Driving Licences

[John the Monkey]

It's clear that this will only workif the roads are actuallyed policed.

ANPR could do that[1], I suppose, linked in to the licensing & registration databases. It couldn't get people in other people's cars though.

[1] To provide targeted stops by police.

 

[tyred]

I have often wondered if there should be some sort of psychiatric assessment carried out before someone can apply for a driver's licence in the first place. Some just seem to have completely the wrong temperament for driving.

 

[numbnuts]

I have often wondered if there should be some sort of psychiatric assessment carried out before someone can apply for a driver's licence in the first place. Some just seem to have completely the wrong temperament for driving.

I have often wondered if there should be some sort of psychiatric assessment carried out before someone can RIDE A BIKE on the roads the amount of prats and bad cycling I see some of them are psycho

 

[markharry66]

Roads will never be properly policed, it would be nice to have regular tests for drivers but the reality is this isnt going to happen it would cost to much and there would be an uproar from motorists. I cannot see this happening.

Nice as it may sound we have to live in the reality. In a recession and a tory government it will all come down to spend.

 

[subaqua]

Roads will never be properly policed, it would be nice to have regular tests for drivers but the reality is this isnt going to happen it would cost to much and there would be an uproar from motorists. I cannot see this happening.

Nice as it may sound we have to live in the reality. In a recession and a tory government it will all come down to spend.

never mind the uproar. the cost of administering the scheme , lack of assesment facilities, lack of assesors, the current delays in getting a test. as a driver thats what would annoy me not that it was going to cost. just the pure delays due to central ( and local for that matter) Govt inability to organise anything

what would be good would be the hazard perception thingy that new drivers have to take. every 5 years you have to do that.

 

[gaz]

ANPR could do that[1], I suppose, linked in to the licensing & registration databases. It couldn't get people in other people's cars though.

[1] To provide targeted stops by police.

Anpr can be fitted into police cars. The data is downloaded each morning from the relevant databases so the data in the car is as up to date as it can be.

My idea of how roads policing should work maybe be out of the box. But if it saves lifes, I'm all for it!

 

[8mile]

I think one area for consideration would be the fact that you can pass your test at 17, not drive a vehicle at all for any number of years, and then get on the road without any form of competence re-test. I've had a couple of friends not drive for 10 years or so before doing this. My wife hadn't driven for 5 years when we first went out. It took her a couple of week just to get re-aquainted with the car controls let alone other traffic.

I should add she is a very safe and considerate driver now and feels confident enough to critically evaluate my own driving abilities on a very regular basis!

 

[subaqua]

Anpr can be fitted into police cars. The data is downloaded each morning from the relevant databases so the data in the car is as up to date as it can be.

My idea of how roads policing should work maybe be out of the box. But if it saves lifes, I'm all for it!

by the same thinking we could all pay £1 a week extra in tax to go to NHS . or an extra £1 for policing etc . its only a pound. but these pounds have a annoying habiot of mounting up into a substantial sum.

maybe the bankers should pay an extra tax to pay for better policing .

 

[gaz]

by the same thinking we could all pay £1 a week extra in tax to go to NHS . or an extra £1 for policing etc . its only a pound. but these pounds have a annoying habiot of mounting up into a substantial sum.

maybe the bankers should pay an extra tax to pay for better policing .

I never suggested we change how much tax we pay to fund the police. The police could easily be self funded by fining the people that break the law based on income.

 

[summerdays]

I think the overheads on testing everyone every 5 years might be quite considerable ... but I do think that it shouldn't just be a one off test, perhaps every 10 years. However if you are caught by the police for various different offences then perhaps that should lead to assessment of driving skills - for example if everytime someone was caught on their mobile they would have to take an assessment before they could drive again it might make them think.

 

[subaqua]

I never suggested we change how much tax we pay to fund the police. The police could easily be self funded by fining the people that break the law based on income.

the police don't fine people . the Justice system does. the police spend huge amounts of money gathering evidence then the CPS do not proceed

and when people are caught and fined lots don't pay. one reason prisons are at capacity is the amount of people inside for failure to pay fines

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/13/prison-service-reoffending-mental-health

http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6112093/the-case-against-cutting-prison-numbers.thtml

any revenue raised is likely to be sucked into the cost of jailing.

I fully support your plans but the costs are likely to prohibit it ever happening.

 

[gaz]

the police don't fine people . the Justice system does. the police spend huge amounts of money gathering evidence then the CPS do not proceed

and when people are caught and fined lots don't pay. one reason prisons are at capacity is the amount of people inside for failure to pay fines

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/13/prison-service-reoffending-mental-health

http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6112093/the-case-against-cutting-prison-numbers.thtml

any revenue raised is likely to be sucked into the cost of jailing.

I fully support your plans but the costs are likely to prohibit it ever happening.

Clearly the current system doesn't work. Pushing it under the carpet and shrugging won't solve it.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I think some form of 'MoT test' for people should be mandatory like the MoT tests for their cars. Provide evidence of a current eyesight test when renewing insurance is one idea perhaps.

Driving conditions, and the testing regime, have changed hugely since I passed my test, my eyesight has deteriorated and my reflexes are not what the once were, my neck is no longer as flexible as it once was, yet I am still licensed by a test taken when I was younger than my son is now.

But then I'd scrap tax discs and insist on a system of new licence plates every year with a coloured border indicting renewal with enforcement via roadside cameras.
I'd scrap commerical motor insurance and slap an insurance levy on the fuel (too late for that probably with the advent of indirectly fossil fueled vehicles)
and I'd declare war on the motorist formally, rather in the way we've declared war on smokers. For the good of the nation and world. (I do own a car btw)

 

[Davidc]

If the boot was on the other foot, let's start assessing cycle riders as WE are far from perfect

WE don't kill other people.

 

[Gixxerman]

WE don't kill other people.

Not necessarily true.
Take this scenario.
A cyclist is riding badly (say swerving into the middle of the road without warning, or entering major road without giving way). Said cyclist causes motorist to swerve to avoid him/her and has head on collision with vehicle coming in the opposite or road furniture. The impact kills driver and / or driver in vehicle he hit.
Driver who swerved and / or driver who was hit are both innocent, but have been killed by at fault cyclist.
I know it is unlikely, but it could happen (and expect has happened) at some point.

We as cyclists have the same resposibility and duty of care to ride safely on the public highway as motor vehicles have.