RSA ad on unaccompanied L drivers

magicbastarder · 11-01-2019 9:30am

Hard-hitting TV road safety ad ‘not about retribution’
Noel Clancy’s wife and daughter were killed in a crash with an unaccompanied learner

A widower who lost his wife and daughter in tragic circumstances when their car was hit by an unaccompanied learner driver has defended a hard-hitting Road Safety Authority ad on TV that he has made and insisted it was not about retribution but about highlighting changes in the law.

Noel Clancy (59) from Kilworth, north Cork, lost his wife, Geraldine (58), and daughter Louise (22) when their Ford Focus was struck by a car driven by an unaccompanied learner driver, their neighbour Susan Gleeson, then 20, at Ballyderown, Kilworth, on December 22nd, 2015.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/hard-hitting-tv-road-safety-ad-not-about-retribution-1.3754069

Hotblack Desiato · 11-01-2019 5:56pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

those stats are meaningless without information about how many of those fatalities occurred while the learner was unaccompanied.

Also meaningless because learner drivers drive less than full licence holders. Accident rate per million km would be meaningful.

User142 · 11-01-2019 6:18pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Also meaningless because learner drivers drive less than full licence holders. Accident rate per million km would be meaningful.

Also more likely to hold a licence and not use it.

And a huge percentage of Learners are driving at low speeds just learning basics of car control and then improving their skills while under the constant supervision of a parent/sibling/SO or instructor.

Its nonsense to even try imply that this statistic justifies allowing learner permit holders driving unaccompanied or that they are better drivers. If anything it suggests the restrictions on learner permit holders work. It prevents most people from passing the theory test, buying a car and then driving as if they are qualified.

dense · 12-01-2019 12:43am

magicbastarder wrote: »

those stats are meaningless without information about how many of those fatalities occurred while the learner was unaccompanied.

A bit of rational thinking here.
That won't go down well, I can tell you.

dense · 12-01-2019 12:51am

magicbastarder wrote: »

Hard-hitting TV road safety ad ‘not about retribution’
Noel Clancy’s wife and daughter were killed in a crash with an unaccompanied learner

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/hard-hitting-tv-road-safety-ad-not-about-retribution-1.3754069

So the Press Release from the RSA named the person who was driving unaccompanied, thereby making it personal.

There is absolutely NO reason to assume that today's lazy "cut and paste journalism" researched the ad that the RSA circulated in the press release and came up with the driver's name all by itself.

AndrewJRenko · 12-01-2019 6:46am

dense wrote: »

So the Press Release from the RSA named the person who was driving unaccompanied, thereby making it personal.

There is absolutely NO reason to assume that today's lazy "cut and paste journalism" researched the ad that the RSA circulated in the press release and came up with the driver's name all by itself.

There's absolutely no reason to assume the opposite either.

Little Less Conversation · 12-01-2019 1:26pm

martingriff wrote: »

I lived in the countryside and I didn't. If I needed to go some where I got a lift in or went when I could be accompanied if that meant going early then so be it and if I had to wait to get home also so be it. I had friends in college who spend whole days in as they had to wait. So you you didn't have to you chose to

I learned how to drive 14 years ago. There was a loophole that allowed learners to drive and nothing was done about it. I didn't have anyone to sit in with me. I didnt have parents to sit in with me and I didn't have older siblings to sit in with me. I wish I had the help but I didn't, it's why I relied on driving lessons. Had a friend who was stopped driving on their own and nothing was done about it. The fact is me and many more weren't privileged enough to have mammy and daddy to come with us.

Things are different these days though. I wouldn't get away with it today. It's still a stupid law though because the person accompanying the learners are only teaching them their own bad habits and can't really predict or stop an accident.

JP Liz V1 · 12-01-2019 6:16pm

I think the test price should be reduced and you should have to resit every few years, tons of full licence drivers also made bad mistakes on the roads

AndrewJRenko · 12-01-2019 6:21pm

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

you should have to resit every few years

Great idea, I wonder how close we are to doing this with technology - virtual reality or gaming tech to do a competency/reaction test in a simulator.

Pero_Bueno · 12-01-2019 6:22pm

I don't understand why learner drivers are even allowed drive a non dual controlled car without having passed a driving test!
In europe you need to PASS the test before doing that, only way you can be ever out on the road without a licence is in a dual controlled car getting a lesson.

