Ban P Platers over Easter

[Silver Ghia]

I have noticed for some years the quality of driving on weekends and public holidays is quite poor, compared with driving to work on the same roads during weekday peak times. Today was no different when we went down the Calder, across the city to Sandringham and back, there were vehicles following almost right up against my rear bumper despite me following behind vehicles in front, "I cant go any faster mate, besides I'm at the speed limit!!".

And a few clowns passing, doing in well in excess of 30kph over the posted speed limit. Makes the 'knock off 5' campaign look quite pointless, they should be concentrating more on these drivers.

Then the many 'L' drivers I came across. One decided to put the right hand indicator on just as I was passing, making me worried for a second or so. Maybe they should ban 'L' drivers instead, only because the licensed drivers next to them dont seem to instruct too well.

No, today I didn't see any 'P' platers doing wrong, but there were certainly plenty of others.

[g220ba]

Why don't we just ban everyone all the time?

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Victoria's learner log book, has exactly what you mentioned.

I'd gladly give up driving if there was public transport that went by my work, unfortunately my closest train station is 30km down the road and no trains/trams/buses stop within walking distance of my work and a taxi to my workplace is about $80 one way.

Damo, you'll find those that flog the 'Use public transport' line (either in here or in the newspapers) are nearly always city folk, where there IS a public transport system

[duaned]

Originally Posted by buggo_gt

Is that a joke? Can I ask what your reasons are?

I'm sick of the general population having ths hate for p-platers.

I personally don't agree with banning p-platers over easter, but wholeheartedly agree why the public has a strong dis-like to p-platers. It is the action of many, with just a few remaining p-platers to do the right thing behind a steering wheel (assuming this is in your minority awd-chaser). Almost daily I come close to swapping paint with a driver with plates combined with their lack of respect for other people and their property. I don't want to go to far off topic, but gen-y people frustrate the hell out of me. Many can't handle a powerful car (but they convince themselves they can) and many can't handle a drink ( and they say they can, but prove otherwiswe in their actions). Make alcohol comsumption and licensing at a min. age of 21. Many in this age group may even have the slightest grasp of respect by the time they reach this age.

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by duaned

but gen-y people frustrate the hell out of me. Many can't handle a powerful car (but they convince themselves they can) and many can't handle a drink ( and they say they can, but prove otherwiswe in their actions).

Yeah because gen y are the only that have those sort of issues aren't they?

[Ben73]

P plates only last for 3 years. You can do 500kms in 3 years or 500,000kms.
Just because someone has full licence doesn't mean they experienced. I was on my p's for 3 years and drove about 130,000kms+ in those 3 years. For some full licensed drivers that do 10,000kms a year it would take them 13 years to drive that distance. Actually getting out there and doing the driving is where skill comes from. Not having your p's for 3 years and not driving because you are banned half the time. I'm not saying I'm a perfect driver but in all that distance I have came across many driving conditions and experiences and that is what helps.

Most p platers I see drive sensible. Few idiots around but they are the ones who stand out and the ones you remember.
I don't think Easter time is very busy. Not around the city atleast.

I think 58% of Australians are idiots if they want to ban all p platers over Easter

RTBU are pathetic anyway. I wouldn't believe anything they say.

[Ben73]

Also I think the general publics view on p platers needs to change.
I was on red p's with sedan and frequentily had people cut off, pull out and try to push me around on road. Moved onto green p and it reduced slightly. Bought a 4x4 and reduced even more.
Now on full licence with 4x4 and it is almost non existent.
I swear people treat others different. As soon as they see the p

[duaned]

Originally Posted by g220ba

Yeah because gen y are the only that have those sort of issues aren't they?

Urm, yes!

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by duaned

Urm, yes!

Good to see you didn't really take offence at light hearted jab mate .
Too many on here wouldn't bitten back without thought.

[shedcoupe]

Personally I would ban everyone except myself from the roads permanently - possibly for everyone else's good.

