Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

SHERWICK

Should You Need To Take A Driving Test To Be Allowed To Drive A Car?

Recommended Posts

Just wondering what the lilbertarians think about whether one should need to pass a driving test to be allowed to drive a car.

(They can answer this before we ask them whether a 1 year old should be allowed to drive a lorry :D )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the lilbertarians think about whether one should need to pass a driving test to be allowed to drive a car.

(They can answer this before we ask them whether a 1 year old should be allowed to drive a lorry :D )

Arn't you conflating 'libertarian' with anachist, or 'moron'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the lilbertarians think about whether one should need to pass a driving test to be allowed to drive a car.

(They can answer this before we ask them whether a 1 year old should be allowed to drive a lorry :D )

I think the test is all wrong. There should be a basic controls test (very basic), A psychological test to make sure they aren't letting a crazy person loose on the road, and a highway code test to make sure that you know how to handle traffic lights/road signs etc.

The present test is far too difficult for many females (who are generally safe) and far too easy for people like me when I was a youngster (potential hazard to everyone). Drivers should be limited to driving cars less than 75 ish horse power until they are over 30.

There, I cant be more honest than that can I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the lilbertarians think about whether one should need to pass a driving test to be allowed to drive a car.

(They can answer this before we ask them whether a 1 year old should be allowed to drive a lorry :D )

There's also another thing...

I think that the government uses driving licenses to discriminate against people who aren't rich enough to buy cars.

Therefore disadvantaged people should be given free access to driving licenses without having to pass the test. It's not their fault that they were born poor, innit?

If we don't give them driving licenses right away, let's not be surprised if they start rioting to express their anger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also another thing...

I think that the government uses driving licenses to discriminate against people who aren't rich enough to buy cars.

Therefore disadvantaged people should be given free access to driving licenses without having to pass the test. It's not their fault that they were born poor, innit?

If we don't give them driving licenses right away, let's not be surprised if they start rioting to express their anger.

So, what you're saying, if I'm not mistaken, is that only disadvantaged people should be allowed to drive a car without passing a driving test? :blink:

Non-'disadvantaged' people should still take a test.

Disadvantaged people shouldn't.

(Let's hope that, miraculously, 'disadvantaged' people are better drivers than non-disadvantaged.... :unsure: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the test is all wrong. There should be a basic controls test (very basic), A psychological test to make sure they aren't letting a crazy person loose on the road, and a highway code test to make sure that you know how to handle traffic lights/road signs etc.

The present test is far too difficult for many females (who are generally safe) and far too easy for people like me when I was a youngster (potential hazard to everyone). Drivers should be limited to driving cars less than 75 ish horse power until they are over 30.

There, I cant be more honest than that can I.

I really don't see how the test is 'far too difficulty for many females. I passed both my car and motorcycle tests first time, the motorcycle test at the age of 50, including the theory test. Far more important would be some sort of intelligence test - I know of people of very lo IQ - too low to be in 'normal' schools - who passed their tests. Though maybe nowadays it is more difficult with the theory test for such people to pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the test is all wrong. There should be a basic controls test (very basic), A psychological test to make sure they aren't letting a crazy person loose on the road, and a highway code test to make sure that you know how to handle traffic lights/road signs etc.

The present test is far too difficult for many females (who are generally safe) and far too easy for people like me when I was a youngster (potential hazard to everyone). Drivers should be limited to driving cars less than 75 ish horse power until they are over 30.

There, I cant be more honest than that can I.

Young people are already restricted by the car they can drive - by the insurance companies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what you're saying, if I'm not mistaken, is that only disadvantaged people should be allowed to drive a car without passing a driving test? :blink:

Non-'disadvantaged' people should still take a test.

Disadvantaged people shouldn't.

(Let's hope that, miraculously, 'disadvantaged' people are better drivers than non-disadvantaged.... :unsure: )

Just like in real life, isn't it?

'Disadvantaged' people get houses, cars and cash for nothing. Take the freebies away from them and they riot.

At the same time all of us have to work hard to rent a shoe box.

So, why not apply this to all areas of life? :P

shhhh... my previous post was sarcastic - just like this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the test is all wrong. There should be a basic controls test (very basic), A psychological test to make sure they aren't letting a crazy person loose on the road, and a highway code test to make sure that you know how to handle traffic lights/road signs etc.

The present test is far too difficult for many females (who are generally safe) and far too easy for people like me when I was a youngster (potential hazard to everyone). Drivers should be limited to driving cars less than 75 ish horse power until they are over 30.

There, I cant be more honest than that can I.

I think they should ban more people from the roads for driving like d*ckbrains.

Anyone using a phone whilst driving should be shot. That a bit extreme?

The woman up the road who speeds round the corners here should be banned.

Is it an offence to get a dummy - kid sized - and throw it under cars where drivers have phones to their ears?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YES

It should also be more difficult, maybe in stages, theory, basic, night time, motorway etc. There is no way that after 20 hours worth of driving you are anywhere near experienced enough to be let loose on your own lol!

