No, Forcing one section of society to record themselves because others are prejudiced to them is discriminatory.
The whole right/privilege argument is nonsensical hyperbole. It's neither a fundamental right, nor a privilege. It's, unsurprisingly a license.
and another thing!
I love Police Camera Action Interceptor Cops on Patrol type programs and the car chases are ace. But, in 2020, surely police should be able to have the tech to switch off a car? Scrote drives off, cops chasing get authority from the boss, car reg is entered into a system, calibrated against GPS to check correct car, engine is disabled, doors locked, skunk spray released into car (okay, maybe not that last bit). All that tech exists and should be fitted as mandatory to all new cars.
I think it's crazy that you can pass a test and then drive without further assessment or tuition for the next 50 years. I'd love to see retests but the infrastructure simply isn't in place. As DezB said, there's barely enough examiners to go around for new drivers. Assuming full retests rather than some sort of short refresher, to have retests every ten years would require a five-fold increase in test centres and staff; for annual retests that's 50 times as many. Maybe a group practical exam would work, where anyone under a certain pass rate is passed up for retraining?
Maybe having a tiered licence might be an option, a bit like with bikes? You pass your test and you can drive with certain restrictions in place, limited power (or power to weight) on the car, not allowed passengers, have to display a P plate, those sort of things. An advanced test gets you your derestricted licence.
The camera thing could be driven by insurance companies. Like with home insurance companies demanding BS-approved locks, a camera to a certain approved spec could be a condition of insurance.
I'm less sure about the idea of black boxes. The people most likely to need them fitting are the same people most likely to 'accidentally' knobble them, so you're penalising the mostly well-behaved whilst not improving those who aren't.
And possibly something more secure than a remote key to open it, start it and drive it off. Let’s face it, if you need to use a fingerprint or facial recognition to open your mobile phone, it can’t be too difficult to require that to start a car.
Bugger that. Biometrics are useful substitutes for usernames, not passwords.
Cars are being stolen in the night by armed gangs. Would you rather they nipped in, stole your keys and quietly drove away leaving with an insurance claim, or dragged you out of bed to obtain your fingerprint with a pair of bolt crops?
Whilst we are on this subject, the one that really grates for me is people keeping their license when they rack up points due to “hardship” or other crap…
Obviously this won’t apply to STW driving gods who are making progress…
How's the view from that horse of yours?
The phrase is Exceptional Hardship and the clue's in the name. Should the loss of your licence cause exceptional hardship - not "hardship or other crap" - then you don't just get away with it, the suspension will be replaced with another punishment such as sticking a zero on the end of your fine.
The evidence suggests that over-70s are more likely to be involved in minor accidents with low cost of repair and minimal risk of injury.
Thinking about the shit driving I see leads me to think that the most dangerous is from white van drivers who are permanently on their phones.
Cameras – no
Black Boxes – no
More autonomous control – no
More Ruddy Touch Screen controls – no
More testing of over 70s – yes. Doesn’t need to be a full test, just a basic competency test.I’m a strong believer that all these systems make people lazy and less aware of what they are doing.
I guess you probably would have objected to introduction of seatbelts then as they would make people less likely to care if they crash.
How on earth does a camera or black box make you lazy and less aware of what you are doing?
I’m a strong believer that all these systems make people lazy and less aware of what they are doing.
Then you'd be wrong.
Having a camera in the car recording your every action makes you much more aware of what you're doing.
You know how you drive more carefully when there's a police car behind you? It's like that. All the time.
I've been working for years in places where all the vans are constantly tracked by GPS. All the van drivers report pretty much the same experience. They rarely speed and moderate their own driving much more than they normally would.
Dashcams are like face masks. They're not really there to protect you from other people. They're to protect other people from you.
Ist one 58 in a 50 – I missed the sign to say it was a 50 limit.
Not paying attention, naughty TJ. What else could you have missed? I am assuming you saw the mobile camera, did that not put you on your guard?
Second one 78 in a 70 – booting it to get past a truck before the dual carriageway ends.
Why? How much would being behind the truck have inconvenienced you? What if there was another vehicle in front of the truck?
Can't believe that after knowing you on here for so long you are taking the part of the aggrieved driver caught for speeding!!! 😂 2020 truly is the gift that keeps on giving!!!
Should the loss of your licence cause exceptional hardship
Then don't run up so many points that you put it at risk, easy!
How’s the view from that horse of yours?
Because I have a different viewpoint to you?
I'm sorry, but **** "exceptional hardship". If you need your license, don't take chances with it. If your mum needs a taxi to get to hospital, you should have thought of that sooner.
I'll concede maybe a shorter ban to start with. One month, employer can't sack you but if you can't work for that month they don't have to pay you. Subsequent ban - no license for 6 months, tough shit if you lose your job and your family end up on the streets. Your choice.
