Two more teenage road deaths

[Edward]

The insurance is stupid, for a 1998 1.2 fiesta 75hp third party only is £1900 throught the farm insurance, where one of my mates at college has a 2007 1.6 fiesta sport 120hp and his is £1600 full comp. haveing said that I can get a landy for £700 as its more of a farm type vehicle.

[pegleg31]

Mr potter i'm 35 so i'm sat on the fence here :yp:

 

 

but i'm sure you'll agree with me that there is plenty of older drivers that should'nt be on the road the thing is people realise that they're gettting older so keep quite about it.

 

 

just like to add,i've never been a boy racer or had a sports car,i've mainly driven a van

[The Duncan]

Pegleg31: " i think they should make people re-sit their test again at 65,70 and then every year after that as i personally think elderly drivers are more dangerous"

 

You might think that pegleg31 but the insurance companies obviously know differently as the insurance costs are significantly lower for older drivers and thats one lot of statistics that you can't argue with!

 

Mr Potter (aged 59³/₄)

 

This is down to perception - if you see a biker pull off a dangerous overtake and you're not a biker, you may think "bikes are so damn dangerous". If you see a car driver do the same thing, you think " what an )0(".

You don't notice the millions of 65+ drivers, driving completely normally, sanely and courteously. You notice the odd old duffer, doing 30 in a 60 limit or going the wrong way round a roundabout (I have seen this) and causing problems.

The stats don't lie here.

Reality is that the 50 plus category of driver is the safest on the road - nothing to prove, experienced and not battling to control his hormones

Bladder? Maybe

 

typo edit

Edited December 28, 2010 by The Duncan

[fortune82]

At the end of the day the reason young lads die in crashes is because the part of the brain which deals with consequential thinking doesnt develop until around 21 - 23 years old in males. That has been proven by several independant studies.

 

You can give them extra lessons in motorway driving, night driving etc but all will have little effect.

You could limit the engine size or power etc but a 1.0 litre car will still do 80 - 90 mph and still kill people.

 

I honestly think the only way to stop this is to insist on draconian measures such as:

 

No passengers until after 21

No driving after 7pm etc

Speed restrictors fitted to cars

ANY driving offence at all equals a 6 month ban and a much harder re-test

 

Make them fear for their licence and they might start to think about what they are doing.

 

A young **** crashed into me in April. The **** hole didnt see a bright red 4x4 sitting stationary in the middle of the road and didnt even brake. If I had been in a small car I could have been killed as the cops reckon he hit me at around 45 MPH. As it was he hit me hard enough to bend the ladder chassis on my car and completely destroy his Citroen Saxo.

 

In the end he lost his licence and got a 150 quid fine. I think he should have been banned for several years and fined several grand to keep him off the road.

Edited December 28, 2010 by fortune82

[pegleg31]

********

 

 

i live not to far from a doctors surgery and the OAPS that get out of a car and can't walk is frightening.i'd like to know how many elderly drivers cause accidents?

 

yesterday my other half was moving her horse when some old **** stopped dead on the A1.as soon as she tried to safely overtake them,said old **** drove off :blink:.i know there's plenty of young muppets out there but lets put things into perspective

[nathanhutchison]

i think a good way to help fix it is a much more in depth test with somthing like a grading system to determin "conditions" on a driving licence, taking into consideration attitude and habbits.

 

i think restrictions closer to that of an fac would help i.e good reason for certain size/power cars would need to be provided within maybe 3 years of passing the test?

 

i, for example, am about to change from a clio to a 4x4 not because i just want too but because a clio does not meet my needs i.e driving on lots of rough rouds and tracks pluss holding a large dog i reckon id be asessed to be a sensible, safe young driver with a good need for a large vehicle however another young driver with passed criminal records etc who lives in the city would be classed as unsuitable to get such a large car and so be stuck wiht the likes of a clio.

this probably doesnt make perfect sense but take from it what you can

 

also, for the record, in the 6 months ive been driving i have been almost hit, tailgated, undertaken and so on by taxi drivers more than other young drivers and i was also run off the road the other day by a guy that turned out to be in his thirties.