I think it should also include parking as mandatory, not one of the optional manouvers. To my mind if you can't park you can't drive! Should also be some element of understaning how to check basic things on your car, afterall if you dont know how to check certain things your vehicle could be dangerous and therefore a danger to other road users.............

People think they have the RIGHT to drive, including people who are too old and claim that as they havent had a crash in 70 years or whatever so they are the best driver in the world, which is probably not the case!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YES

It should also be more difficult, maybe in stages, theory, basic, night time, motorway etc. There is no way that after 20 hours worth of driving you are anywhere near experienced enough to be let loose on your own lol!

I think it should also include parking as mandatory, not one of the optional manouvers. To my mind if you can't park you can't drive! Should also be some element of understaning how to check basic things on your car, afterall if you dont know how to check certain things your vehicle could be dangerous and therefore a danger to other road users.............

People think they have the RIGHT to drive, including people who are too old and claim that as they havent had a crash in 70 years or whatever so they are the best driver in the world, which is probably not the case!

I also believe that motorway driving should be compulsory...the only issue with this is that those who live in the far depths of Wales, The Highlands or Cornwall, and live a couple of hundred miles from the nearest m'way..would it be any use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arn't you conflating 'libertarian' with anachist, or 'moron'?

Must... Resist.. Water Flea.. in a teacup... with a tactical nuke..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Test is too easy in my view, it's amazing just how poor basic car maneouvering skills can be from someone who has passed their test. Even reversing into a drive is beyond many people.

I don't think it's a priority for some people, and bad habits get reinforced by poor road markings, eg some roundabouts are atrociously marked and now you can have the situation where if you follow the Highway Code when entering these things you end up being dangerous because everyone else is doing something completely different and wrong. It's just plain nuts. The amount of signage around has exploded in recent times, bus lane operation times to take note of, lanes peeling off, etc etc. The volume of information that must be safely processed is too much for those unwilling or unable to give it 100% concentration. Which is a lot of people.

Also, the art of safe overtaking has all but disappeared, to be replaced with some sort of pull out and hope, irrespective of potential hazards etc. Some time ago, watched the car in front of me pull out to overtake a farm vehicle on a single track A road in Somerset, with heavy fog and snow limiting visibility(of car lights) to under 40 metres, That was a fatal accident in the making and I had a palpable sense of relief at the wheel when the clown got back in safely, Pure blind luck.

I don't want to start an open thread flame war, but the worst instances of daytime driving I see are from young women, and the majority of the time it is because of poor lane discipline/signals, poor concentration/observation, poor hazard awareness and poor anticipation.

Most of the worst nighttime driving I see is from young males due to excessive speed.

Me, well I'm perfect.. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering what the lilbertarians think about whether one should need to pass a driving test to be allowed to drive a car.

(They can answer this before we ask them whether a 1 year old should be allowed to drive a lorry :D )

Wrong question.

Try this one -

Should you threaten someone with death merely for driving a car?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Motorbikes used to be like this, the test was three times round the block and an emergency braking test.

The thing is motorbikes and riders are a self cleaning genepool, you mess up YOU die.

Cars are not, you crash 9/10 times you walk away from it.

If ALL Safety devices were removed from cars, I mean airbags, ABS, tracktion control, seat belts, and cars to be made like pintos (i.e. they explode on impact burning to death the occupants).

Then yes I would be quite happy for people to drive without tests.

There would be total carnage for a bit, which is just nature cleaning up tge gene pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the worst nighttime driving I see is from young males due to excessive speed.

Me, well I'm perfect.. :P

You've never driven in Georgia (Caucuses). The driving there is nuts. The motorways do not have central reservations or barriers quadruple and quintuple overtaking is normal in beaten up old Ladas. Riding into Tbilisi I had more than a few head on encounters where the opposing traffic overtook and completely filled my side of the road only to tuck in at the last moment.

The road side also had lots of burnt out cars as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Also, the art of safe overtaking has all but disappeared, to be replaced with some sort of pull out and hope, irrespective of potential hazards etc. Some time ago, watched the car in front of me pull out to overtake a farm vehicle on a single track A road in Somerset, with heavy fog and snow limiting visibility(of car lights) to under 40 metres, That was a fatal accident in the making and I had a palpable sense of relief at the wheel when the clown got back in safely, Pure blind luck.

...

Yes, cycling on the local country roads, fairly straight, narrow, but double width, fast, fairly quiet, I am amazed by the number of people who don't slow down but just overtake whatever. It rarely makes me feel endangered but it regularly scares the willies out of the person coming in the opposite direction who has to slam the brakes on.

Though I remember family touring holidays in the 80s, summer driving in a laden car, it was the done thing for boy racers to hop along a queue of traffic trying to gain 2 or 3 car lengths over 20 minutes of 40mph progress...

One thing I learned from cycling that I find works well driving a car or even a big van as well, is positioning yourself assertively on the road, hold the lane, act like you know where you're going, don't cower in the kerbside, and people react to that and give you space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong question.