However, on Friday arvo I was travelling from Perth to Bunbury (2 lanes southbound) in the escape-the-city traffic and spent some time following a p-plater sitting in the right-hand lane at 10 km/h below the limit.
Cars ahead had been passing on the inside (where it was rarely possible).
I put my lights on - no moving over. Put high beam on - nothing. Gave the beams a tickle - nothing.
So I passed on the left and observed a girl staring rigidly ahead with arms extended straight out and hands at 10 and 2, boy draped across the passenger seat looking vacant.
Felt tempted to give a blast on the horn and a serving of finger with a 'pull-over' gesture, but that is dangerous as she might have got a fright and swerved. She probably would have had no idea what those things were about anyway.

I had no idea what it was all about - greenies trying to slow the traffic, mum's just been rushed to hospital, too many bongs, European whose dad had told her to always drive in the right-hand lane, looking for a turn-off on the right, who knows ??

And then there's the more experienced drivers with the cruise set on 5 kays under to make absolutely sure to not get a ticket, the 'drop 5-10 kays because the phone's rung and I'm trying to find it in my handbag' crew, and the 'staring at the base of the steering wheel while texting' mob.
I can see why fascism can appeal.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by ak.v

wrapping a car around a pole is not hard at all,.

really, personally I dont know anyone that has managed to do it, either deliberately or by accident.

[The Yeti]

for once here is a thread that quoats actuals.

Look at the 17 - 25year old bracket thats 20 people reprecented in the stats the next interesting figure is 40 -59year old bracket. they are deffinatly over represented lets keep them off the road as well O hang on next easter I'll fall in to that catagory so perhaps not

but think about it 17 - 20 is a 3 year period that equates to a huge proportion of fatalitys go back and look at the stats for MVA's involving injurys and you will see they are also overy reprecented I think a daylight and work only restricions for long weekends could be somthing that should be given some further considerationg

we as a country need to start undersating drving a car is a privlige not a right it would be interesting to see who the at fault drivers were for these stats and to see how many other age groups are reprecented as the result of the fault of another age group

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Sorry, dont think that is a good idea at all.
We are going to have a couple of million people having to go out on their weekend burn needless amount of fossil fuels to get their country miles up?
the more km you do the more chance of accident, I could only see more carnage out of such an idea.

While I agree that getting a licence should include instruction and actual testing or simulation(especially learning about how to safely predict how much road needed for overtaking etc) test on country roads, it is not something that needs to be practiced every 4 weeks to be a capable driver. For most people in the population, once you have a skill, it typically remains at a high level....riding a bike for example, and learning to ride a bike is a damn lot harder skill wise than learning to drive a car.

People's reflexes are what they are, you can do small things to improve them, but driving on country roads certainly wont change them one iota!

I agree that when I hit the highway after being suburban bound for months, then 100km/h does seem fast, that doesnt mean that Im unable to drive or that my skills have dropped away or wont be able to react to situations, cant see why, perhaps you can explain it to me.

I can see your point and agree with you, driving skill and ability has nothing to do with how far you have driven in the last 4 weeks. I was raised in the country and now live in the city and employed as a full time paramedic, only yesterday I was rushing through traffic to a cardiac arrest. If I were to take 4 weeks leave, spend 2 weeks at home doing odd jobs and then go on a holiday for the second 2 weeks, is he saying I won't be allowed to drive on the highway because I don't have enough recent experience?

For most people in the population, once you have a skill, it typically remains at a high level....riding a bike for example, and learning to ride a bike is a damn lot harder skill wise than learning to drive a car.

I can see what you are trying to say here, both driving and riding a bike are acquired skills that involve a degree of situational awareness and also muscle memory (reflex muscle use that does not need you to look for the brake pedal, your foot knows where it is). These skills do degrade over time but not in a space of two weeks. However I can not agree with your comment that learning to ride a bike is harder than learning to competently drive a car, driving a car is a much more complex task requiring more complex use of vehicle controls and coordination. I think the notion that driving a car is easy, easier than riding a bike is something that anyone who is remotely supportive of road safety should never support. In the comparison between bike and car, the car is a much more lethal machine that can kill and maim more people in a shorter amount of time. Use of that car requires a lot more training and skill in order to use it safely and competently.

