Rant Another Rant! (One for Tom, really) :(

[Scouse]

Road deaths at "record low". So what do they want to do?

Disqualify you from driving for being caught doing over 90 on the motorway

And lower the drink-drive limit so people who've been out the night before are much more likely to be over the limit the morning after...

 

[Will]

Imagine the governemt response if just under 3000 people in one year died on the trains or from terrorism, and that was a good year.

 

[Raven]

First one, 90 on the motor way. outright ban? No. 6 points maybe.

2nd one, about bloody time. You shouldn't be driving with even a trace of alcohol in your blood.

 

[Will]

The first one is 6 points for driving over 90 on the motorway. They are talking about a ban for the second time.

 

[Tom]

Imagine the governemt response if just under 3000 people in one year died on the trains or from terrorism, and that was a good year.

Or from infectious diseases caught during hospital stays.

The people in charge here are imbeciles. The best way to address road safety is with driver education, not punitive measures aimed at behaviour which causes less than 5% of deaths on the road.

Don't make the mistake of assuming that all those deaths are the fault of the driver; a large percentage will be the fault of idiot pedestrians wandering into the road without first checking to see if the road is clear.

And quite frankly I can drive more safely than many people I see, even after a pint.

 

[Scouse]

The people in charge here are imbeciles. The best way to address road safety is with driver education, not punitive measures aimed at behaviour which causes less than 5% of deaths on the road.

Quite right Tom.

I also hate that they roll out people who've lost their kids/parents etc. "Mwwwwaaaaaah!!!! I've suffered a loss so that justifies draconian legislation that's totally out of proportion!!!! Mwwwwaaaaahhhh!!!!"

Fuckers.

And:

2nd one, about bloody time. You shouldn't be driving with even a trace of alcohol in your blood.

/sigh

 

[Trem]

Its if you get caught doing 20mph over the limit you get 6 points, do it again you get another 6 points. 12 points = ban. This hasn't really been reported very clearly at all.

The government will just gain steam on the whole speeding thing now the figures show that deaths dropped last year. I can honestly say its nothing NOTHING to do with speed cameras that the deaths have dropped. The figures in the first place were a fucking shambles, bloke jumping off a bridge to top himself was seen as a fatality on that stretch of road so they had their reasons to put a speed camera there......I could go on......

....in fact I will, I am on 9 points now surely I should have the cheapest insurance seeing as I will be way more careful and way more slow when driving. How can they charge me more insurance for the more points I have? Oh wait its something I did in the past, thats why they do it, god I fucking hate this country!

 

[old.Tohtori]

Funny thing is, someone should realise that punishment does not equal "less crime".

If someone wants to drive drunk, i doubt they are planning on getting caught.

Tom is right, more education etc.

 

[Chilly]

I agree with the reduction in blood alcolhol level tolerance, though. There is no rational argument NOT to do it. If more people drink less before driving (or decide NOT to go into work at 8am after getting back from the pub at 4am) less bad driving will result. While this may not result in a huge change in mortality rates or general quality of driving standard, it's a step in the right direction.

I also agree that education is the key, having watched the topgear episode with the Finnish driving stuff I'm almost inclined to suggest a massive overhaul of the driving test and structure. Forcing people to take more training in more situations. I didnt have to do any night or compulsary bad weather driving (I happened to have some lessons in the wet, as this is England) during my training and I think it would be beneficial to do so.

At the end of the day, there will always be muppets on the road, even with the best of driver training. A good way to make these people stop and think is financial penalties or bans. Yes, these spill over to the rest of the driving population and may make life worse, but it's hard to think of anything else we could do.

 

[`mongoose]

..

....in fact I will, I am on 9 points now surely I should have the cheapest insurance seeing as I will be way more careful and way more slow when driving. How can they charge me more insurance for the more points I have? Oh wait its something I did in the past, thats why they do it, god I fucking hate this country!

so move then!!!!!

Honestly I think it's not far from being right, I think motorways should see a speed increase tbh which is where I feel these proposals are slightly wrong. I also think that there is a massive difference between say 70mph and 90mph on a motorway when compared to 30mph and 50mph on a side street. I guess I'm trying to say that I think yet again we're focusing on the wrong areas and Tom is right. This should already be in place on our side streets and towns where pedestrians are at risk from careless drivers.

