RSA ad on unaccompanied L drivers

dense wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I've been thinking back over mistakes. I remember misjudging an overtake on the M50 2 or 3 years back due to poor observation of what was going on behind me. There was no collision, but if things had gone badly wrong, I guess that someone could have got badly hurt. Since then, I've changed how I do the observation to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Fair enough, we learn all the time on the road.

But if your error had killed someone, how do you think you'd feel having the accident (you did accidentally misjudge something, it wasn't deliberate) and your mistake as the centre of an identifiable media campaign?

Think you'd deserved it? Honestly now.

Honestly, I be putting my hand up to appear in the advert to reduce the chances of it happening again.

dense wrote: »

Isn't this the point, there seems to be no legislation that anyone can point to to explain what the experienced driver is required to do apart from being there.

So despite all the fuss there is no way to know if an accompanying driver would have prevented this or has prevented any other accident.

I'm not against the principle, but I'm not going all guns blazing for it either.

An idiot experienced driver could just as easily be accompanying an idiot inexperienced learner.

So the current requirements could be pretty futile as they stand and we should bring in far more restrictions on learners by increasing the legal responsibilities of the accompanying driver?

dense wrote: »

Isn't this the point, there seems to be no legislation that anyone can point to to explain what the experienced driver is required to do apart from being there..

I have only acted as the accompanying experienced driver in the case of my own children and because I didn't want any harm to come to them, me or our only car I interpreted my role as allowing them to practice whatever had come up in the driving lesson while keeping a constant a constant eye out for hazards they might miss and maintaining a running commentary in the early stages, "gear", "brake" "indicator" "cyclist" "bend" "steep hill" etc, etc, etc. If I had been asked to accompany a colleague or friend learning to drive it would never have occurred to me to read a newspaper or use my phone when I should in my opinion be acting as an extra pair of eyes, ears.

I have a lot of sympathy with the view that personalising the Clancy case heaps continued odium on someone who has already been tried and convicted for the offence but there have been some daft statements on this thread, eg re driving unaccompanied "we all did it" when for years it was perfectly legal to drive unaccompanied on a 2nd or subsequent provisional licence but now its not and in the interim roads are busier and speeds are faster.

A German student I knew wasn't allowed in the driver's seat (apart from lessons) until they had passed their test. On the other hand lessons took place by day and by night, in urban and rural settings, on motorways and regional/local roads. It was horrendously expensive, so parents or guardians lending their car or being asked to be observant when accompanying their learner could count their blessings

User142 wrote: »

So the current requirements could be pretty futile as they stand and we should bring in far more restrictions on learners by increasing the legal responsibilities of the accompanying driver?

I know in Britain they accompanying driver has to conform to all laws as if they are driving ie. no reading a newspaper, not be on a mobile phone and not be over the limit for drink and drugs

Needles73 wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Honestly, I be putting my hand up to appear in the advert to reduce the chances of it happening again.

It’s great that you would take full responsibility. But your saying that not having made a mistake, not after causing the loss of another human, not having that on your conscious all the time.
There is also a big difference on volunteering to be part of an ad campaign and being the subject of it.

It's a bit of an exaggeration to say that she's the subject of it. She's not mentioned by name. She's not pictured. It's all about the incident and the victim.

suicide_circus wrote: »

do unaccompanied learners account for a disproportionate amount of fatalities?

I think it was said earlier in the thread that there was 12 deaths via unaccompanied drivers last year. What we never hear though is stats of serious & life changing injuries behind accidents, that figure would be a multiple of deaths. If there is 12 deaths attributed to learner drivers then it wold be fair to say there is a multiple of people who have ended up with paralysis or suffered life changing brain injuries, etc.

Regarding road deaths we have come down from circa 450 a year in 1998 to 149 last year. Theres many reasons for that such as improved car safety systems, improved road & motorway network as well as the clamp down on drink driving and speeding. At this stage all the low hanging fruit is picked so if the RSA are to keep road deaths falling then campaigns like this one are the next step.

suicide_circus wrote: »

do unaccompanied learners account for a disproportionate amount of fatalities?

According to this report seemingly not, in that learner drivers represent about 9% of drivers but account for 5.8% of fatal collisions and unaccompanied lerers were involved in 37 fatal crashes over a 4 year period.

https://www.thejournal.ie/learner-drivers-unaccompanied-3893515-Mar2018/

I'd still support the legislation though in that its absurd to say unaccompanied learners shouldn't be driving but not to have any penalty up to now for those who facilitated them by lending them a car.

I do agree though that it's unfair to forbid unaccompanied driving while at the same time having such inordinately long wait periods for a test. Once lessons are completed and enough accompanied practice has been done a test date should be available within a month imo

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I do agree though that it's unfair to forbid unaccompanied driving while at the same time having such inordinately long wait periods for a test. Once lessons are completed and enough accompanied practice has been done a test date should be available within a month imo

ah but this is Ireland, where even the simplest interaction with the state requires a monumental struggle

I've great sympathy for the man given that his wife and daughter were killed. I would I never have to go through anything like it. I understand the message and given the new legislation introduced the authorities are trying to get the point out there. My issue is that it should have been a general ad but not identify a particular accident that was well known.

Lackey wrote: »

And if it were your (and the others on here) family that were trapped upside in a car screaming for their lives while drowning ?

If the wall that " had a gap in it for years " was repaired years ago it wouldn't have ended that way

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I do agree though that it's unfair to forbid unaccompanied driving while at the same time having such inordinately long wait periods for a test. Once lessons are completed and enough accompanied practice has been done a test date should be available within a month imo

I learned last year. Booked a test as soon as I had lesson 12 done. Had to wait about three months. All in all from first lesson to passing the test just over 6 months. Never drove unaccompanied.