I also agree with your comment about reflexes and I would go as far as to say someone that drives small distances in heavy traffic daily is likely to have better use of their reflexes than someone that drives purely on country roads and highways every day. On a highway you are traveling much faster but there are less hazards and less sudden changes than driving in the city. Think of it like this, I drive in the city every day but I find once I am on the Logan Motorway I can relax a bit more because although I am traveling a bit quicker, there are no pedestrians, no bikes, no scooters and I have 3 lanes in which to move in and no driveways and cross streets. In the city my scanning for hazards is probably on 25% long distance but medium to close distance takes up the rest because that is where the threat will come from. On the highway, close distance scanning drops to probably less than 25% and the medium to long distance becomes more important as that is were the threat will come from.

[anolade]

Originally Posted by NEEDspeed

The cultivation of a nanny state obviously never looked as easy to some of these twits...and so the juggernaut rolls on into oblivion.

NSW government been spending too much time in Mexico

problem with the "P" platers is lack of actual training understanding of road conditions and speed.
the big problem is with driver training schools most of these instructors don't know how to drive they follow the RTA rules and instructions, never once with myself friends and sibling in a manual do a hillstart and any form of highway/freeway driving towing not saying this will do anything to curb the stupidty of the fully sick dumbarse "P" platers.

first problem is the parents second is the kid.







remember when i did my P's with my old man i never was stuck running to the supermarket and to another suburb i did a heap of highway driving along with night raining day/nights so.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I think the notion that driving a car is easy, easier than riding a bike is something that anyone who is remotely supportive of road safety should never support

It appears that you have just seized on this as an opportunity for a put down, you could perhaps have put a case forward as to what skills in particular you think there are in driving the average auto that are beyond that of riding a bicycle on the roads, sure it can be debated, but no you didnt that, just straight into some character assassination.

Give a person who has never ridden a bike or driven a car, Ill get them driving a car better and more quickly than they can safely ride the bicycle in traffic. Yeh, and Ive taught six people to do both.

Have you ridden a bicycle in traffic recently with the wheels of a 40 tonne truck brushing past your shoulders?, not something you'd recommend an eighty year old with decreasing co-ordination and balance to be doing? but they manage quite well in cars. I gather we are not comparing this to being able to change gears on a road train without a clutch!

Originally Posted by geckoGT

In the comparison between bike and car, the car is a much more lethal machine that can kill and maim more people in a shorter amount of time

No kidding! however, its not good logic for that activity needs more skill than an other.

Im sure juggling, keeping five things in the air while blindfolded doesnt have the potential to maim and kill innocent bystanders either, but it certainly requires skill exceeding that of what is needed to drive a car safely on public roads

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by sudszy

It appears that you have just seized on this as an opportunity for a put down, you could perhaps have put a case forward as to what skills in particular you think there are in driving the average auto that are beyond that of riding a bicycle on the roads, sure it can be debated, but no you didnt that, just straight into some character assassination.

Give a person who has never ridden a bike or driven a car, Ill get them driving a car better and more quickly than they can safely ride the bicycle in traffic. Yeh, and Ive taught six people to do both.

Have you ridden a bicycle in traffic recently with the wheels of a 40 tonne truck brushing past your shoulders?, not something you'd recommend an eighty year old with decreasing co-ordination and balance to be doing? but they manage quite well in cars. I gather we are not comparing this to being able to change gears on a road train without a clutch!



No kidding! however, its not good logic for that activity needs more skill than an other.

Im sure juggling, keeping five things in the air while blindfolded doesnt have the potential to maim and kill innocent bystanders either, but it certainly requires skill exceeding that of what is needed to drive a car safely on public roads

Give me a break, I agree with 95% of your post, mention 5% that I do not agree with and that is a put down? Paranoid much or are you just looking for an argument?

This is going off topic but as for your example of teaching someone to ride and someone to drive, you must be kidding. So clearly you are suggesting you can teach a 12 year old to safely drive a car in heavy traffic, because a 12 year old can be taught to ride a bike in those circumstances and it does not require a 100 hrs of logged instruction.

