Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 100

Thread: Finally, the truth about speed bumps and low speed limits

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    why would I tell you?
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by Kozy View Post
    I'm sorry, while I all up for scrapping speed limits, I want that because I personally want to drive like a loon everywhere and not get done for it. I cannot see in any way how eliminating the speed limits would reduce accidents.
    I have some links for you:

    Speeding accounts for 2% of accidents in Britain

    In the state of Iowa speed limits are up and deaths are down

    I'm too lazy to find it now but Montana or Wyoming eliminated speed limits all together on some roads and experienced an extreme decrease in accidents. Of course, when they lowered the limit again the accidents came back. Most accidents aren't caused by hooligans speeding, they're caused by hooligans speeding on the same roads that people are going to slow on. It's not caused by speed itself, but by differences in speed.

    The research shows that increasing the speed limit doesn't make people that used to drive 10mph over the limit continue to speed (10mph over the new limit). People drive what they think is reasonable for the road. Not having to watch your back while you drive a reasonable speed tends to decrease the number of accidents.

    There is also an abundance of data that shows that lowering speed limits increases both ticket revenue and accidents- as do red-light and speeding cameras. Not only is it a blatant intrusion in to a persons privacy, it seems that it also compromises their safety.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    75
    Call it a mass over generalisation, but I would say that the roads in Britain are a damn sight more dangerous than the roads in the US. As I said, it could be a mass generalisation, but the majority of roads in the US appear to be largely very striaght and wide, the only roads like that in the UK are the motorways, were accident rates are generally low anyway.

    Raising the speed limits on such roads will not have much effect I will agree, but I just can't see it working here.

    In addition, if they raised the limits and less people would caught speeding, they wuold make less revenue on the cameras. And why would they do that eh?

    I cannot realistically see any speed limits being raised in Britain in the near future. Everything is dropping to 40mph rural and 20mph urban now.

    Peroanlly I think they are largely wrong and I drive according to the conditions. Lucky I have a speed camera proof car then!

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    6,153
    Speed limits are necessary only as a guide line to those with no idea about driving dynamics. It’s like when you have to have procedures in the work place. So that people who can’t work out a sensible way of doing things can work too.
    The people who die from exceeding the speed limit generally die travelling 20 or so kmh faster, not 5. I have proof that speed doest kill. I have driven a car a 200kmh on a 100kmh road and didn’t die. I have driven a car are 60kmh in a 50kmh zone and likewise survived. I am not trying to be smart but that’s the kind of response I feel towards comments like “speed kills”.
    Funny that on the S.A. dept transport web page about road safety they tend to agree with me in the ambiguity they use.

    Research has identified excessive speed as a major factor in approximately 20% of fatal crashes in Australia.
    Excessive speed is not the same as exceeding the speed limit as the go on to say –

    There are two kinds of speed problem:
    • excessive speed (travelling faster than the speed limit)
    • inappropriate speed (travelling too fast for the conditions).
    Speed limits are set so as to indicate a reasonable speed for most vehicles under normal circumstances. But, under less than ideal conditions, travelling below the speed limit may be required for safety.


    Therefore under ideal conditions it is perfectly safe to exceed the speed limit?

    On 60 km/h urban roads the risk of a casualty crash doubles for each 5 km/h above the speed limit; on rural roads the risk doubles for each 10 km/h above the average traffic speed. International research in a number of countries broadly (loosely?) supports these findings.

    Well these are two different things. “Each 5 km/h above the speed limitand “each 10 km/h above the average traffic speed”. So in the country if everyone is going between 100kmh and 140kmh (exceeding the speed limit) then those travelling at 120kmh (exceeding the speed limit) are driving quite safely?

    Their strategies then.

    How can we stop speeding?
    These are just some of the ideas being considered for future action plans to reduce road trauma in our State:
    • Legislation – more regulations to control speeding
    (the faster than the speed limit type, the inappropriate speed type or the above the average speed type????)
    • Education – more information about the consequences
    • Enforcement – greater use of speed guns and cameras
    ( naturally)
    • Penalties – increased demerit points and greater chance of losing your licence (whatever)
    • Traffic management – wider application of lower speed limits (great)
    • Smart technology – vehicle and traffic management systems to automatically lower speed. (Fear their definition of smart!)


