Young Male drivers

GreeBo · 31-07-2009 11:51AM

The problem is not that young males do not know how to drive a car..they do...they get plenty of practice.
The problem is their attitudes to driving.

There is no question that a young person is going to have better reactions, co-ordination etc,etc than older people.
Accidents are rarely caused or avoided due to reactions or someone having bad co-ordination (yeah you might hit/miss a dog or scrape the wall etc but I mean REAL accidents)

Older drivers are more likely to drive in a more careful manner, anticipating rather than reacting, doing things "just in case" rather than "shure that never happens".

Basically, I've yet to see a Fiesta with 4 40 year old blokes in it doing handbrake turns on their way up to the hellfire club.

Sharik · 31-07-2009 11:51AM

If you are a safe driver, these campaigns are not addressed to you. Just look away!

Insurance companies are businesses. If you have an idea how to segregate a certain part of population for special insurance rates, they'll jump on it.

Tigger · 31-07-2009 11:51AM

greenfly wrote: »

How is this revelant at all?
How would the subjugation or misrepresentation of somone in the past, effect wether or not they could now be publicisied as part of a stastic now?

do you mean why should it be or do you mean why is it

the fact is that groups that have been treated badly in the past have special protection; both in law and in soceity

the why is liberal guilt the why should is it shouldn't

Smart Bug · 31-07-2009 11:51AM

Just for interest, can anyone point me in the direction of actual figures of the amount of current licence holders, broken down by gender/age etc?

AnonoBoy · 31-07-2009 11:52AM

greenfly wrote: »

Your missing the point, he is not saying that there is a stastic to show it.
But rather if there was, would it be accectable to say it?
To promote it on the radio, TV and newspaper? I very much doubt it

No I didn't miss the point at all. I understand what he's saying completely. However there are not figures that back up his assertion so therefore it would not be allowable to use it as part of an advertisement.

However - there ARE facts, figures, stats and studies etc. that show that young men cause more fatalities on the road than any other demographic. So you can't complain when that is used in a road safety ad.

It's just the way it is.

Tigger · 31-07-2009 11:52AM

GreeBo wrote: »

Basically, I've yet to see a Fiesta with 4 40 year old blokes in it doing handbrake turns on their way up to the hellfire club.

ah the memories

i had my first crash on that road

dionsiseire · 31-07-2009 11:52AM

Mr. Anderson wrote: »

This!

You are being absolutely ravaged by them! I'm 24 and had insurance for a year on my second provisional and it was just over €1100 with Asgard who I got quoted through insure.ie.
After a year's no claims bonus they dropped the price to €950 and then down to €730 when I passed my test. 3rd party fire and theft I might add. At the time I got the quote I checked other companies; even with the full license hibernian quoted me €1500!
I changed my car from a 99 Punto to a 1.2l 2006 Fabia Sport and also changed to fully comp and with Asgard it still comes in under a grand. Having my license less than a year that ain't bad. I'd change who you're with asap tbh.

Actual campaigns to pressure young drivers into driving carefully? That's absolutely pathetic.

I am Fully Comp, my insurance after 1 year named driving and passing ignition test was 920, when renewal came up i got quoted 990 by hibernian because base costs have gone up (so 1 year no claim driving and the price went up) i got qoutes from all around and the general consensus was 1300 for a 24 year old with 2 years experience fully licensed and fully comp

ive not tried asgard, is insure.ie the only way to get quoted by them?

Smart Bug · 31-07-2009 11:57AM

dionsiseire wrote: »

I am Fully Comp, my insurance after 1 year named driving and passing ignition test was 920, when renewal came up i got quoted 990 by hibernian because base costs have gone up (so 1 year no claim driving and the price went up) i got qoutes from all around and the general consensus was 1300 for a 24 year old with 2 years experience fully licensed and fully comp

ive not tried asgard, is insure.ie the only way to get quoted by them?

Go to 123.ie

I'm 29, second year's incurance on a 1.0 and I was quoted 1,165 from Hibernian for renewal, Quinn quoted me 985 (all 3rd party) so I went to 123.ie, where I got fully comp for 670.

