Educate or prosecute?

What would you opt for?


  • Total voters
    81
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
We hav a a guy at work who was done for speeding and took an awareness course.

He now thinks that he has learnt from the course how to be more observant and how to spot problems.... as a result he can drive faster and more safely than he could before the course!
 

Brains

Legendary Member
Location
Greenwich
I had a aunt and a uncle who separately died in car accidents aged 89 and 91. neither should have been on the road
 

sabian92

Über Member
Oi! You can't just lump all us oldies together. How the very dare you?!

I've always needed corrected vision. Difference is when I was younger I wore glasses or contacts for myopia and astigmatism but for the last few yrs I've had just about perfect vision following laser surgery (£400.00 total for both eyes with Wavefront from Optimax courtesy of 4x deals from Tesco. One of the best decisions/investments i've ever made if anyone is interested).

You shouldn't just generalize!


I suppose I shouldn't but it is a fact that most older people have worse eye sight because they are getting older and maybe don't even realise (unless they are like yourself and have had them laser surgery'd). Younger people can be dangerous drivers, which is why I get irritated when people say that "all young people drive the same because they're boy racers" which isn't true.

There was a story on here of somebody who caused an accident or very nearly (may have been a grandparent of a member) who handed in their licence then found out they were legally classed as blind. That is scary.
 
I suppose I shouldn't but it is a fact that most older people have worse eye sight because they are getting older and maybe don't even realise (unless they are like yourself and have had them laser surgery'd). Younger people can be dangerous drivers, which is why I get irritated when people say that "all young people drive the same because they're boy racers" which isn't true.
/quote]

It's testoterone that's scary, whether in car or bike. Insurance rates for younger people are higher because on average they are involved in serious accidents, but the male younger driver is also more involved, overall, in speeding, serious and fatal accidents and crime. Something in their makeup perhaps. Not that all young drivers are stupid by any means, but insurers and actuaries are not interested in individuals, unless the insured have markers already. From which they can possibly make an extra profit:smile:
 

downfader

extimus uero philosophus
Location
'ampsheeeer
For me, I'd personally judge it on their attitude at the time of the RTC. If they were apologetic, concerned etc I might think about suggesting a course for them. If they were arrogant, unconcerned and trying to shift blame, I'd be more inclined to prosecute as I would doubt their ability to learn anything.

People can sometimes show their true light after the Police and ambo have gone. Not to put too negative a spin on it my own experience was such where the driver didnt want to give me his insurance details, I had to threaten him with either my going back to Plod and saying "he aint playing ball here" or getting a solicitor on to him.After 9 phone calls with him hanging up on me I finally got him to see sense and hand over the insurance details.

Didnt stop him lying to his own insurer either. When I sent photocopies of the Police correspondence and the video to them they paid out for the damages.
 
My 2p on the age debate. One of my Strava runs that friends have been trying to beat for a while was suddenly smashed by 9.9mph. I went to the ride and found the bloke had been knocked off his bike (when he was going to the hospital probably the last thing on his mind was switching Strava off). Anyhow, he was knocked off in the Kinross area on the weekend of the T in the Park (Music Festival). My first guess was it was some young speeding ned but in fact the hit and run driver turned out to be an 83year old driver who even when confronted by the police and several witness statements obliviously? denied it.
 

Bigsharn

Veteran
Location
Leeds
I'd say have his license taken from him. SMIDSY is an admission of either not looking where he should be (shouldn't be on the road) or incapable of seeing other road users (shouldn't be on the road).
 

Electric_Andy

Heavy Metal Fan
Location
Plymouth
I am still of the opinion that 'the elderly' should have to re-sit their test or complete a compuslory driving course at a certain age OR after driving for a certain amount of time. The majority are a nuisance on the road IMHO.[/quote]

A slight aside, but I think relevant: My friend said that her elderly Father (92 years old) is a hazard on the road, and she wonders how he hasn't had an accident yet. When renewing his license there was a tick-box that asked "Can you read a number plate from x metres?" He simply ticked "yes" and that was it, new license.
 

Bigsharn

Veteran
Location
Leeds
I'm of the view that drivers of all ages should be retested regularly.

GC

I agree with you, drivers should resit their theory/hazard perception tests every time the HC gets changed. (The practical, from my point of view would be a pointless retest)*
But, on the subject of elderly drivers, their reaction times are generally** slower, their eyesight and hearing is generally*** worse and therefore should get a full retest at LEAST every 10 years.

*At the moment the theory is a load of rubbish anyway and needs changing back to how it was. A friend did a theory test and most of the questions were common sense, rather than Highway Code material. He had TWO questions on braking distances, the rest was rubbish that most 10 year olds should know.

**I'm aware that not ALL elderly drivers have rubbish reaction times, but they're comparatively worse than those of say a healthy 30 year old.

***Hearing important on the grounds on emergency vehicles. I realise deaf people are allowed to drive, but in my opinion, they're not as safe as they could be.
 

glasgowcyclist

Charming but somewhat feckless
Location
Scotland
The practical, from my point of view would be a pointless retest

Since the driving test represents the minimum standard a licence holder should be able to achieve before being allowed to operate a vehicle, I'm not sure that any subsequent reassessment which didn't look at how a driver performed on the road would be at all worthwhile.

GC
 

Bigsharn

Veteran
Location
Leeds
Since the driving test represents the minimum standard a licence holder should be able to achieve before being allowed to operate a vehicle, I'm not sure that any subsequent reassessment which didn't look at how a driver performed on the road would be at all worthwhile.

GC

The way I see it, the practical is a test of you being able to physically operate the car on Britain's roads. The education part (which is what we're talking about here) would be taught, and easier to implement, as part of the theory test.
 
I am still of the opinion that 'the elderly' should have to re-sit their test or complete a compuslory driving course at a certain age OR after driving for a certain amount of time. The majority are a nuisance on the road IMHO.

I agree, but why limit it to the elderly? I am of the opinion that everyone should have to have compulsory re-assessment at a set time throughout their driving lives. Some, to persuade tehm that no, they shouldn't be driving any more, others to correct bad habits they've learned.
The best driver training I think that could be given is to make them ride a bicycle around the town where they live for a day, so they can appreciate the impact of their actions when driving.
 
I agree, but why limit it to the elderly? I am of the opinion that everyone should have to have compulsory re-assessment at a set time throughout their driving lives. Some, to persuade tehm that no, they shouldn't be driving any more, others to correct bad habits they've learned.
The best driver training I think that could be given is to make them ride a bicycle around the town where they live for a day, so they can appreciate the impact of their actions when driving.

In a perfect world, I agree with this. I do think some motorists are simply unaware of the road as experienced by cyclists. Sadly, I think it will never happen - but it would be good.

I also think some cyclists, motorcyclists and car drivers would be safer and more considerate road users if they sat for a few hours in the cab of a bus or an HGV.

I see cyclists buzzing around larger vehicles as though the driver is some sort of omniscient telepath who can see through solid ojects and look in seven directions at once. A common retort is that a vehicle with such blatant blind spots shouldn't be on the road.

Nor should someone who is either ignorant of these limitations or determined to go up against these vehicles despite knowing they may be invisible to the driver. I do not include in this generalised observation those cyclists who are run down despite taking every precaution.
 
Top Bottom