    Some recent initiatives in South Australia are:
    • A general 50 km/h limit now applies throughout urban areas, except on arterial roads and where local councils have established 40 km/h zones
    (nice that. 40, 50 , 60 so you have no idea of what you are supposed to be doing therefore a soft target for this guy
    http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/rss/c...s/speed_02.jpg
    • Speed limits on sections of the Adelaide Hills have been lowered to 80 km/h (fair call as long as they are placed sensibly)
    • Speed limits on lower standard rural open roads have been reduced from 110 to 100 km/h (but if the average speed… ah f#@* it.)
    • Demerit points as well as fines now apply to speed camera offences. (whateva!)

    I suppose my point is most of their ideas and initiatives revolve around the ambiguity of the term speeding. As far as I am concerned and I am happy to be proved wrong, the dangerous type of speeding is the one where the speed is inappropriate for the road or conditions. It’s the only one that makes sense. Therefore greater use of speed traps is primarily going to catch those who are exceeding the limit by 5 or 10 ks. Most of the fines I hear about are around those numbers. The leastdangerous type of speeding. The only strategy they list that addresses anything of value is “Education – more information about the consequences.” Pity they don’t think Education – more thorough practical driver training rates a mention.
    "A string is approximately nine long."
    Egg Nogg 02-04-2005, 05:07 AM

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,315
    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    I suppose my point is most of their ideas and initiatives revolve around the ambiguity of the term speeding. As far as I am concerned and I am happy to be proved wrong, the dangerous type of speeding is the one where the speed is inappropriate for the road or conditions. It’s the only one that makes sense. Therefore greater use of speed traps is primarily going to catch those who are exceeding the limit by 5 or 10 ks. Most of the fines I hear about are around those numbers. The leastdangerous type of speeding. The only strategy they list that addresses anything of value is “Education – more information about the consequences.” Pity they don’t think Education – more thorough practical driver training rates a mention.
    This sums it up very nicely. To my opinion speed traps should be placed at points where there is a real need to slow down.
    Let me add also that as far as saw the discussion in this thread, the emphasis seems to lie on fatalities involving car passengers. In urban areas the participation in traffic of other members of the public (like cyclists or pedestrians, or playing children) should be taken into account. There the level of speed really will determine the mortality level of contacts made.
    The other important issue, also mentioned here is the difference in speed. Having done a trip on the fable German Autobahn yesterday, I couldn't help notice that even on ungoverned sections of a two lane motorway the average speed will be relatively low, due to fact that lorries are not allowed/governed for speeds over say 85-90 kph, and many motorists are overtaking these with speeds of about 100-110 kph, causing sometimes massive braking activities hundreds over meters behind them. This is really an accident prone situation indicating that driving too slow is sometimes a greater danger than driving too fast.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    2,192
    Crisis: I agree with your post in its entirety and the following isn't directed specifically at you, but I just wanted to point-out the following things:

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Speed limits are necessary only as a guide line to those with no idea about driving dynamics. It’s like when you have to have procedures in the work place. So that people who can’t work out a sensible way of doing things can work too.
    This is the problem: Despite the fact that these numpties have little or no other option regarding transport, they're simply too ignorant to be behind the wheel. If you can't trust someone to maintain a sensible speed, can you trust them to judge when to turn the steering wheel or judge distances? No.

    The only proper solution is proper driver training BEFORE learners are allowed a driving license. If someone can't show good judgement they shouldn't be controlling a potentially dangerous machine. It's as simple as that.

    Some think that they should automatically have the right to drive - this is wrong. Some people who drive wouldn't be granted a firearms license or allowed by their employer to operate other dangerous machinery because they can't be trusted to use them appropriately. Can everybody see the problem now?