Lord Derpington · 31-07-2009 11:59AM

Tigger wrote: »

do you mean why should it be or do you mean why is it

the fact is that groups that have been treated badly in the past have special protection; both in law and in soceity

the why is liberal guilt the why should is it shouldn't

I get what your saying, and i agree that it special protection in both in law and in soceity shouldn't be there.

tech77 · 31-07-2009 12:00PM

kowloon wrote: »

Well I don't know about the rest of you but I generally do kill the girl in the passenger seat, but it's for entirely different motives and not due to my driving; I'm usually parked in a dark siding somewhere.

You serial killers make me sick.
Nobody ever makes a radio ad that stereotypes you.

Ye get away with murder.

KevR · 31-07-2009 12:01PM

Fink Goddie wrote: »

That may cause a crash yeh but how often would it cause deaths?

I think it's high time the RSA and the Gardai tackled some of the actual causes of accidents rather than just tackling speed (which only reduces the severity of the accidents). It would be better to reduce the number of accidents instead of trying to reduce severity whilst not really reducing the number of accidents.

We could all drive around at 10kmh and nobody would ever get killed in accidents but we would still have accidents because the causes (lack of awareness, lapses in concentration, non-use of indicators, tailgating, inappropriate overtaking...etc) haven't been eliminated.
Of course everyone driving at 10kmh could never work because the country could not function properly.

It's a fact - some of our roads are capable of carrying cars safely at high speed. We have spent/are spending billions on new high speed roads.
It's a fact - our cars are perfectly capable of travelling safely at these high speeds.
It's a fact - people doing stupid **** cause accidents.

With the way the RSA and Gardai go on about speed constantly, people are actually starting to believe that they are good and safe drivers just because they stay below the speed limit. This couldn't possibly be any further from the truth.

Also, with all their nagging about speed, for example telling us it's dangerous to drive at 125kmh on a motorway, all the while there are country lanes (barely wide enough for one car) with 80kmh speed limits where people can legally kill themselves. They can't even manage to get these speed limits lowered. Give me a break.

Cuddlesworth · 31-07-2009 12:01PM

Fink Goddie wrote: »

That may cause a crash yeh but how often would it cause deaths?
I'm sure there are girl racers, but there are way more men that drive aggressively, the insurance companies are not being sexist for the fun of it, the statistics spell it out.
there's no arguing with it really.

Until the day the RSA and insurance company's release all their statistics I refuse to believe any of it. Independent studies in the UK have shown that per mileage driven women are far more likely to be involved in a accident. There are way too many socio-economic factors to simply pigeon hole men as being bad drivers, and yet we are over and over again.

Loomis · 31-07-2009 12:02PM

dionsiseire wrote: »

I am Fully Comp, my insurance after 1 year named driving and passing ignition test was 920, when renewal came up i got quoted 990 by hibernian because base costs have gone up (so 1 year no claim driving and the price went up) i got qoutes from all around and the general consensus was 1300 for a 24 year old with 2 years experience fully licensed and fully comp

ive not tried asgard, is insure.ie the only way to get quoted by them?

Not sure really. Just tried the main companies here and a few brokers the first time I got insured and the lowest quote was from insure.ie. When I got the policy I then found out who it was from.

Also try http://www.brittoninsurance.com They seem to give very good quotes for anyone on a full license. My parents moved to them a couple years ago and their already low policies dropped even further with them.

Fink Goddie · 31-07-2009 12:07PM

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Until the day the RSA and insurance company's release all their statistics I refuse to believe any of it. Independent studies in the UK have shown that per mileage driven women are far more likely to be involved in a accident. There are way too many socio-economic factors to simply pigeon hole men as being bad drivers, and yet we are over and over again.

Women may be involved in more accidents yeh, but most of them are minor, you only have to look at the news and papers to see who dies every weekend on the roads, its mainly young men or foreign nationals.

Tigger · 31-07-2009 12:07PM

KevR wrote: »

I think it's high time the RSA and the Gardai tackled some of the actual causes of accidents rather than just tackling speed (which only reduces the severity of the accidents). It would be better to reduce the number of accidents instead of trying to reduce severity whilst not really reducing the number of accidents.