Edited December 28, 2010 by nathanhutchison

[poontang]

 

I honestly think the only way to stop this is to insist on draconian measures such as:

 

No passengers until after 21

No driving after 7pm etc

Speed restrictors fitted to cars

ANY driving offence at all equals a 6 month ban and a much harder re-test

 

 

 

So you think lumping EVERY driver under 21 into the same bracket is the way forward?

 

As with anything, education and experience is a far better way to get through to people.

[jacksdad]

I have a used car plot that I run alongside my plumbing work, just how do you expect me to sell cars to the right people if all these stupid suggestions were to be implemented?

Why do you think yound lads steal cars and go 'joy' riding: for the thrill, the exitement, banning all under 21 year olds would have a massive impact on car crime and create a huge increase in uninsured driving.

New drivers do get a discount for doing the Pass Plus course, then the first years no claims discount is about 30%, the second 20%

 

 

I told my nephews to get themselves an old Classic motor, not very powerful, they would learn how to fix them and the insurance is dirt cheap...for some reason they weren't interested :blink:

[RC45]

Not letting them carry passengers until they are 21 might be a start.

:good: :good:

[berties]

You could put accidents into groups

Old people

Young people

High mileage drivers who take driving for granted

And so on ,

I would say the youth are slated in the press a lot and putting them on advance courses etc does not make them a better driver,experience does that,it's like every thing with kids if they are taught right and wrong and respect it may reflect in the way they drive,a car is a luxury sponsored by parents when you are young and should be controlled by the parents,yes you might be able to reduce engine size till they are 21 but you can get 100 out of most cars and so could kill others ,it's all about how fast it goes and don't worry weather it can stop with a lot of the young,maybe fail young drivers cars at mot if they are keved up,but then they will take the stuff off the cars before hand,so I think not all kids are bad but they need to find there own way and should be made aware they will be held to book if they screw up and that can mess up your life if you hurt some one,and the fact they have to live with that

[bakerboy]

What about starting at the very beginning.

Instruction and tuition to be undertaken only by qualified instrutors,and through a recognised and registered driving tuition facility, not Aunts Uncles Mums Dads and Mates etc.

Cars only to be sold to persons holding a full driving license, the responsibility to be with the seller, including private sales.

Thats a start.

[throbbingfinger]

May be it's a good idea to implement restrictions. But on the other hand this will deter some from driving and push them towards car crime as well as costing the good kids more money to drive legally.

As someone said earlier the statistics prove less accidents are occurring despite the population increasing. So they just need to keep doing what they are doing.

I think all drivers should have a retest every ten years and more cops on the road to actually police the law.

I drive alot for my job and have done pretty much since passing my test, I'm 30 years old.

There are so little police on the roads you can drive how you please, most of the time I drive within the speed limits on dual carriageways and motorways but if I'm in a rush I'm using the vehicles performance .

 

A kid who lives two doors down from me was involved in an accident in the village in August this year. One person died and he has massive brain injuries. I went to see him in a rehab centre a few weeks ago and the result ain't pretty. I saw him in the morning, normal 16 year old kid, I saw him 2 minutes after the crash and from that point on his world, his families world changed forever.

 

If we can do something, we need to do something, there're only kids and despite what they and the government thinks they all aren't capable of making sensible decisions.

[Gordon R]

Mike - your quote about the cost of car insurance made me laugh. I pay £250 fully comp, protected no claims, for a fairly quick motor - sad part is being old enough to get the cheap insurance.

 

The world and his wife bleat about - "there must be another way" - without coming up with jack ****. I agree about restricting carrying passengers until 21 - that seems workable and sensible to me.

[The Duncan]

Mike - your quote about the cost of car insurance made me laugh. I pay £250 fully comp, protected no claims, for a fairly quick motor - sad part is being old enough to get the cheap insurance.

 

The world and his wife bleat about - "there must be another way" - without coming up with jack ****. I agree about restricting carrying passengers until 21 - that seems workable and sensible to me.

S type Jag, 275 fully comp - 37 yo, ncb protector,

 

 

I don't think the 21 no passenger idea would work - rather hard to enforce given the very very limited numbers ofplod on the road; most seem to have been replaced with speed cameras these days

[Ferret Master]

What a load of ****.

 

You lot would be the first to complain when stuck behind the many thousands of people in a car limited to 40mph. Motorways would be particularly slow with lorries having to overtake cars! You would also be complaining because your kids were unable to drive your cars because it isn't limited to 40mph. You would then be complaining at the price of having to buy another car to restrict and insure.

 

Not allowing passengers for U21's is a rediculous and unworkable law that would only increase traffic congestion, environmental pollution and result in 5 lads going to a party all being in seperate cars (more likely to race etc.) than all being in seperate cars.

 

 

FM

[Gordon R]

Not allowing passengers for U21's is a rediculous and unworkable law that would only increase traffic congestion, environmental pollution and result in 5 lads going to a party all being in seperate cars (more likely to race etc.) than all being in seperate cars.

 

Why is it unworkable? No different to having tax, insurance and MOT. If they were caught - ban them.

 

As for no passengers resulting in five cars racing - a quantum leap in "logic". Absolute classic.

 

all being in seperate cars (more likely to race etc.) than all being in seperate cars.

How does that work?

Edited December 28, 2010 by Gordon R

[dunganick]

Why is it unworkable? No different to having tax, insurance and MOT. If they were caught - ban them.

 

 

Okay, say your police officer is on a patrol (the police got together and found enough diesel to actually drive around looking for crime.... no this story is not based on a real life experience), he see's a young looking person driving, PNC (if he is allowed to do one without first stopping the car) brings the car as registered to a young driver but with several people insured. Pulls car over, discovers that it is the baby faced father of the young man driving. Has to fill out paperwork to show he stopped the car and it was nothing, 30mins of police time wasted for nothing. Repeat this with whatever outcome across everyone that looks young in the UK, £millions down the drain in time.

 

Now we come to Debby, Debby has been trying to pass her test for 17 years, she is now 38. Through some miracle she passes finally, she posses no driving ability at all, nor judgement, she has no idea what oversteer is, what ABS does or is, if her car has it. She thinks folding mirrors were designed so you dont catch your wing mirrors on other cars when your driving. However she is old enough that she can now carry her friends (who are sensible old boring people and not a distraction to an old - new driver), this is ok, the police pass her by without a second glance.

 

Until they are pulling her out of a ditch or towing her car off the side of the road after she abandoned it 1ft from the pavement around a blind bend after 1inch of snow stopped her from making it up a 1 in 72 incline.

 

 

 

As for no passengers resulting in five cars racing - a quantum leap in "logic". Absolute classic.

 

 

He has made a typo, his point is valid, the young drivers will simply have to take a car each. With young irresponsible lads this is just as likely to end badly.

 

 

 

Some of the comments in this thread are seriously separated from reality (in my opinion of course).

 

I particularly like the 'insurers should make it impossible to insure a powerful car for a young person' - well they basically have. My first car 4.5 years ago had 65 hp, group 3 insurance, i was paying 2.5k per year on a 4k car with no performance at all. However it would still do over 100mph and if driven badly it was still capable of killing someone.

 

Most insurers wont insure a 17-18 yr old on much over about group 8 for a year. After this point they can get insurance but they will be paying thousands, 4 or 5k on a car of a similar value. This added to the cost of running a performance car of any sort makes it very expensive indeed.

 

As has been said in the thread, apparently us under 23's don't have the fear part of our brains fully developed so can make poor judgements, in which case i expect we will make poor judgements about adhering to these laws. However the ones that are sensible, do value their license will pay attention and will have their freedom restricted suitably whilst the others drink drive, carry passengers, etc.. etc...

 

You cant educate everyone, some will listen, but others will not. What you can do is make sure that they have experience in situation which might stand people in better stead to save a bad situation. Most experienced drivers with an interest in driving would have experienced understeer, oversteer or locked brakes, however as they have an interest in driving i am willing to bet that they have previously put themselves in a situation that allowed them to learn what to do in this situation. For lots of us that will be a quiet rural round about, empty car park, trackday, skid pan. What about experienced drivers without this experience, these are the ones your see pirouetting down a hill in the snow.

 

Yes older drivers are safer on paper, but the standard of lots of their driving is also very poor despite being over 21. Incorrect use of lanes on motorway, incorrect use of their fog lights and indicators, not understanding braking distances in different conditions, not understanding the basics of driving in poor weather conditions. Not aware that braking in a corner is a bad idea, there is a massive list. These people don't consider driving an interest so blindly go on their way incorrectly using the roads and causing dangerous situations due to poor driving technique.

 

A certain number of deaths on the road is inevitable, its not good or nice, but it will happen until human beings are not in charge of them or their maintenance. I personally feel that rather than a new system to restrict young/inexperienced drivers the time and money would be best spent catching people drink driving or driving uninsured. These people flaunt the laws willingly (not by accident) and they kill people too.

 

There are also poor young female drivers, but i sense that they are not under the spot light so much here. And no they don't have so many accidents, but they do have accidents.

[docholiday]

yup we could become a communist state and have our bottoms wiped for us, but I guess I know who would be the first to cry then....

 

doc

[fortune82]

So you think lumping EVERY driver under 21 into the same bracket is the way forward?

 

As with anything, education and experience is a far better way to get through to people.

Yes I do. At the end of the day I would bet all my worth on the fact that most accidents involving young drivers are caused by them dicking about not having a lack of experience.

 

Prime example, three lads I went to school with decided to pile into mummys renault megan and go thrashing round the local bypass. They overtook a mates car and hit an innocent woman coming the other way. She died and so did two of them.

 

What training or education is going to prevent that? Nothing. Common sense tells you if you overtake at 90 odd mph on a bend you stand a good chance of dying.

 

Until the part of the brain in young lads that deals with risk and consequence is fully developed I think we should lump them all together and impose stricter rules on them.

[al4x]

yup we could become a communist state and have our bottoms wiped for us, but I guess I know who would be the first to cry then....

 

doc

 

 

exactly, we hear about a few deaths compared to the hundreds of thousands of 17 year olds who don't die behind the wheel. The Insurance companies have effectively limited engine size for most by making it prohibitively expensive for larger engined cars, revoking licenses at 6 points was a good move by the government as it makes an effort to pick out those who do ignore the laws. Other than that I and most people I know learnt by their mistakes

[DSPUK]

Can I be the first to say I am glad the old boy in VW got out of his car alive - to me the right person died - I do feel sympathy for the parents of the two passengers they had no control of the events leading up to the accident either.- Am I cynical enough to think if the driver had survived he was still an accident waiting to happen. ?

 

This sort of debate has been going on since I started riding bikes in 1960 - safety in cars has immproved no end but it's still nut holding steering wheel. -- Perhaps everyone should start off on bikes and only after accident free few years can they have a car licence.

 

To be honest you are never going to solve this problem - all I hope is that whoever the idiot is that causes an accident is the one to get killed - one more off the road.

 

Dave

[poontang]

Until the part of the brain in young lads that deals with risk and consequence is fully developed I think we should lump them all together and impose stricter rules on them.

 

Really?

 

Well there's obviously a lot of risk associated with working for the emergency services and armed forces, so would you ban youngsters signing up to those careers until their brains are 'fully developed' too? Afterall, they wouldn't be able to perform the job anyway, as most of them work shifts so couldn't get to and from work, seeing as you wouldn't allow them to drive after 7pm.

 

Talk about a knee jerk reaction

[Hornet 6]

Lets just give all the young idiots enough rope (performance) to kill themselves quickly, job done.

You cannot legislate for idiots

 

Neil.

[docholiday]

Really?

 

Well there's obviously a lot of risk associated with working for the emergency services and armed forces, so would you ban youngsters signing up to those careers until their brains are 'fully developed' too? Afterall, they wouldn't be able to perform the job anyway, as most of them work shifts so couldn't get to and from work, seeing as you wouldn't allow them to drive after 7pm.

 

Talk about a knee jerk reaction

 

 

hardly a reasoned argument, in the services and emergency services there are guidelines rules and a pretty watchful eye kept on you, everything is thought through and supervised to a degree, a lot goes into minimising the dangers so hardly something that can be compared

[BlaserF3]

Lets just give all the young idiots enough rope (performance) to kill themselves quickly, job done.

 

 

Neil.

 

It's not just the driver's that get killed, normally they are showing off to their passengers so there could be another three deaths, which is normally the case.

 

It's not very often a young driver on their own who is killed.