Try this one -

Should you threaten someone with death merely for driving a car?

Or, should a beautiful, innocent 2 year old baby be BRUTALLY MURDERED BY THE STATE WITH SPIKES DRIVEN THROUGH THEIR EYES just for merely driving a lorry :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the UK dole out provisional licences like they do in Ireland?

You can drive around without having passed the test for 6 months, or something like that. You learn how to drive through practice, and have to have an experienced driver with you at all times - so the test really has been proven by the Irish experience to be unnecessary.

The libertarian's point would be to do with the licence, rather than the test. I agree - the only requirement should be insurance. Put it another way - are insurers only bothered about licences and tests because the state insists, or do the tests and licences really tell them something about the riskiness of the drivers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the UK dole out provisional licences like they do in Ireland?

You can drive around without having passed the test for 6 months, or something like that. You learn how to drive through practice, and have to have an experienced driver with you at all times - so the test really has been proven by the Irish experience to be unnecessary.

The libertarian's point would be to do with the licence, rather than the test. I agree - the only requirement should be insurance. Put it another way - are insurers only bothered about licences and tests because the state insists, or do the tests and licences really tell them something about the riskiness of the drivers?

What exactly do you agree with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've never driven in Georgia (Caucuses). The driving there is nuts. The motorways do not have central reservations or barriers quadruple and quintuple overtaking is normal in beaten up old Ladas. Riding into Tbilisi I had more than a few head on encounters where the opposing traffic overtook and completely filled my side of the road only to tuck in at the last moment.

The road side also had lots of burnt out cars as well.

Central American Highway. Nothing to meet two articulateds on a two lane road trying to overtake each other while coming around a long blind bend. There is nowhere to go.

Road between Tijuana and Santa Rosalia, Baha California on a Saturday night after the bar closes in SR is an interesting experience. Memories of Mad Max. See a wreck one side of the road and there will be a wreck the other side too.

Outback Australia can present some interesting challenges too.

As can scarolina, sorry S. Carolina

Oh, and the kidnapping in Nicaragua.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong question.

Try this one -

Should you threaten someone with death merely for driving a car?

Yup. If a person is not trained to drive, they threaten my life by driving. Hence, I can threaten them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you need to take a driving test to be allowed to drive a car.....but many drive a car without ever taking a driving test...someone else took it for them....this is not uncommon believe it or not. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If passing a driving test really were the most important prerequisite for driving safely and courteously, then teenage drivers should be amongst the safest on our roads given that they still have the training fresh in their minds.

Obviously they are not, which suggests good driving practice is learned through experience, not testing. No amount of reversing around a three point turn in the rain while on a motorway is going to prepare you as well as just getting some hours in on the road.

Case in point.. take a look at motorway accidents this summer. The stretch of the M6 I drive on, I've barely seen an accident all year. Come summer.. all the regular experienced drivers are swamped with holiday makers who've dusted off their steering wheel and filled the roof rack with sleeping bags. Result: Carnage nearly every day this summer.

The problem is that to get experience you need to drive.. but you can't easily get away from that.

Probably a happy medium is to have a simple test (slightly simpler than we have presently). Then a probation period of 6 months where you are free to drive with L plates, but only while you have an experienced adult in the car with you. After this period.. it is in the hands of the gods. You can't control/watch/mind people for ever.. if people are idiots they will drive like idiots. Heaven knows there's plenty on the roads already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the Republican Iowa caucus debate on a plane yesterday evening (Delta now has live Fox News on the seat-back screens - no escape!), and someone raised this issue in relation to Tim Pawlenty's proposal that, in place of Obamacare, citizens who can afford it should be compelled to buy medical insurance in the same way that drivers are compelled to buy car insurance. The debate centred on the constitutionality of that in relation to the tenth amendment (do individual states have the power to impose it?), but it seemed to me that this raised a broader debate.

As someone who falls midway between Rand's position and Stalin's, but veering towards the former, my take is that imposing such a requirement (you must buy health insurance, or pass a test to drive) can only be justified if the absence of it is very likely to cause a real problem for your fellow citizens. After all, there was no driving test in this country before 1935, and that was the reason why one was introduced. The volume and speed of traffic on the roads, and the increasing complexity of road systems being built, had transformed driving from a harmless hobby for the rich into a widespread and economically essential activity that had the potential to cause a lot of physical and economic damage if it was done wrong.

However, I do believe that the test should be kept down to the minimum in scope and difficulty needed to keep the level of risk posed by someone on the road down to what society as a whole considers an acceptable level. The same applies for all other motoring law and regulation: minimum and maximum driving ages, insurance requirements, things included in the MOT test, etc. etc. The volume of regulation should not be added to simply because some pressure group lobbies for it. Just because the family of a virtually blind pensioner who is run over crossing the road by a 22 year-old doing 31mph wants the speed limit reduced to 10mph nationwide does not mean that their desire is in the overall national interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 285 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.