We could all drive around at 10kmh and nobody would ever get killed in accidents but we would still have accidents because the causes (lack of awareness, lapses in concentration, non-use of indicators, tailgating, inappropriate overtaking...etc) haven't been eliminated.
Of course everyone driving at 10kmh could never work because the country could not function properly.

It's a fact - some of our roads are capable of carrying cars safely at high speed. We have spent/are spending billions on new high speed roads.
It's a fact - our cars are perfectly capable of travelling safely at these high speeds.
It's a fact - people doing stupid **** cause accidents.

With the way the RSA and Gardai go on about speed constantly, people are actually starting to believe that they are good and safe drivers just because they stay below the speed limit. This couldn't possibly be any further from the truth.

Also, with all their nagging about speed, for example telling us it's dangerous to drive at 125kmh on a motorway, all the while there are country lanes (barely wide enough for one car) with 80kmh speed limits where people can legally kill themselves. They can't even manage to get these speed limits lowered. Give me a break.

i also like to drive fast

Fink Goddie · 31-07-2009 12:08PM

KevR wrote: »

I think it's high time the RSA and the Gardai tackled some of the actual causes of accidents rather than just tackling speed (which only reduces the severity of the accidents). It would be better to reduce the number of accidents instead of trying to reduce severity whilst not really reducing the number of accidents.

We could all drive around at 10kmh and nobody would ever get killed in accidents but we would still have accidents because the causes (lack of awareness, lapses in concentration, non-use of indicators, tailgating, inappropriate overtaking...etc) haven't been eliminated.
Of course everyone driving at 10kmh could never work because the country could not function properly.

It's a fact - some of our roads are capable of carrying cars safely at high speed. We have spent/are spending billions on new high speed roads.
It's a fact - our cars are perfectly capable of travelling safely at these high speeds.
It's a fact - people doing stupid **** cause accidents.

With the way the RSA and Gardai go on about speed constantly, people are actually starting to believe that they are good and safe drivers just because they stay below the speed limit. This couldn't possibly be any further from the truth.

Also, with all their nagging about speed, for example telling us it's dangerous to drive at 125kmh on a motorway, all the while there are country lanes (barely wide enough for one car) with 80kmh speed limits where people can legally kill themselves. They can't even manage to get these speed limits lowered. Give me a break.

Everyone makes mistakes on the roads but if you're driving at a high speed you're not really allowing for the mistakes of others are ya?

Fusion251 · 31-07-2009 12:10PM

I think that generally young male drivers are pretty good to be honest. I can't remember ever having to beep one off the road for doing something stupid! I do think there are FAR to many incompitent drivers on the road though and testing should be a bit more frequent....I cannot believe how many old people have no understanding of how roundabouts and their indicators work....anyway...not going on to rant.

Young drivers get bad press but if you're young and being hit with a big premium (like I was a few years back €2,500 ouch!!) :eek: it's not all doom and gloom, I'm driving a few years now and even with a bigger engine car my insurance is closer to €500 then €2500 so it goes down fast

Fusion

Pace2008 · 31-07-2009 12:12PM

Fink Goddie wrote: »

Women may be involved in more accidents yeh, but most of them are minor, you only have to look at the news and papers to see who dies every weekend on the roads, its mainly young men or foreign nationals.

While it is true that more males are involved in serious accidents, you're committing a potential spotlight fallacy by using papers and news reports in an attempt to prove a point.

Ghost Train wrote: »

Here's the main statistics

Drivers responsable for fatal/serious injury collisions 1996-2004

39% Male 17-24
25% Male 25-34
12% Male 35-49
4% Female 17-24
4% Female 25-34
3% Female 35-49

http://www.rsa.ie/publication/publication/upload/speed_mess_3rd_a4_jul07.pdf

That's how you go about it. Easy when you're right.

Fink Goddie · 31-07-2009 12:16PM

Pace2008 wrote: »

While it is true that more males are involved in serious accidents, you're committing a potential spotlight fallacy by using papers and news reports in an attempt to prove a point.

That's how you go about it. Easy when you're right.

Maybe in the papers, but on the news when they give how many people died and who they are (men), thats proof enough!

