[Closed] Reducing casualties on the road

not mandatory helmets for all road/pavement users then?

Imma gonna say mandatory helmet use.

I would rather reduce accidents than mitigate them.

Rather than looking to reduce injury after accidents which is at best controversial we should be looking to reduce the number of accidents

mandatory helmet use would reduce accidents - people wouldn;t go out as much if they had to put a skid lid on every time 😉

you want to reduce accidents?

Reduce the volume of traffic

You are not taking this seriously

tsk tsk

[i]You are not taking this seriously[/i]

It's difficult - all the points you make are valid and could be introduced if their was the political will to do so.

But there isn't, so nothing will change.

Inserting hidden surveillance cameras in all Audis, Ford Focus STs and pimp-tinted 4x4s would do wonders in my area...

80% of bad driving caught on film right there.

1) - make testing much harder [b]yes[/b]
2) - have a graduated licence for car drivers like for motorcycles - and as is done in Australia IIRC. Small engined car, limited to usage. [b]that could work, have the changes in the motorbike laws reduced motorcycle fatalities or accidents?[/b]
3) - allow police to do random stops - at the moment they need suspicion, and have far tougher drink driving enforcement. roadblock particular roads and breathalyser everyone [b]Absolutely not, nice theory PITA in reality[/b]
4) mandatory retesting every 5 years and every two years after 75. [b]no need, if the test is hard enough and penalties are stiff enough and the licence is seen as a privilege and not a right...[/b]
5) introduce a continental style "car driver assumed at fault until proven otherwise" in collisions with bikes [b]despite living on the continent, i've never heard of this one, in fact the complete reverse. It would promote the them and us culture which does nothing to remove the problem.[/b]
6) - 20 mph speed limit in residential areas [b]for everyone, and everyone must respect the rules of the road. The good news being that there is a never ending pot of money to pay for the enforcement[/b]
7) - proper well thought out cycle facilities - not just a bit of red paint where it is not needed [b]Personally I don't see a need[/b]

Anything else?
Mutual respect and common sense, removal of the them and us attitude and perhaps include a few minutes cycling as an awareness part of the driving test.

1 testing seems fairly strict now, wasn't in the past but that would be picked up by 4
3, police being cut, good luck with staff intensive operations like that.
Everything else yep go for it.

Edit Don number 4, really? So you don't think people get good enough to pass the test (however hard) then completely ignore it drive how they like and pick up many many bad habits? Stick to current tests and retest regularly so people don't [i]forget[/i] how to drive properly

People need to learn that driving is a privilege and not a right.

I am not sure retesting every 5 years is sensible from a point of view of cost and how many testers you would need but something does need to be done.

I think the current testing system needs to be completely overhauled and it needs a staged pass system which includes a motorway test as I think it is madness someone can pass a test and go out on the motorway alone straight away.

The test also needs to address a bit more about how to look after a car. I am not expecting people to have to fix a car but they should know how to recognise there is a problem that means the car needs immediate attention. My reasoning is that breakdowns can be dangerous, cars fail mots with faults that are dangerous so why should drivers be allowed to be ignorant to the faults? Maybe if people actually looked at their cars with open eyes they would spot faults before they drive around with them for 6 months and then get annoyed by a big MOT bill. Also people need teaching on why you need to have the car services and do cambelts etc.

The cameras that record accidents as used in the states would help as well.

3) - allow police to do random stops - at the moment they need suspicion

Do they? Whenever I watch those 'Cops with Cameras' shows, they seem to stop folk willy-nilly. Occasionally, the voiceover will pronounce that a car has been stopped because "Gigsy's copper's nose" has smelt something....

5) introduce a continental style "car driver assumed at fault until proven otherwise" in collisions with bikes

I don't think that is fair at all assuming someone is guilty just because of the mode of transport they use.

Retesting is a good idea though and yes limited engine size based years since passing the test.

more traffic police would help.

It is no good having laws which aren't enforced. I have been pulled over (speeding) once but it is rare to even see police.
A pulling over and a stern word about things really reinforces things.
minor issues to be delt with in the 'stern word' manner. not indicating, tailgating, dangerous overtaking etc.

the ability to give out single points on the license for things such as above. not indicating, dangerous overtake etc.

2) - have a graduated licence for car drivers like for motorcycles - and as is done in Australia IIRC. Small engined car, limited to usage.