Hope the driver of the car thinks long and hard about what she did.

brightspark · 12-01-2019 9:15pm

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I think the test price should be reduced and you should have to resit every few years, tons of full licence drivers also made bad mistakes on the roads

It's amazing how often this is suggested by those who haven't passed the test once!
(not saying you haven't, just that it seems to come up whenever the issue of learner permit holders wanting to drive unaccompanied)

It would require a significant number of driving testers to be employed (at a guess it would be something similar to the amount of people employed at NCT centres, but probably a lot more as testing would likely only take place during daylight hours)
More testing is unlikely to prevent full licence holders from making mistakes, a more effective strategy would be fitting monitors to all cars that immediately notify the authorities whenever you fail to stop at a stop sign, exceed the speed limit etc.

0cp71eyxkb94qf · 12-01-2019 9:39pm

Got to love all of the drivers in here who seem to have been gifted their driving skills at birth.

0cp71eyxkb94qf · 12-01-2019 9:40pm

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I think the test price should be reduced and you should have to resit every few years, tons of full licence drivers also made bad mistakes on the roads

When are you volunteering to resit your test then?

brightspark · 12-01-2019 9:45pm

London Poor Notch wrote: »

Got to love all of the drivers in here who seem to have been gifted their driving skills at birth.

Well I certainly wasn't one of them, it took me a lot of lessons, practice and a couple of attempts before I passed.

0cp71eyxkb94qf · 12-01-2019 9:50pm

brightspark wrote: »

Well I certainly wasn't one of them, it took me a lot of lessons, practice and a couple of attempts before I passed.

As I imagine it would all learner drivers. Most people here seem to want to ban learner drivers from learning the way they learned. The good old Irish "I'm alright so **** you" attitude springs to mind.

gctest50 · 12-01-2019 9:57pm

brightspark wrote: »

................................

a more effective strategy would be fitting monitors to all cars that immediately notify the authorities whenever you fail to stop at a stop sign, exceed the speed limit etc.

Even Vodafone are doing those now :

https://shop.v.vodafone.com/IE/V-Auto

80 euros to buy and 2.99 per month afterwards

brightspark · 12-01-2019 10:00pm

gctest50 wrote: »

Even Vodafone are doing those now :

https://shop.v.vodafone.com/IE/V-Auto

80 euros to buy and 2.99 per month afterwards

I wouldn't be surprised if at some stage it will become almost impossible to get insurance without having an approved device.

dense · 12-01-2019 10:05pm

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ten-complaints-received-over-crashed-lives-tv-advert-rsa-says-1.3755313?mode=amp

RSA receives 10 complaints about the ad.
I'd say that's unprecedented.

The RSA refused to confirm if it had communicated with the driver's family regarding the ad.

gctest50 · 12-01-2019 10:10pm

brightspark wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if at some stage it will become almost impossible to get insurance without having an approved device.

Be interesting to see, if you had a " T " plate on yer car ( t for tracker ) , would people give you a wider berth on the road because they know your careful driving would all be recorded for the last year or two

dense · 12-01-2019 10:13pm

gctest50 wrote: »

Be interesting to see, if you had a " T " plate on yer car ( t for tracker ) , would people give you a wider berth on the road because they know your careful driving would all be recorded for the last year or two

Might, until the novelty wears off.
Still, not a bad idea.

But you'd want to have some incentive to use and fork out for one, an insurance discount.

Stephen15 · 12-01-2019 10:40pm

Pero_Bueno wrote: »

I don't understand why learner drivers are even allowed drive a non dual controlled car without having passed a driving test!
In europe you need to PASS the test before doing that, only way you can be ever out on the road without a licence is in a dual controlled car getting a lesson.

Hope the driver of the car thinks long and hard about what she did.

That would be going over the top now I don't think that's the case in most European countries I believe in France for example you can nominate one sponsor but only that person can sit with you while learning also that person has to undergo some training to teach someone to drive.

If that was to become the case you'd basically have to buy your way through the test. Also there is no actual requirement for lessons to be done in a dual controlled vehicle. ADIs don't have to use a dual controlled car afaik but it's likely an insurance but not a legal requirement. The test can be done in non dual controlled cars and you can use your own car for lessons I have done it myself.

brightspark · 12-01-2019 11:06pm

dense wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ten-complaints-received-over-crashed-lives-tv-advert-rsa-says-1.3755313?mode=amp

RSA receives 10 complaints about the ad.
I'd say that's unprecedented.

The RSA refused to confirm if it had communicated with the driver's family regarding the ad.

The purpose of any advert is to raise awareness, they aren't the first to use a controversial advert and won't be the last.

The very fact this thread exists proves that they have increased awareness.

As to communicating with the drivers family? Was there any requirement? The advert is as far as I am aware factually correct. No doubt the advert is painful for them, but probably insignificant in comparison to the events that inspired the advert.

