

How are you being singled out though? The only difference is you may have to wear a sticker and you may have fewer allowable penalty points but as a good, careful, recently-qualified driver you shouldn't expect to be picking up any penalty points and certainly not over 6 in a couple of years.

How is it not unfair treatment?

Do you have to wear a star on your jacket for 2 years once you become a legal adult, and are given twice the penalty for committing a crime?

AudreyHepburn

pickarooney wrote: »

How are you being singled out though? The only difference is you may have to wear a sticker and you may have fewer allowable penalty points but as a good, careful, recently-qualified driver you shouldn't expect to be picking up any penalty points and certainly not over 6 in a couple of years.

You just answered your own question there.

Why should these rules only apply to new drivers? Experienced drivers are quite capable for being bad drivers too.

pickarooney

emul8ter25 wrote: »

How is it not unfair treatment?

Do you have to wear a star on your jacket for 2 years once you become a legal adult, and are given twice the penalty for committing a crime?

I'm not sure if that's a hysterical Godwin post or what the star reference is about but I didn't see anywhere that N drivers would be given double points. The deal is, like with any dangerous activity, that you go about your business carefully until you gain experience. If you pass your driving test and then proceed to drive like a spa for two years then I think it's fair to say that you just don't get it. If you're basically saying you want the right to break the rules of the road 7 times in two years I wouldn't let you near a car in the first place.

edit: if your suggestion is that experienced drivers should also not be allowed to rack up >6 points in two years, I fully agree with and support that.

emul8ter25

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You just answered your own question there.

Why should these rules only apply to new drivers? Experienced drivers are quite capable for being bad drivers too.

You could not be more correct.

My mom is a terrible driver. She is terrified of driving and drives so nervously she makes loads of mistakes and is a danger to everyone around her. My nephew just start driving but is confident, and I would get in the car with him any day over my mother.

Macca07

Merch wrote: »

you sound like you are learning,
Absolutely no requirement for this to be done in schools here, think they are trying (despite contradictory stuff) to get people on public transport, If i have kids in school I want them to be learning maths, science, whatever not driving, should disband transition year too.

resits, hard to say, i'd suggest doing check ride type tests, not the full test, that way they might be able to get more through the system, but there would have to be reason AND rhyme to it, not just going through the motions to get money in,

2 years is fine, that will weed out people that cant abide by the rules

No, not learning, driving with 9 years.

I'm not saying that I would prefer that have my kids learning to drive rather than learning maths, science, etc., but in transition year, there isn't much book education. We did stuff like first aid, swimming. I don't see why there shouldn't be driving with this.

I agree with the re-sits though, would be very tough to implement, but there are plenty young people learning to drive, and having to go through all this, when there is just as many older people who should be going through this too.

emul8ter25

pickarooney wrote: »

I'm not sure if that's a hysterical Godwin post or what the star reference is about but I didn't see anywhere that N drivers would be given double points. The deal is, like with any dangerous activity, that you go about your business carefully until you gain experience. If you pass your driving test and then proceed to drive like a spa for two years then I think it's fair to say that you just don't get it. If you're basically saying you want the right to break the rules of the road 7 times in two years I wouldn't let you near a car in the first place.

edit: if your suggestion is that experienced drivers should also not be allowed to rack up >6 points in two years, I fully agree with and support that.

The star reference was obvious, if an extreme example.

If the proposal was just to have new drivers use an N plate, that would be ok, but the fact they will receive double penalty points is wrong, and unfairly singles out a group of people.

Why should someone driving for 5 years receive half the penalty than someone driving for 1 year?

OnTheCounter

Chairman Meow wrote: »

You dont get much respect or patience from other drivers with an L plate, so an N plate isnt gonna change that. It was so frustrating learning at first when youd stall at the lights and some **** would start beeping you.

As for the rest i agree. I think the longer people are driving for the more bad habits they pick up and the worse drivers they become. Most new drivers are still in the test frame of mind are probably driving more safely than most qualified drivers.

Im not gonna wear any ****ing N plate. Im close to taking my test now and with some luck ill pass it, but im not advertising to the world that im a ****ing noob even if ive passed.

then you get penalty points.
6 and your off the road with the new legislation.

OnTheCounter

pickarooney wrote: »

How are you being singled out though? The only difference is you may have to wear a sticker and you may have fewer allowable penalty points but as a good, careful, recently-qualified driver you shouldn't expect to be picking up any penalty points and certainly not over 6 in a couple of years.

the points for the offences are being increased for these drivers also.