I am not sure i agree with this - teenagers rag the shit out of their first car because it is a 1.0l engine - the thing that slowed most of my mates down was the second/ third car. getting a car with some real power makes you respect them a lot more.

having said that - I have been working with a foreign student over the summer - he often hires the biggest car available to him (V6 vauxhall insignia) then boots it across the country doing 130 up the motorways. 😯

and yes limited engine size based years since passing the test.

no need, if the test is hard enough and penalties are stiff enough and the licence is seen as a privilege and not a right...

To which end I think we need a '3 strikes' system. Receive a ban of any length 3 times and the last one is permanent.

I also think livelihood shouldn't matter, 12 points that's it if you need your vehicle for work you should have thought of that first!

but more years driving does not necessarily equal better driving does it? Harder tests for bigger engines surely?

Not it doesn't but not sure why you need a different test for a bigger engine. Gaining experience driving goes a lot further than passing a test then feel free to do what you want as soon as you have your bit of paper.

3 strikes? seems generous, 2 I reckon.

Agreed livelihood shouldn't matter in sentencing, if you need to drive to work you should know better.

Edit, sorry drac meant more testing in a vehicle to suit, no point testing in a 1.0 super mini than spending all your time driving round in a powerful behemoth.

some-one I know drives with no licence and no insurance, and TBH it's pretty common amongst people round here. thinking is: driving a car not that hard actually, so no real need for lesson, chance of being stopped if your careful is pretty small, and the penalties aren't that expensive, really a lot less than running a car legally.

there aren't enough police on the roads at the minute let alone more to stop more people

retest every 5 years would just be waste of time for most law abiding people, no? why should you anyway, if you've done nothing wrong?

Most accidents are young blokes, right? restrict what/when they can drive. I seen loads in car parks late at night all pissed/stoned doing stunts arsing about, stop that.

Drac - Moderator

5) introduce a continental style "car driver assumed at fault until proven otherwise" in collisions with bikes

I don't think that is fair at all assuming someone is guilty just because of the mode of transport they use.

It works well in most of Europe and is IMO a very good way of reducing the toll of cyclists killed and injured

Or as the publication Cycling in the Netherlands, published by the Dutch Directorate-General for Passenger Transport puts it:

Something that should not be overlooked in the safety section: Liability. In some countries, bicycling is seen as causing danger, which sometimes ends up in an anti-cycling policy. The Dutch philosophy is: Cyclists are not dangerous; cars and car drivers are: so car drivers should take the responsibility for avoiding collisions with cyclists. This implies that car drivers are almost always liable when a collision with a bicycle occurs and should adapt their speed when bicycles share the roads with cars.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/drivers-may-be-blamed-for-all-bicycle-accidents-638842.html

There are not enough bike lanes in this country. It's bloody shameful to be honest. Visit other European countries and there will more often than not be some proper cycle paths. That doesn't exist here to the same extent, if at all. This would be the number one way to reduce casualties.

Then there is definitely NOT enough police presence/checks on the roads. Christ, in the two years in drove a car in Sweden I got stopped 3 times for breathalyzing tests, never happened here.

I still say the biggest reason for casualties is that cyclists have to mix with cars on the roads. And when I say cycle paths i don't mean a green painted strip on the road, but proper separated bits.

I am not in complete agreement with segregating cyclists completely. However well engineered junctions that are designed with bikes in mind would be a great help anc certainly our road designers could learn a lot from the dutch.

I like the dutch urban system with no road signs and a 30 kph limit - where pedestrians have priority over bikes who have priority over cars

chance of being stopped if your careful is pretty small, and the penalties aren't that expensive, really a lot less than running a car legally.

Ban means losing the car?

I think point 4: "mandatory retesting" would be the most effective.

Operators of most heavy machinery require regular safety refresher courses. Seems sensible that drivers should too.

I think it would genuinely help to point out bad habits, misconceptions and rule changes. I'm amazed* at the number of drivers round my way who swing across lanes on the roundabouts or who don't seem to have any idea what the national speed limit is.

A useful practical test exercise would be to sit with the driver and film them as they drive normally on their local routes, then play it back and point out all the odd things they did.

(* I'm sure I have plenty of bad habits too, but sometimes it takes someone else to point them out)

Automatic short jail sentence for drink drivers. Second offence decent sentance

And when I say cycle paths i don't mean a green painted strip on the road, but proper separated bits.

Just got white lines painted about a foot from the kerb round my way! Aka the gutter.

[i]our road designers could learn a lot from the dutch.[/i]

Holland? (is that dutch?)is a lot smaller/less traffic than britain though, doesn't that make a difference?

I think point 4: "mandatory retesting" would be the most effective.

Surely just because a driver can drive well doesn't mean she/he will drive well between mandatory tests?

It may well be worth doing, though, to cut out some of the idiot drivers who don't have a clue.