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    The people who die from exceeding the speed limit generally die travelling 20 or so kmh faster, not 5. I have proof that speed doest kill. I have driven a car a 200kmh on a 100kmh road and didn’t die. I have driven a car are 60kmh in a 50kmh zone and likewise survived. I am not trying to be smart but that’s the kind of response I feel towards comments like “speed kills”.
    Funny that on the S.A. dept transport web page about road safety they tend to agree with me in the ambiguity they use.
    Yes, yes, yes! And in appropriate conditions, there's nothing wrong with those who know what they're doing driving their cars in an appropriate way (whether that be in a "sporty" fashion or otherwise). Sorry to stereotype, but even if a genuine car enthusiast with a high level of driving ability and a reasonable head loses control of their machine, they'll do it in an environment where they're not going to harm anyone else - it's the chavs

    And just as important to remember: Accidents will still happen regardless - you can't prevent every unexpected event*, but authorities are too quick to jump on the "speed bandwagon" rather than look for the real problem in most cases.

    * For example, I was hit by a wheeltrim that flew off another car last night (only little scratches thankfully) - no-one was driving stupidly and I was driving below the speed limit. Accidents still happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Research has identified excessive speed as a major factor in approximately 20% of fatal crashes in Australia.
    Excessive speed is not the same as exceeding the speed limit as the go on to say –
    There are two kinds of speed problem:
    • excessive speed (travelling faster than the speed limit)
    • inappropriate speed (travelling too fast for the conditions).
    Speed limits are set so as to indicate a reasonable speed for most vehicles under normal circumstances. But, under less than ideal conditions, travelling below the speed limit may be required for safety.
    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, and this is the other problem: Even speed limits and enforcement that are draconian in ideal conditions can still be inadequate in less than ideal conditions. That's why despite the disadvantages of cost and practicality, we ultimately need to switch to a more "common sense" approach to driving, especially seeing as the volume of traffic on our roads is on the increase.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Therefore under ideal conditions it is perfectly safe to exceed the speed limit?
    Short answer: Yes. Many drivers do that regularly with no ill-effects whatsoever. Sorry to repeat myself, but as long as you're driving appropriately, only freak accidents will still happen - and they're indiscriminate anyway!

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    On 60 km/h urban roads the risk of a casualty crash doubles for each 5 km/h above the speed limit; on rural roads the risk doubles for each 10 km/h above the average traffic speed. International research in a number of countries broadly(loosely?) supports these findings.
    The text highlighted in bold means almost nothing in reality. How this data was gathered and who's agreeing and why are more important issues. Can we trust it? Doubtful, because it's being sprouted from the same governments we already know not to be truthful in many matters including those involving transport and driving.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Well these are two different things. “Each 5 km/h above the speed limitand “each 10 km/h above the average traffic speed”. So in the country if everyone is going between 100kmh and 140kmh (exceeding the speed limit) then those travelling at 120kmh (exceeding the speed limit) are driving quite safely?
    A very good point and in reality there's a likelihood they are driving safely. If someone with an equal skill/equipment etc.etc. can demonstrate how to do something at 140kmh, you can do it at 120kmh. It's like walking across a bridge: If you see a horse run across it just before you get to it, unless something's changed before your turn, you'll be able to walk across it with no problems.

    [QUOTE=crisis;789729]Their strategies then.

    How can we stop speeding?
    These are just some of the ideas being considered for future action plans to reduce road trauma in our State:
    • Legislation – more regulations to control speeding
    (the faster than the speed limit type, the inappropriate speed type or the above the average speed type????)

    I'd vote for the inappropriate type every time. If there were no posted limits and someone did have an accident, it could be judged whether they were driving inappropriately* or not and if they were, they could be reprimanded just the same. - Only without affecting those who are capable of acting reasonably. It's a "win/win" situation for road users.

    * By "inappropriately", I don't just mean "speeding", as speeding is never the sole cause of RTAs.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    • Education – more information about the consequences


    As our government likes to say: "Education, education, education!"

    - it's time for them to put their money where their mouths are. This, together with a sensible approach, is the only way to solve most of the problems facing society. Nelson Mandela once said that man will act wisely once every other option has failed - my question is "why"?

    Initial costs and impracticalities (to the government) will be very high, but once the foundations are laid, we're left to reap the benefits of our hard work. There is no excuse.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    • Enforcement – greater use of speed guns and cameras
    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    ( naturally)
    For what? Yet more inappropriate manipulation and deceit?