As for the question as to if I ride in heavy traffic with the wheels of 40t vehicles passing by. Get to know the other person in the debate first. I have been a competitive cyclist from age 12 through to 35, competed at state level road racing and triathlon and was WA champion in my age group in triathlon. I have also completed 2 Australian Ironman Triathlons (3.8 km swim, 180 km bike, 42.2 km run) in 2002 and 2003. In 2003 I had a time of 9 hrs 52 mins and became the Australian defence Force Ironman triathlon Champion in the process. As a result of all this competition I often averaged over 1000 km a week on all forms of public roads training on the bike with annual distance travelled on bike often in excess of 30,000 km a year. Some of that trainingg was done in Karratha WA where I was riding on single lane highways for up to 200 kms at a time with large road trains passing by (40t is a light weight compared to those bad boys). Basically, I have more km's under my belt on my bike than many here have done in a car, so I do have a pretty good idea.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Im sure juggling, keeping five things in the air while blindfolded doesnt have the potential to maim and kill innocent bystanders either, but it certainly requires skill exceeding that of what is needed to drive a car safely on public roads

It does if you are juggling chainsaws or loaded machine guns

[Ben73]

Overall I think younger people will always have more crashes. Mostly due to less experience. But you can't do much about that. Banning young drivers from driving is not going to improve there skills and experience. Just make them less skilled for a longer period of time.

I heard somewhere the 26-30 something age group has more crashes then the 17-25 now..... Dont know how true.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Overall I think younger people will always have more crashes. Mostly due to less experience. But you can't do much about that. Banning young drivers from driving is not going to improve there skills and experience. Just make them less skilled for a longer period of time.

I heard somewhere the 26-30 something age group has more crashes then the 17-25 now..... Dont know how true.

There is generally a lot of truth in what you say although it is arguable that the key cause of younger crashes is due to less experience, many of the larger crashes involving deaths or serious injury are a result of greater risk taking behaviour.

0-4: 0
5-16: 2
17-20: 10
21-25: 10
26-29: 8
30-39: 7
40-49: 15
50-59: 14
60-69: 8
70+: 17
uknown: 0
Total: 91

I heard somewhere the 26-30 something age group has more crashes then the 17-25 now..... Dont know how true.

Not according to the stats from NSW so far this year. Actually the poor performers are the experienced 40-49 age group followed by the 50-59's, interesting. Could that be from over confidence and complacency?

[tezxr8man]

Originally Posted by xisled

I disagree with you, a P plater is still a learner driver and is not a good driver until they have a few years experience. Just because a P plater may be a safe driver does not mean they are a good driver. Only over time a person can become a good driver.

I agree with you here but this is across the board there are plenty of people who are hopeless altogether and shouldn't be on the road regardless of age.
P platers have a bit to learn but there are plenty who are better than some older people who think they know everything

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by tezxr8man

I agree with you here but this is across the board there are plenty of people who are hopeless altogether and shouldn't be on the road regardless of age.
P platers have a bit to learn but there are plenty who are better than some older people who think they know everything

Very true and the stats supplied may suggest that.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Not according to the stats from NSW so far this year. Actually the poor performers are the experienced 40-49 age group followed by the 50-59's, interesting. Could that be from over confidence and complacency?

I don't agree - based on the data in the first post and the same that you quoted, 17-29yo show 28 deaths which would probably relate to around 22 for a 10 year spread of 17-26. 40-49's totals 15 and the 50-59 totals 14. In percentage terms, the younger group has more than 50% more deaths than the 50's.

Perhaps because of their experience they *should* be lower, but as a group their number of deaths is obviously smaller.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Actually the poor performers are the experienced 40-49 age group followed by the 50-59's, interesting. Could that be from over confidence and complacency?

I think some people automatically think they are the best just because they have had their license for a long time, overconfidence certainly plays a part.