Snakeblood · 31-07-2009 12:18PM

Ghost Train wrote: »

Here's the main statistics

Drivers responsable for fatal/serious injury collisions 1996-2004

39% Male 17-24
25% Male 25-34
12% Male 35-49
4% Female 17-24
4% Female 25-34
3% Female 35-49

http://www.rsa.ie/publication/publication/upload/speed_mess_3rd_a4_jul07.pdf

Well, you can prove anything with facts.

loobylou · 31-07-2009 12:23PM

I actually agree with young male drivers being charged more for insurance based on the accident/claims statistics.
What I don't then agree with is that the same young drivers will be charged a "community rated" figure for health insurance, despite them having a much lower claim rate.

Pace2008 · 31-07-2009 12:25PM

Fink Goddie wrote: »

Maybe in the papers, but on the news when they give how many people died and who they are (men), thats proof enough!

That's not my point. Just because the majority of fatal accidents you hear about on the news involves men doesn't necessarily mean that they are actually causing the majority of fatal accidents, though it does suggest it. It could be a case of bias in coverage; women could be causing ten times as many serious crashes and it's just not being reported. Gotta have dem facts if you want to be convincing.

Sorry to be a pedant but critical thinking is good.

Fink Goddie · 31-07-2009 12:30PM

Pace2008 wrote: »

That's not my point. Just because the majority of fatal accidents you hear about on the news involves men doesn't necessarily mean that they are actually causing the majority of fatal accidents, though it does suggest it. It could be a case of bias in coverage; women could be causing ten times as many serious crashes and it's just not being reported. Gotta have dem facts if you want to be convincing.

Sorry to be a pedant but critical thinking is good.

Most of these accidents dont involve anyone else though, its young men driving into trees or ditches. Yeh maybe a woman might have pulled out in front of them and they had to swerve but if they werent going so fast chances are they wouldnt die.
Are you going to blame cows, sheep and dogs for mens fatalities on the road too.
So the insurance companies are biased but now but so is the news. Come on now!

Snakeblood · 31-07-2009 12:32PM

Pace2008 wrote: »

That's not my point. Just because the majority of fatal accidents you hear about on the news involves men doesn't necessarily mean that they are actually causing the majority of fatal accidents, though it does suggest it. It could be a case of bias in coverage - women could be causing ten times as many serious crashes and it's just not being reported. Gotta have dem facts if you want to be convincing.

Sorry to be a pedant but critical thinking is good.

Are you saying that newspapers aren't covering fatal crashes if women are driving?

Lord Derpington · 31-07-2009 12:34PM

Snakeblood wrote: »

Are you saying that newspapers aren't covering fatal crashes if women are driving?

No he is saying that while men may be the ones dieing in the crash, they are not necessarily the reason that the accident happend in the first place.

Snakeblood · 31-07-2009 12:36PM

greenfly wrote: »

No he is saying that while men may be the ones dieing in the crash, they are not necessarily the reason that the accident happend in the first place.

It is the most likely reason though, isn't it? Considering the relative percentages elsewhere in the thread.

Edit: I mean, think about this. Let's say that men are unfairly victimised, because they have most road deaths, but it's all women drivers faults, pulling out into oncoming traffic or whatnot.

It's a bit odd then, that there are so many dangerous women drivers on the road causing male accidents, but they don't have anywhere near the same level of fatalities.

Lord Derpington · 31-07-2009 12:47PM

Snakeblood wrote: »

It is the most likely reason though, isn't it? Considering the relative percentages elsewhere in the thread.

Edit: I mean, think about this. Let's say that men are unfairly victimised, because they have most road deaths, but it's all women drivers faults, pulling out into oncoming traffic or whatnot.

It's a bit odd then, that there are so many dangerous women drivers on the road causing male accidents, but they don't have anywhere near the same level of fatalities.

Obviously saying that all the accidents are being caused by someone other than the driver is naieve to say the least, but a percentage are bound to be.
EDIT:
Also it wouldnt be women drivers as a whole arnt dangerous imo, people of older age who have become complacent behind the wheel and people in a hurry and taking risks would be much more dangerours, granted there are bad ones but im sure like has been said there are bad male drivers too.
I just think that this relentless targeting of "slow down boys" has gone a bit too far and the insurance companys are more than happy to climb onboard the bandwagon and rise there prices a bit more.