    "I'm sorry, you were doing 80mph on a 70mph road in the middle of the night with no other traffic around, we're going to punish you more severely than thugs who assault and terrorise the public."


    No thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    • Penalties – increased demerit points and greater chance of losing your licence (whatever)
    £££

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    • Traffic management – wider application of lower speed limits (great)
    The only places I'd still advocate low speed limits are in heavily populated, built-up areas as there is more opportunity for the unexpected to happen - otherwise all we're doing is inconveniencing everybody that's driving sensibly.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    • Smart technology – vehicle and traffic management systems to automatically lower speed. (Fear their definition of smart!)
    Why? So that yet more complete idiots can be deemed to be "safe" behind the wheel? If there were a God, we'd need their help with this...!

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Some recent initiatives in South Australia are:
    • A general 50 km/h limit now applies throughout urban areas, except on arterial roads and where local councils have established 40 km/h zones
    (nice that. 40, 50 , 60 so you have no idea of what you are supposed to be doing therefore a soft target for this guy
    http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/rss/c...s/speed_02.jpg
    • Speed limits on sections of the Adelaide Hills have been lowered to 80 km/h (fair call as long as they are placed sensibly)
    • Speed limits on lower standard rural open roads have been reduced from 110 to 100 km/h (but if the average speed… ah f#@* it.)
    • Demerit points as well as fines now apply to speed camera offences. (whateva!)
    Similar BS in the UK - except the limits are even lower and more difficult to stick to. (Ever tried to drive a modern car at a steady 20mph for a while, whilst watching the road?)

    What happens when more people have accidents due to them watching the speedo rather than the road?
    "This is hardcore." - Evo's John Barker on the TVR Tuscan S

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    2,192
    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    I suppose my point is most of their ideas and initiatives revolve around the ambiguity of the term speeding. As far as I am concerned and I am happy to be proved wrong, the dangerous type of speeding is the one where the speed is inappropriate for the road or conditions. It’s the only one that makes sense. Therefore greater use of speed traps is primarily going to catch those who are exceeding the limit by 5 or 10 ks. Most of the fines I hear about are around those numbers. The leastdangerous type of speeding. The only strategy they list that addresses anything of value is “Education – more information about the consequences.” Pity they don’t think Education – more thorough practical driver training rates a mention.
    Exactly. What's therefore needed is for all sensible drivers to stick together and force improvements on our roads - it's the only real way to solve the problem of speeding, and indeed all of the other problems that face us. The most dangerous drivers are those who don't care about driving appropriately, and current measures do almost nothing to stop them.

    In short, we need to STAND UP FOR OURSELVES! Good luck!
    "This is hardcore." - Evo's John Barker on the TVR Tuscan S

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    6,153
    Just because it’s a hobby horse of mine-

    I attended an advanced driver training course where you took your own car and were taught how to avoid hitting things. It was extremely valuable to me who has been driving nearly 30 years (no way!!!!) . How valuable would it be to a new driver?
    I can tell you how valuable it was to a couple of old drivers. One practical exercise was to have you drive at 60kmh at a series of witches hats and execute an emergency stop at a line where the instructor would blow a whistle. Point A. You then had to steer the car such as to avoid B and come to rest before hitting the witches hats at C.



    Now the distance between A B and C were intimidatingly short, such that I thought no way, especially as the track had been wetted down. The trick is (as explained to all of us prior) to look at where you want to go as opposed to what you don’t want to hit. The instructor (who also investigates actual accidents) explained that the normal human reaction is to focus on the threat and as a result many people hit it. Putting the theory of lifting your eyes and looking for a way out meant that a few of us completed the exercise without hitting anything and ending up where we wanted. Now I was in a 2003 VY Commodore (a large family sedan for those who don’t know it) which had factory sports suspension and wide tyres (although half worn). I was asked to do it at 80kmh ( (-: ) and still managed to pull it off. Probably the hardest part was holding your nerve until the instructor (standing at point A) blew the whistle.
    Did I say probably? There were two women aged around 50 who were driving brand new cars similar to mine. Each time they did their run (and I doubt they reached 60ks) they ground to a halt right next to the instructor (A) before he blew the whistle. The whole thing was just too intimidating for them even though all they would have hit was a couple of plastic cones.
    I think there were 10 of us so 20% of the people there displayed 0 confidence in themselves, their car or the training. A couple of others couldn’t manage to complete the exercise effectively either.