I have an example on how people automatically pass judgment on P platers before they even see them drive.
Few years ago when I was on my p's we did a defensive driving course for work.
I was the only P plater in my group and before we even started the other guys were giving me **** about being a p plater and how I will be hopeless at it.
Turns out when we got into the car some of these guys in there 30's 40's and 50's were a lot worse then me at control the car around the cones in the wet.

[ak.v]

Originally Posted by sudszy

really, personally I dont know anyone that has managed to do it, either deliberately or by accident.

have u watched the news lately???

[Gobes32]

I hope I die before I get old,so I don't become bitter and jaded like everyone else over 30.......... Sheesh.

[JC]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

There is generally a lot of truth in what you say although it is arguable that the key cause of younger crashes is due to less experience, many of the larger crashes involving deaths or serious injury are a result of greater risk taking behaviour.





Not according to the stats from NSW so far this year. Actually the poor performers are the experienced 40-49 age group followed by the 50-59's, interesting. Could that be from over confidence and complacency?

Or in an aging population such as ours, are now making up the majority? I'd like to see these stats in terms of percentage of age group (ie, the 17-25 accident rate is 1 per 10,000, while the 40+ is 1 per 25,000, etc). You can get stats to say anything you want, and these raw figures didn't impress me in the first post, and still don't.

Gecko - the idea of banning weekday commute users from driving on holidays is purely because I don't believe their skill level is up to it and is probably less than a brand new P plater. I would not including professional drivers in this "test" though. And it is just food for thought - it's not like I'm in a position to implement it.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Scott

I don't agree - based on the data in the first post and the same that you quoted, 17-29yo show 28 deaths which would probably relate to around 22 for a 10 year spread of 17-26. 40-49's totals 15 and the 50-59 totals 14. In percentage terms, the younger group has more than 50% more deaths than the 50's.

Perhaps because of their experience they *should* be lower, but as a group their number of deaths is obviously smaller.

Good point, the age break up makes it a bit tricky to work out. Average it for deaths per year and 17-25 works out to 2.5 deaths per year (8 years) of the age range, the 40-49 age group (10 years) equals 1.5 deaths per year of the age group. Not really the spectacular difference that would justify the older age group deciding the younger drivers are dangerous and should be banned from driving at certain times.

To me the figures and previous information I have come across suggest there could be a number of main issues consisting of inexperience, risk taking, overconfidence and complacency. These are issues that span across all of the driving population and although the frequency of each issue does vary with age, no age group is immune. Therefore I do not believe that targeting one age group like suggested is a good idea, not while other age groups are devoid of sufficient attention.

[Sizey]

Originally Posted by flappist

I totally agree with not allowing inexperienced lowly skilled drivers on the roads at Easter.

Unfortunately the MAJORITY of inexperienced lowly skilled drivers are those of ALL ages and licensing durations who live in a city, usually take public transport to work and only ever drive to drop the kids off at school, down to the local shops, once a week to the golf club and once or twice a year for a distance of more than 50km.

THEY are the dangerous ones but the problem is THEY don't know it and would not accept it even if they did.

It would be nice if, like pilots, all drivers had log books detailing just how much driving they have done and in what conditions and locations.

HERE HERE. However The P-plater has been pulled into the limelight so much now that it is easy to use as a scapegoat.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by JC

Or in an aging population such as ours, are now making up the majority? I'd like to see these stats in terms of percentage of age group (ie, the 17-25 accident rate is 1 per 10,000, while the 40+ is 1 per 25,000, etc). You can get stats to say anything you want, and these raw figures didn't impress me in the first post, and still don't.

Gecko - the idea of banning weekday commute users from driving on holidays is purely because I don't believe their skill level is up to it and is probably less than a brand new P plater. I would not including professional drivers in this "test" though. And it is just food for thought - it's not like I'm in a position to implement it.

Population density across age groups, interesting point and probably a factor.

[AWD Chaser]

Originally Posted by JC

Or in an aging population such as ours, are now making up the majority? I'd like to see these stats in terms of percentage of age group (ie, the 17-25 accident rate is 1 per 10,000, while the 40+ is 1 per 25,000, etc). You can get stats to say anything you want, and these raw figures didn't impress me in the first post, and still don't.