I'll also say - I've not known any driver yet who doesn't think they drive better than "the average bloke on the street"

As a pedestrian, I regularly see people jumping lights these days, speeding around corners or parking in incredibly dangerous and obstructive positions and generally showing little forethought, respect or concern for their own safety or anyone elses. I realise that many of you are not in that group and feel unfairly dealt with but the problem is that until we stop these morons from driving like this - legislation is likely to get tougher.

I also agree regarding the alcohol limit although again - I feel we're not far off being right with our current legislation.

I'd be interested in seeing what the strategy for these changes are - or whether this is just knee jerk reactions to the terrible tragedies that have occured recently on our roads

M

 

[Raven]

Saying "I drive at 90 odd all the time and not had a crash once" or "I can drive just fine on a couple of pints" reminds me of the bracelet of immortality adverts that used to be in Viz, "immortality or your money back"

Just because you haven't stacked it into the central reservation or hit some ice, an animal or anything else that can and do appear on roads now and again does not mean it will not happen some day.

Its far better to punish and prevent things from happening than trying to mop up afterwards. If increasing the punishment for driving like a **** stops just one death a year then it is worth it.

 

[Scouse]

I agree with the reduction in blood alcolhol level tolerance, though. There is no rational argument NOT to do it. If more people drink less before driving (or decide NOT to go into work at 8am after getting back from the pub at 4am) less bad driving will result. While this may not result in a huge change in mortality rates or general quality of driving standard, it's a step in the right direction.

So, by your own rationale it won't make a difference but you still want to do it?

I also disagree - there are a lot of rational arguments not to lower the limit.

At the end of the day, there will always be muppets on the road, even with the best of driver training. A good way to make these people stop and think is financial penalties or bans. Yes, these spill over to the rest of the driving population and may make life worse, but it's hard to think of anything else we could do.

And again - you've come up with another reason not to do it! - there will always be muppets on the road that you can do fuck all about.

Financial penalties and bans DON'T make muppets think - that's why they're muppets. But they do penalise the wider population - as you've noted yourself.

 

[Scouse]

...the problem is that until we stop these morons from driving like this...

The problem is that we can't stop morons from being morons.

That's New Labour thinking - and the reason we've had rafts of new laws and legislations that make no bloody difference to levels of crime etc. but DO piss the normal people off...

Its far better to punish and prevent things from happening than trying to mop up afterwards. If increasing the punishment for driving like a **** stops just one death a year then it is worth it.

No. It isn't.

Do you not drive yourself or have you recently lost a family member or something?

 

[Will]

The people in charge here are imbeciles. The best way to address road safety is with driver education, not punitive measures aimed at behaviour which causes less than 5% of deaths on the road.

Don't make the mistake of assuming that all those deaths are the fault of the driver; a large percentage will be the fault of idiot pedestrians wandering into the road without first checking to see if the road is clear.

20% of the deaths are peds. Of which, I seriously doubt you can fairly say they all just stepped out in front of a car, in the same way I can't blame cars for every one of the 3000 deaths.

Do you seriously think driver education would work? What measures would you put in place? I'm curious, as I can't see many people bothering to attend any extra training, or paying attention.

 

[Scouse]

Do you seriously think driver education would work? What measures would you put in place? I'm curious, as I can't see many people bothering to attend any extra training, or paying attention.

Yep. Compulsory education. Kids should get skid pan training in this country because that's effectively what the roads become when they're wet, and it's always wet here.

Driving standards have gone through the floor in the last ten years or so - if you do a lot of motorway miles you now see undertaking and lane-weaving (and fucking middle lane hogging) pretty much constantly - whereas previously it was a rare occasion to see someone shoot by you on the left. It's dangerous. Much more dangerous than "speeding".

I'd also re-test people every ten years. If they fail then they'd have 6 months to get themselves back to a standard where they can pass again. Top-up lessons can't be a bad thing to maintain standards and are certainly less draconian than twatting people with fines and points whilst doing nothing to help them improve...