    A few points-
    These people were a reasonable representation of drivers, me a sales person who drives around for my job, government workers (the ladies) who also drive around, a couple of young drivers (male and female) and others. Also there was a 100 series Landcruiser, cars like mine and a couple of old bangers with no ABS (the real clincher in this exercise) and others.
    The young drivers listened and at least attempted to do what they were told and they had the worst cars out of all of them. The men also tried and succeed to varying degrees (the Cruiser owned plenty of withes hats but) and the middle aged women, well, I think they represent the “numpties (who) have little or no other option regarding transport” that Clivey refers to and drive because we are all allowed to and most of us have to get around . They were told and would not/ could not/ learn or execute a simple instruction in a safe environment. What happens when they are presented with a real emergency and will it really matter if they are doing 90 kmh or 140kmh on a country road or 50 or 60 on a suburban road? These people were presented with a certificate that stated they had completed the course though which kind of misrepresents their actual ability.

    This course should be a part of the process of obtaining ones licence and if you cannot pass it you should not be given one.
    "A string is approximately nine long."
    Egg Nogg 02-04-2005, 05:07 AM

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,315
    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    The trick is (as explained to all of us prior) to look at where you want to go as opposed to what you don’t want to hit.
    Indeed, those who are familiar with slalom skiing (going through the gates) will know that you concentrate on the gate AFTER the one you are about to pass....

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Down Under
    Posts
    8,833
    Motorcyclists as well.
    Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
    – Hunter Thompson

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,315
    Quote Originally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen View Post
    Motorcyclists as well.
    (motor)cyclists...
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Eindhoven, The Netherlands
    Posts
    7,827
    Quote Originally Posted by henk4 View Post
    (motor)cyclists...
    In desperate need of two extra wheels

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Down Under
    Posts
    8,833
    Ha. Not likely.
    Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
    – Hunter Thompson

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    2,192
    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    I attended an advanced driver training course where you took your own car and were taught how to avoid hitting things. It was extremely valuable to me who has been driving nearly 30 years (no way!!!!) . How valuable would it be to a new driver?
    I can tell you how valuable it was to a couple of old drivers. One practical exercise was to have you drive at 60kmh at a series of witches hats and execute an emergency stop at a line where the instructor would blow a whistle. Point A. You then had to steer the car such as to avoid B and come to rest before hitting the witches hats at C.
    The only problem I'd have with taking such a course in my own car is that if I did hit a cone, that means damage to the car. I'd definitely consider it though if the organiser provided the car.

    But other than that, it's an absolutely fantastic idea - courses such as those make you realise that driving isn't just a trivial chore that you do to go somewhere. You have to be competent and responsible.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Now the distance between A B and C were intimidatingly short, such that I thought no way, especially as the track had been wetted down. The trick is (as explained to all of us prior) to look at where you want to go as opposed to what you don’t want to hit. The instructor (who also investigates actual accidents) explained that the normal human reaction is to focus on the threat and as a result many people hit it. Putting the theory of lifting your eyes and looking for a way out meant that a few of us completed the exercise without hitting anything and ending up where we wanted.
    Can't argue with that - it matters even more when you're riding a bike (powered or otherwise) - Think about what you do when you want to do a simple 180-degree turn on a pushbike: You don't stare at the ground a metre ahead - you look where you want to go. It's all about training yourself to deal with possible situations, and if you can't handle it you're quite simply risking life.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Now I was in a 2003 VY Commodore (a large family sedan for those who don’t know it) which had factory sports suspension and wide tyres (although half worn). I was asked to do it at 80kmh ( (-: ) and still managed to pull it off. Probably the hardest part was holding your nerve until the instructor (standing at point A) blew the whistle.
    True that - you'll be used to driving well within your own personal limits, assuming you are a decent driver, so "pushing it" will heighten your awareness and ready you for emergency evasive action etc. The problem is when people don't even realise they're pushing it, just freak-out and, typically, slam the brakes on - which is ironically the worst thing you can do in many situations...