No retests give the impression that a license is a gift for life. And frankly drivers - and the courts - seem to think it is.
Anyone consistently driving shite, too fast, etc, just hike their insurance premiums.
Reminds me of Michael Winner, "Bus Lanes, they only charge you £60 to use them, and you get no points. Wonderful value!"
So in your world rich people can speed...
the overtake was fine in that it was not that close to the end of the dual – 2 cars came past after me. i was just getting it done quickly.
Fine? Apart from deliberately breaking the speed limit?
But ban? Not unless you had 6pts already.
What I would change would be excuses for 12pts not being a ban. Need a licence for your job? Don't make a habit for speeding.
Are we not missing the point that soon self driving cars will replace any human taking control of 2 tons of steel.
"soon"??
20 years. Minimum.
The phasing out of petrol and diesel sales from 2035 will help (although there's talk of bringing that forward to 2030) as new cars could come with significantly more tech to be switched on in future but it's an all or nothing thing. There's potential for autonomous driving lanes on motorways but not much else, at least not in the near future.
For the same reason that roads are still being built in spite of it waving in the face of Climate Emergency because all councillors go "oh but soon all cars will be electric therefore we can build as many roads as we want and still reach net zero".
It's bollocks, it's a way of getting what you want now (more roads, no restrictions on cars) and kick the can down the road.
The phrase is Exceptional Hardship and the clue’s in the name. Should the loss of your licence cause exceptional hardship – not “hardship or other crap” – then you don’t just get away with it, the suspension will be replaced with another punishment such as sticking a zero on the end of your fine.
Exceptional hardship is defined as:
• Loss of a career for you or anyone who relies on your business
• Potential homelessness which results in you not being able to pay for your mortgage if you lose your job
• If you suffer from health issues and will have your mobility restricted if you cannot drive
• If you are the carer for somebody with severe health issues and they are heavily dependent on you
( https://cartwrightking.co.uk/areas-of-practice/motoring-law/exceptional-hardship)
I'm not arguing that these are horrible positions for anyone to be in, but you have to do something (usually multiple times) pretty bad to get to the point of losing your driving license. This isn't a momentary lapse.
What about the lives ruined if that person (who has demonstrated that they are an unsafe driver) seriously injures someone in a crash?
My point is - people need to take personal responsibility for their actions. Driving rules aren't made up on the spot - they are well known. If you need to drive for your job, then stick to the rules and it won't be an issue.
Are we not missing the point that soon self driving cars will replace any human taking control of 2 tons of steel. These cars will not speed, no one will be making progress, or not stopping at stop signs and the cars will be talking to each other to prevent most crashes. Anyone still driving one of those ‘historic’ vehicles will have to pay for 2 sentry cars at the front and back to ensure they are safe.
I like your thinking.
Can’t believe that after knowing you on here for so long you are taking the part of the aggrieved driver caught for speeding!!! 😂 2020 truly is the gift that keeps on giving!!!
Im not - read my post. I fully accept the fines were merited and that both were poor driving. I merely wondered if you thought that worth a ban given your statements that 6 points should be a ban?
Fair enough. Yes. 2 week ban for getting 6 points.
Ist one 58 in a 50 – I missed the sign to say it was a 50 limit.
So you admit you were Driving without Due Care and Attention?
Second one 78 in a 70 – booting it to get past a truck before the dual carriageway ends.
Should've slowed down rather than increasing the speed differential whilst running out of road.
the overtake was fine in that it was not that close to the end of the dual – 2 cars came past after me. i was just getting it done quickly.
So there was absolutely no point in speeding at all then?
No one was inconvenienced let alone harmed
BUT YOU BROKE THE SPEED LIMIT YOU MONSTER! WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!
I'm being contrary of course. In the letter of the law, what you did was wrong, end of. There was a time where traffic enforcement was performed by actual humans who could differentiate between driving past a school at 40mph at 3pm and doing it at 3am, or clipping over the limit momentarily during an overtake versus driving like your head's on fire for 20 miles. In the world of unmanned speed cameras or patrol vans it's flash flash £100 and three points thank you very much, they're a blunt instrument making a binary decision.
I was once caught in much the same manner as your second example, overtaking a string of vehicles in a crawler lane on a single carriageway. Got to the head of the queue, pulled in, thought "hm, that was a bit quick," looked down to see ~74mph indicated and immediately slowed back down to the 60 limit. Got a NIP for somewhere around 67-68 IIRC. Is it genuinely safer for me to be staring at the dashboard rather than concentrating on the road during an overtake in case I go a few mph over the limit for like two seconds, or trying to squeeze back in to a queue of all-too-close traffic in a lane the is about to end? I'll hold my hand up, I made a mistake and I took my penalties, but I can't help but think that it was rather a cynical placement for the camera and that it was there for the wrong reasons.