I have a good few friends who without having an accident this past year and gaining a no claims bonus have been given higher renewal quotes than was there premium for the previous year on the same car.

Snakeblood · 31-07-2009 12:58PM

greenfly wrote: »

Obviously saying that all the accidents are being caused by someone other than the driver is naieve to say the least, but a percentage are bound to be.
Also it wouldnt be just women drivers either, people of older age who have become complacent behind the wheel and people in a hurry and taking risks would be just as dangerours.

A percentage, but enough to make up the discrepancy between young male drivers and everyone else? That seems extraordinarily unlikely.

Young male drivers endure the same conditions as older male drivers, for example. Older male drivers still drive around a lot, and they have far less crashes.

Edit: Fatal crashes, I should say.

Pace2008 · 31-07-2009 01:08PM

You're all completely missing my point. It has more to do backing up your statements than the topic at hand.

I'm not denying that men are involved in the majority of serious crashes. The facts are there and unless the RSA are lying for some unfathomable reason (they aren't) that settles it. Nor do I think that there in anyone else but the men responsible for the accidents in most cases - it's because of speed.

My point is that the picture portrayed by the media might not accurately represent the scenario in real life. For example, If you were to go by what the media are reporting you might think that murders in Ireland were comparitively high in 2008. This is not the case, they actually dropped sharply last year as this link shows. You can't rely on hearsay to prove a point, you need the hard facts.

Snakeblood wrote: »

Are you saying that newspapers aren't covering fatal crashes if women are driving?

No. I was creating a hypothetical situation. I think in some instances there is a strong bias against men in terms of coverage (domestic abuse springs to mind) but when it comes to road accidents you hear about men more simply because they're involved in more serious accidents.

greenfly wrote: »

No he is saying that while men may be the ones dieing in the crash, they are not necessarily the reason that the accident happend in the first place.

I wasn't actually saying that. As mentioned earlier in my post I think most men cause these accidents because they're speeding.

It could be a case of bias in coverage - women could be causing ten times as many serious crashes and it's just not being reported.

I think this was the line that caused confusion. Again, it was a hypothetical situation. It doesn't represent reality in this country.

Hope this clears things up.

KevR · 31-07-2009 01:10PM

Fink Goddie wrote: »

Most of these accidents dont involve anyone else though, its young men driving into trees or ditches. Yeh maybe a woman might have pulled out in front of them and they had to swerve but if they werent going so fast chances are they wouldnt die.
Are you going to blame cows, sheep and dogs for mens fatalities on the road too. The person who owns these animals has to shoulder some of the blame. The animals should be fenced in properly, a public road (especially a high speed one) is no place for animals to be wondering around.
So the insurance companies are biased but now but so is the news. Come on now!

That's kind of the point I was trying to make in my other post. Surely the woman is almost fully to blame in an incident such as this?!

You can say if the bloke wasn't going so fast he might not have been killed but if the woman doesn't pull out in front of him then there would be no swerving, no accident and no death.
It's not a good idea to completely clear the woman of all blame just because the bloke was going fast. It's not a good message to send out - you can do whatever the hell you want provided you don't drive fast.

I commute everyday on a 100kmh single carriageway road. It's a good quality road but there are lots of side roads. When conditions and visibilty are good I drive up at the speed limit, sometimes on the very good stretches I might creep over the limit for a moment or two to 105/110kmh without realising - I don't constantly watch my speed dial as that would be dangerous. I can't drive along at 50kmh in the fear that some fool (male or female) will pull out in front of me at the last second as I'm passing a side road. If someone pulls out at the last second when I'm passing and I have a crash, the crash is their fault. Obviously everyone should always try to anticipate people pulling out of side roads and never just presume that people won't pull out in front of them.

For the record, I don't want to or expect to be allowed to drive around at whatever speed I like. I tend to stick to speed limits regardless of whether or not I agree with them. It really annoys me that speed is focused on so much when every single day I see people doing stupid things that are argueably a lot more dangerous than driving fast

Young Male drivers

Comments