 

[Will]

The obvious immediate counter-arguement is why am I having to pay to be retested when I've done nothing wrong, and its a poll tax on motoring which will price out lower income drivers.

 

[Raven]

The problem is that we can't stop morons from being morons.

That's New Labour thinking - and the reason we've had rafts of new laws and legislations that make no bloody difference to levels of crime etc. but DO piss the normal people off...




No. It isn't.

Do you not drive yourself or have you recently lost a family member or something?

yes i do drive and no nobody i know has been killed (touch wood) Just because you think you are a good driver does not mean everyone is at 90 odd mph. People who dont give a shit about risking others lives should not have a license. If they carry on driving without one then they should be in prison. If a member of your family was killed because some twat thought that he could control over a ton of metal at 90 but turned out he couldnt. You would be fine with that would you? 3 points and a £60 fine enough?

 

[Scouse]

The obvious immediate counter-arguement is why am I having to pay to be retested when I've done nothing wrong, and its a poll tax on motoring which will price out lower income drivers.

I thought "saving lives" was the important thing here?

Or is it "we want to save lives, but only if it doesn't cost us anything"...

If you want higher standards then there's obviously going to be a financial downside. However, you could argue that reducing the number of hospital admissions/accidents has a financial upside that's greater than the down...

 

[Raven]

Oh and yes, yes they could be done for dangerous driving etc. The point is its far better to prevent it from happening in the first place than punishing them afterwards. However, would you really like to see another increase in road tax, petrol tax and even an increase in speed cameras to fund this education? Or shell out for more lessons after you have passed maybe?

 

[Scouse]

If a member of your family was killed because some twat thought that he could control over a ton of metal at 90 but turned out he couldnt. You would be fine with that would you? 3 points and a £60 fine enough?

I lost my dad when I was 4 years old to a twat in an articulated lorry that decided it was OK to pull a U-turn through the central reservation of a motorway.

It doesn't mean that I'm so short-sighted that I want to punish every driver on the road for it...

 

[Scouse]

Oh and yes, yes they could be done for dangerous driving etc. The point is its far better to prevent it from happening in the first place than punishing them afterwards. However, would you really like to see another increase in road tax, petrol tax and even an increase in speed cameras to fund this education? Or shell out for more lessons after you have passed maybe?

I agree that it's better to prevent accidents from happening. The only way you can do that is by improving driving standards - not by punishing people after they've been caught.

And yes. I'd gladly shell out for more lessons if I failed a re-test. Quite rightly I'd put my money where my mouth is.

 

[Chilly]

So, by your own rationale it won't make a difference but you still want to do it?

I also disagree - there are a lot of rational arguments not to lower the limit.

Hold on a minute, I said there might not be a huge difference. Not there will be NO difference. Do not put words into my mouth, and read before you type.

And again - you've come up with another reason not to do it! - there will always be muppets on the road that you can do fuck all about.

Financial penalties and bans DON'T make muppets think - that's why they're muppets. But they do penalise the wider population - as you've noted yourself.

It's all about reducing the number of muppets, we can never make it zero so lets do what we can? Just because something isnt a perfect solution does not mean we shouldnt try it. I never said penalise, either. Christ you are like a bad reporter putting spin on what I say. I said affects, not penalise. If you change *anything* to do with driving legislation it's going to affect drivers. Whether or not that effect is tolerable, appropriate and reasonable is an entirely different matter. Personally I believe it would satisfy those criteria to increase the mandatory training requirements and lower thresholds for banning, and giving the judiciary more discretion to deal with the edge cases and appeals.

 

[Damini]

They want to make roads safer? Then how about actively hunting down and prosecuting people who are: uninsured (less likely to stop after an accident, therefore less likely to help/call ambulance, therefore more likely to contribute to mortality rates). How about sending people that drive without a licence to jail, or people that drive when disqualified to jail. How about changing the law to recognise that a vehicle in the hands of the untrained is a weapon? How about making it so that people with foreign plates get fined, and not a licence to drive like twats without much fear of repercussions. How about actively taking all the un-MOTed cars off the roads.