It works well in most of Europe and is IMO a very good way of reducing the toll of cyclists killed and injured

Wider roads, mild banking on corners, long sight lines, curved lamp posts, no trees within 20 feet of the verge.

How do we compare to other countries for road accidents/death anyway? aren't we quite good?

emsz - Member

our road designers could learn a lot from the dutch.

Holland? (is that dutch?)is a lot smaller/less traffic than britain though, doesn't that make a difference?

Netherlands is the country, the people are the dutch, holland is a province of the country

its actually a lot more densely populated than the UK in the main and its not that small. Traffic is managed well unlike here. Lots of busy motorways and so on

emsz you should grass on them [ seriously]- do you think they will stop if they hit someone or panic and leave the scene? That is one of the best things tests + insurance does, it makes you do the right thing when you mess up and someone gets hurt.

most of what TJ says is sound
What worries me most is the way many people are when they drive badly it is like they rejoice in how bad they are. Somehow we need to get people to see it is a cooperative exercise designed to ensure we all get from a to b without crashing rather than just being about making sure i get from a to b faster than you.
I have no suggestions as how to re educate people on this issue sadly.

Don - its in most of europe.

all the low countries, Germany, France, I think spain, again I believe Scandinavia

Its not discussed as it is the norm and has been for a long time

2) - have a graduated licence for car drivers like for motorcycles - and as is done in Australia IIRC. Small engined car, limited to usage

I like this adea, wonder what sort of difference it makes with motorbike users safty?

I would also like to see some sort of fuel card system, that you would have to swipe to prove your vehicle has a mot, insured and taxed, as well as the driver having a valid licence, before you could buy fuel, how it could be implemented I have no idea and I am sure there would be many reasons why it would not work, but clearing the roads of uninsured, unsafe drivers would be a good start in my book.

TandemJeremy - Member
Automatic short jail sentence for drink drivers. Second offence decent sentance

I think a better way would be 1st offence automatic community service, picking up litter on roads/motorways/etc wearing a fluro vest with 'Drunk Driver' written in massive letters on it.

2nd prison.

3rd permanent ban.

Take drunk driver's cars as well, they obviously can't be trusted!

I would also like to see some sort of fuel card system, that you would have to swipe to prove your vehicle has a mot, insured and taxed, as well as the driver having a valid licence, before you could buy fuel, how it could be implemented I have no idea and I am sure there would be many reasons why it would not work, but clearing the roads of uninsured, unsafe drivers would be a good start in my book.

I like that!

yes for mandatory retests. Hugely costly though: is the dvla registration of new drivers and running of test centres funded completely by driving test fees? You'd also need loads more examiners and instructors, we might even have to wheel glupton out of 'retirement' 😉

TandemJeremy - Member

The cameras that record accidents as used in the states would help as well.

I was thinking about that the other week. Surely the technology now exists for new cars to be relatively cheaply fitted with a dash/bonnet mounted camera and basic telemetry recording 'black box recorder'. It could record in a fifteen minute loop to maximise visual quality for the memory available (for other drivers reg plates for example) and could be stopped a couple of minutes after a collision is detected, or if the driver or police see an incident and want to preserve the film and telemetry and wish to use it for evidence for or against the driver.

I bet that would sharpen up people's driving, knowing that if you screw up or the police pull you for speeding/dangerous driving you have both your car's recordings and possibly the other driver's recordings too. Insurance companies could also 'profile' drivers who agree to have this retro-fitted to older cars and reduce their premniums accordingly as they are put off driving unsafely, and more able to prove fault in the other party in the case of a claim.

Surely just because a driver can drive well doesn't mean she/he will drive well between mandatory tests?

True bit it would increase the overall standard of driving.

If we retested every 5 years then that means one fifth of the drivers on the road would have sat a test in the past year and would have the "correct way to drive" freshly in their minds (even if they chose to ignore it).

That's got to be a start.

I'd also like to see all driver's spend one day commuting on a bike as an "other road user awareness" part of driver training. 😀

How do we compare to other countries for road accidents/death anyway? aren't we quite good?

Yep the UK is right up there at the top of the table. Road deaths are already decreasing year on year. 8,000 deaths per year in the 60's and now down to around 2,500 annually. That's good going in anyone's book.

With regard to the young driver/high power car thing. Insurance companies effectively police this anyway. Have you seen the price of premiums for young drivers on a boggo supermini. Hate to think what anything with a big engine would cost.

Visit other European countries and there will more often than not be some proper cycle paths.

Julian - thats the sort of system that is starting to be fitted in the US