FishOnABike · 12-01-2019 11:53pm

Parker Clever Sextant wrote: »

Anyone from that era would be at least 55/56 years old now.

And probably driving for approx. 25 years more unless they are refused on medical grounds once they are over 70 which could be 15 years or thereabouts.

Corca Baiscinn · 13-01-2019 12:07am

magicbastarder wrote: »

those stats are meaningless without information about how many of those fatalities occurred while the learner was unaccompanied. it's quite possible the stats would show the system works - that ensuring learners are accompanied by a qualified driver - and that it keeps fatalities lower, rather than showing the converse which a trivial reading of the statistics might suggest.

But the article I linked to did give those stats re unaccompanied drivers. I was replying to Suicide Circus'es query and I started my reply by saying that the stats didn't seem to support the view that unaccompanied learners were responsible for a disproportionate number of accidents relative to their overall number on the road but that I agreed with the amendment nonetheless because it introduced consistency. & placed some responsibility on the car owner.

"She" is Moyagh Murdock and programme is Primetime
! She told the programme: “On average, twelve learners are involved in fatal crashes every year and ten are unaccompanied. That compares very unfavourably with our near neighbours in the north where in 2016 they reported no learner or unaccompanied learner involved in a fatal crash.

Those are stark figures – there’s not much difference in society between north and south but there is a different attitude towards unaccompanied learner drivers.
With 47 fatal crashes involving learner drivers in between 2014 and 2017 – 35 of these fatal crashes involved unaccompanied drivers – Murdock said “it really isn’t acceptable” for people to take the risk."

JP Liz V1 · 13-01-2019 12:08am

brightspark wrote: »

It's amazing how often this is suggested by those who haven't passed the test once!
(not saying you haven't, just that it seems to come up whenever the issue of learner permit holders wanting to drive unaccompanied)

It would require a significant number of driving testers to be employed (at a guess it would be something similar to the amount of people employed at NCT centres, but probably a lot more as testing would likely only take place during daylight hours)
More testing is unlikely to prevent full licence holders from making mistakes, a more effective strategy would be fitting monitors to all cars that immediately notify the authorities whenever you fail to stop at a stop sign, exceed the speed limit etc.

The is a good idea

What is the current test price?

I think if you fail and reapply within 3 to 6 months, the test should be 50% off or free

London Poor Notch wrote: »

When are you volunteering to resit your test then?

I will admit I have picked up bad habits but would resit again might need a pretest first

dense · 13-01-2019 12:54am

brightspark wrote: »

As to communicating with the drivers family? Was there any requirement?

No requirement, but they can't simultaneously be claiming to have "consulted with all parties concerned" if they didn't:

"Therefore in developing the campaign, the RSA consulted with all parties concerned,” the authority said."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ten-complaints-received-over-crashed-lives-tv-advert-rsa-says-1.3755313?mode=amp

appledrop · 13-01-2019 12:59am

I dont think this ad is a fair reflection on all L drivers.Yes a L driver crashed into car but how they died was a freak accident. Don't get me wrong very sad for family involved but don't think this happened solely because it was L driver. It was an unfortunate outcome due to flooded field.

The end of ad makes it seem that any L driver on road kills people. Thats not true + a lot of hypocrites on this thread. Years ago when I was learning to drive everyone drove un accompanied as driving test waiting times were 13-14 months. In rural areas like this there is no proper public transport. I'm not saying that was right + better the way you need lessons now etc but people shouldnt be so quick to judge.

dense · 13-01-2019 1:15am

appledrop wrote: »

I dont think this ad is a fair reflection on all L drivers.Yes a L driver crashed into car but how they died was a freak accident. Don't get me wrong very sad for family involved but don't think this happened solely because it was L driver. It was an unfortunate outcome due to flooded field.

I'm just wondering with all the stats available to Moyagh Murdock and the RSA why they waited until this crash to do anything about it?

Surely it was their responsibility as the foremost authority on road safety to have tightened up the legislation that might have prevented this accident long ago.

Mr E · 13-01-2019 1:41am

Surely if she was accompanied, the same accident would still have happened. The only difference is an extra witness and someone else who has to live with the trauma.

dense · 13-01-2019 1:48am

Mr E wrote: »

Surely if she was accompanied, the same accident would still have happened. The only difference is an extra witness and someone else who has to live with the trauma.

Well this is the while point it isn't it?

There's no guarantee that an accompanying driver (who has no obligation other than to be sober and a licence holder, they could have been getting some shut-eye after all) would have made any difference.

RSA ad on unaccompanied L drivers

Comments