I'm hardly a speed freak, and I never drink at all if I'm driving, so its not like I'm really going to be affected personally by this, but even I can see that if they really gave a shit about road safety there are hundreds of better ways to go about it.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

If they gave a shit about road safety they'd introduce less dangerous roads that are actually surfaced properly. But that would cost them money, and not make them money, so why bother?

 

[JingleBells]

I'm of the opinion that instead of fining drivers and crushing their cars if they are uninsured/without a license, they should crush the driver and sell the car.

As for the 90mph on the motorway, what utter bollocks, "20mph over the limit" is ridiculous, doing 50 in a 30 would be equivalent to doing ~116 on a motorway, which quite rightly should be a ban. As far as I know the current law is over 100mph on a motorway and you have to go to court, which seems fair to me. After all, speed itself doesn't kill, it's just a factor, more importantly is the right speed for the right conditions, doing 40 in a 30 at 3.30pm on a schoolday is going to be significantly more dangerous than doing 40 in a 30 at 3.30am.

 

[GReaper]

It doesn't mean that I'm so short-sighted that I want to punish every driver on the road for it...

I'd also re-test people every ten years. If they fail then they'd have 6 months to get themselves back to a standard where they can pass again. Top-up lessons can't be a bad thing to maintain standards and are certainly less draconian than twatting people with fines and points whilst doing nothing to help them improve...

Hmmmm!


Seriously though, I'm keen on seeing harsh punishments for drink driving, tighten up the limit etc. There is no excuse for drink driving, everyone knows the consequences of it.

As for speeding, it's going to take a lot more effort than this to solve speeding problems.

 

[Scouse]

Hmmmm!

Seriously though, I'm keen on seeing harsh punishments for drink driving, tighten up the limit etc. There is no excuse for drink driving, everyone knows the consequences of it.

As for speeding, it's going to take a lot more effort than this to solve speeding problems.

As I see it there's 3 things wrong with this:

1) It's not a punishment to make sure that people who drive cars don't let their standards slip. It's a privilege to drive - not a right. I have to retake my CCNA every three years to make sure I'm up to scratch yet it's very rarely someone dies if their network goes down. Why shouldn't drivers have to maintain their standards?

2) The limit was set after a long consultation period so people don't get fucked over for having residual alcohol in their system. Also, your reactions go UP after a single pint so there's no harm there. Reducing the limit would most likely cause more harm than it solved.

3) I don't see speeding as a big problem. It's the cause of 5 or 6% of accidents? There are more pressing issues, like Dams mentioned above.

 

[DaGaffer]

3000 deaths is the drag on the system. Its been around 3000 deaths a year for a long time now, despite increases in fines, speed cameras and all the rest every year for decades. 3000 deaths a year in a small country with 24m cars on the road (and Christ knows how many billion man-miles of journeys) is a low number. The government can carry on being more and more draconian, and I guarantee that unless you take away the human factor for driving completely, it will make no difference, other than to criminalise (and levy fines on) more and more of the population.

Oh, and Will, what the hell does 90 on the motorway have to do with pedestrian deaths?

 

[MYstIC G]

They want to make roads safer? Then how about actively hunting down and prosecuting people who are: uninsured (less likely to stop after an accident, therefore less likely to help/call ambulance, therefore more likely to contribute to mortality rates). How about sending people that drive without a licence to jail, or people that drive when disqualified to jail. How about changing the law to recognise that a vehicle in the hands of the untrained is a weapon? How about making it so that people with foreign plates get fined, and not a licence to drive like twats without much fear of repercussions. How about actively taking all the un-MOTed cars off the roads.

I'm hardly a speed freak, and I never drink at all if I'm driving, so its not like I'm really going to be affected personally by this, but even I can see that if they really gave a shit about road safety there are hundreds of better ways to go about it.

Vote Damini!

No, seriously, run for election somewhere.

 

[Will]

Oh, and Will, what the hell does 90 on the motorway have to do with pedestrian deaths?

Tom said it was a large percentage of the 3000 deaths, I didn't believe him, but it turns out to be 20%. Nothing to do with the motorways at all.