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    Did I say probably? There were two women aged around 50 who were driving brand new cars similar to mine. Each time they did their run (and I doubt they reached 60ks) they ground to a halt right next to the instructor (A) before he blew the whistle. The whole thing was just too intimidating for them even though all they would have hit was a couple of plastic cones.
    And thanks "crisis" for the example. What happens if a child steps-out in front of them? Do they simply slam the brakes on, close their eyes and pray? More importantly, this kind of driver probably didn't even see the hazard developing and so would already be in deep trouble before they even realise it. Very worrying.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    I think there were 10 of us so 20% of the people there displayed 0 confidence in themselves, their car or the training. A couple of others couldn’t manage to complete the exercise effectively either.
    I've quoted this to reinforce what I'm saying but really, if you're reading and understanding my point(s), you'll understand by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    A few points-
    These people were a reasonable representation of drivers, me a sales person who drives around for my job, government workers (the ladies) who also drive around, a couple of young drivers (male and female) and others. Also there was a 100 series Landcruiser, cars like mine and a couple of old bangers with no ABS (the real clincher in this exercise) and others.
    Precisely. One of the main problems is that despite some cars having ABS, I'd bet money that a large amount of drivers don't even know what it does, how to use it and which cars are fitted with it. It's the same with many other features of cars. In fact, most poor drivers should IMO be made to undertake a course driving a simple, older car to make sure they understand the basics - you shouldn't be relying on electronics etc. to save you.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    The young drivers listened and at least attempted to do what they were told and they had the worst cars out of all of them.
    Maybe due to the fact that previous driver training may be fresher in their minds - but more importantly: The sort of younger driver that actively wants to undertake such a course typically isn't the sort that screeches a riced-up car around city centres causing chaos - in other words: It's the other "know-it-all" showoffs that cause the problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    The men also tried and succeed to varying degrees (the Cruiser owned plenty of withes hats but) and the middle aged women, well, I think they represent the “numpties (who) have little or no other option regarding transport” that Clivey refers to and drive because we are all allowed to and most of us have to get around . They were told and would not/ could not/ learn or execute a simple instruction in a safe environment. What happens when they are presented with a real emergency and will it really matter if they are doing 90 kmh or 140kmh on a country road or 50 or 60 on a suburban road?
    When are the "speed kills" Nazis going to realise this though? That's my main gripe.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    These people were presented with a certificate that stated they had completed the course though which kind of misrepresents their actual ability.
    "Congratulations: Here's a hand grenade - have fun!"

    - Further proving my point that driving education and testing needs a thorough overhaul - the authorities don't seem to know their arse from their elbow and we simply can't trust them with our safety.

    Quote Originally Posted by crisis View Post
    This course should be a part of the process of obtaining ones licence and if you cannot pass it you should not be given one.
    Absolutely. The "reverse around a corner" etc. on our driving test is laughable - you should be able to do much more than that.

    Who else agrees?
    "This is hardcore." - Evo's John Barker on the TVR Tuscan S

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,315
    Isn't it ironic that in another thread a 16 year old is considering buying a 270 BHP Audi 200 Quattro.......
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    2,192
    Quote Originally Posted by henk4 View Post
    Isn't it ironic that in another thread a 16 year old is considering buying a 270 BHP Audi 200 Quattro.......
    Yes, although it is possible although statistically not probable that they will be mature and sensible with it. The danger we face is tarring everyone with the same brush that the numpties are having to be brushed by. I could say with total certainty that despite being "just" 19, you could give me a TVR and NOT find me backwards up a tree by next week. - If I were in a position to own something like that, I'd want to be shown how to use and take care of it properly, I wouldn't even drive it until I knew that I knew what I was doing.

    - In fact, anyone who knows me would agree that I'd probably spend a month polishing every nut and bolt before it even saw a road!
    "This is hardcore." - Evo's John Barker on the TVR Tuscan S

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •