Women

[The Natural Philosopher]

Think it does actually

[Andrew]

How many packets of chocolate hobnobs did you consume ?.

[Jack98]

No it does not. Only one of these bans women from driving and even that one is backing off from that now.

[Tim Streater]

World government would merely provide a couple more useless layers of administration for political crooks like Clegg, Milliband, Blair, or H Clinton to hide in. We see this already with the EU, as the infighting to replace the current set of "chums" with a new set progresses.

The right size for a country is no more than perhaps 75 million, with exceptions for such as Japan where it's an island nation. Then the political layers are obliged to be closer to the populace and, in consequence, are much more accountable.

(Political crooks can of course include failed politicians like Pillock, Mandelson, or Chris Patten)

[tim...]

laws don't stop anybody from doing anything

only enforcement of the law does that

and who's going to enforce such a rule in a non-Sharia country?

tim

[Mr Pounder Esquire]

[www.GymRatZ.co.uk]

And the same word meaning 2 completely different things.

"wound" for example.

[ARW]

I am for mandatory retests. Fail and you go back to a provisional driver.

[Steve Walker]

The trouble with that is would be too easy to fail, while not being dangerous - especially as recommended ways of driving have changed over the years and while there is nothng wrong with the old ways, you'd likely get marked down for using them.

For instance, these days they teach using the brakes for slowing down and stopping and dropping into the right gear for moving off, whereas I was taught to use the gears for slowing down. It could well count as not using the gears correctly.

Similarly I was taught to hold in the handbrake button when pulling it on, so as to save wear on the pawl mechanism, but more recently they have taught not to do that (indeed my car's handbook tells you not to).

Another problem is observation. People that have been driving for years can become very good at knowing what is around them and seeing with just eye movements, whereas examiners are looking for marked head movements.

You could easily end up with perfectly able drivers losing their licences and therefore their jobs, homes, etc.

There could also be other problems - many people suffer anxiety problems that have developed later in life (particularly women, as it can be a symptom of menopause) and may well become too anxious in a face to face assessment, especially if it is critical to their employment, but be fine driving normally.

SteveW

[ARW]

Points noted. I wonder how many would fail the eyesight test?

So maybe some mandatory reassessment would be a better solution?

I spent some time a few years ago with the IAM. You could not at the time take an advanced driving test in a van with no back windows.

[Tim Streater]

I've always done this to avoid the irritating noise it makes. Why would one not do this?

[ARW]

Back in 1987 my driving instructor said "The examiner might have a hangover"

[Dave Liquorice]

That might be a little harsh but it seems crazy that you can put in charge of lethal bit of machinery on the public highway at 17 and not to be required to have any further assement of abilty ever again. That licence will expire at 70 but renewal is self assesment not a formal one.

A full 3 part test would be over the top but a re-assement looking for poor safety and making the person aware of rule/law changes since their last assement must be better than nothing.

[Bob Eager]

I remember reading something about the fact that the pawl might not 'grab' properly due to the tops of the teeth catching together. However, if it did slip I would expect it to grab again. Who knows?

Mine's electric, anyway.

[Steve Walker]

I wear glasses, so I get my eyes tested regularly anyway.

Maybe health checks would help - catching signs of dementia or other impairments.

I've not done that, but I did do an extended test (including motorway driving) and the theory test with a higher passmark than for normal driving some years ago - Engineering was very quiet and I trained to be a driving instructor, but then Engineering picked up, so I never started teaching. It will come in useful in 13 months when my eldest son is old enough to learn to drive!

Funnily enough my first car (a very cheap, emergency purchase, as I was starting work the next week and the 20 minute car journey was 2-1/2 to 3 hours by public transport) was a clapped out, ex-driving school car. It still had a sticker on advertising "He-man dual controls," although they'd been removed.

SteveW

[Steve Walker]

A damned good idea would simply be for the government to send a copy of the Highway Code to every household every 10 years or so. I am pretty sure that most people who have never learned to drive or to ride a scooter/motorbike have never read it and there is a lot in there for pedestrians and cyclists as well as those with driving licences.

SteveW

[Jack98]

otoh it would be unusual for that 17 old to not do better over time.

Some jurisdictions do have formal tests over a certain age.

But its less clear if that level of testing does make much difference to the accident rate.

[dennis]

You wouldn't fail if there is nothing wrong with them. They don't fail people that can drive you know.

Well they would be correct. Gears aren't for slowing down normally. I was taught not to use the gears in ~1969.

That's because they have found a design flaw in many mechanisms.

Maybe not on a retest, maybe you will have to tell the examiner what is happening around you.

[dennis]

Because wear on the pawl can cause the hanbrake to release when you have left it, in fact some cars that were new had handbrakes releasing by themselves.

I would have though all drivers would know this by know its been in the papers and on the TV enough times.

[Tim Streater]

That's a reason for doing it, not a reason for not doing it.