I don’t think it would be unreasonable for drivers to undertake an eye test and danger perception/ reaction test every 10 years. I had some old duffer rear-end my camper in the middle of town - he’d obviously had too many sherries when he came out the Conservative Club trying to go through a too narrow gap. I got out and ended up on his bonnet as he tried to drive off. Judging by the condition of his car I wasn’t the first thing I’d hit and he didn’t look complis mentis. He’d actually only scuffed my bumper - cracked his so didn’t bother with insurance claim.
Change the culture so people realise driving is a privilege rather than a right.
50 year project right there, two generations, minimum.
Yep, no point kicking the can down the road though. Sooner we start, the sooner we're done.
Went to the shop to buy some coffee
Any autonomous car should check in advance whether the journey could be better completed by another means and if so direct the would be car-ist to nearest pavement, bike share or bus stop.
Cameras – no
Black Boxes – no
More autonomous control – no
More Ruddy Touch Screen controls – no
More testing of over 70s – yes. Doesn’t need to be a full test, just a basic competency test.I’m a strong believer that all these systems make people lazy and less aware of what they are doing.
I kind of agree with this. It's about time people started taking responsibility for their own actions and not hiding behind technology. Not too long ago, someone reversed onto my friends car. the excuse, oh sorry, my beepers didn't go off. A blackbox isn't going to change stuff like this.
It doesn't doesn't mean we have to be under 24/7 surveillance in order to try and avoid stuff. Accidents happen, people make mistakes sometimes. Dangerous driving and it's prevention should be the responsibility of the police and punished accordingly, or it was until they had their budgets slashed and thus there's no longer anyone patrolling the roads.
Be careful what you wish for, mandatory GPS tracking, registration, cameras and 18mph limits on bikes may follow if we go down that path!
I had some old duffer rear-end my camper in the middle of town – he’d obviously had too many sherries when he came out the Conservative Club trying to go through a too narrow gap. I got out and ended up on his bonnet as he tried to drive off. Judging by the condition of his car I wasn’t the first thing I’d hit and he didn’t look complis mentis. He’d actually only scuffed my bumper – cracked his so didn’t bother with insurance claim.
Did you report him for suspected drunk driving?
I don't think the bloke in this week's 24 Hours in Police Custody is a big fan of dashcams...
I’m being contrary of course. In the letter of the law, what you did was wrong, end of. There was a time where traffic enforcement was performed by actual humans who could differentiate between driving past a school at 40mph at 3pm and doing it at 3am, or clipping over the limit momentarily during an overtake versus driving like your head’s on fire for 20 miles. In the world of unmanned speed cameras or patrol vans it’s flash flash £100 and three points thank you very much, they’re a blunt instrument making a binary decision.
I was once caught in much the same manner as your second example, overtaking a string of vehicles in a crawler lane on a single carriageway. Got to the head of the queue, pulled in, thought “hm, that was a bit quick,” looked down to see ~74mph indicated and immediately slowed back down to the 60 limit. Got a NIP for somewhere around 67-68 IIRC. Is it genuinely safer for me to be staring at the dashboard rather than concentrating on the road during an overtake in case I go a few mph over the limit for like two seconds, or trying to squeeze back in to a queue of all-too-close traffic in a lane the is about to end? I’ll hold my hand up, I made a mistake and I took my penalties, but I can’t help but think that it was rather a cynical placement for the camera and that it was there for the wrong reasons.
Careful, this is the internet, not sure there's any place for this kind of common sense here!
Because I have a different viewpoint to you?
No, because you're deliberately misrepresenting people and arguing about something no-one's said on this thread.
“soon”??
20 years. Minimum.
Every time we have a driving thread someone brings up self driving cars. It's not going to happen in our lifetime. Tech in cars be blowed, the roads aren't consistent enough for people to cope with let alone some AI. Motorways maybe, but they're statistically our safest roads anyway. We still need train drivers and they're on bloody rails FFS.
Anyone consistently driving shite, too fast, etc, just hike their insurance premiums.
The problem is that is that you'll end up with more uninsured drivers leaving the scenes of accidents etc.
Because I have a different viewpoint to you?
No, because you’re deliberately misrepresenting people and arguing about something no-one’s said on this thread.
WTF??? I was expanding on a point made by an earlier poster. Where have I misrepresented anyone? If I have then I apologise.
In the bit I quoted.
Obviously this won’t apply to STW driving gods who are making progress…
No-one's said anything of the sort. You're just having an unprovoked dig.
As has been explained time and again, "making progress" is not synonymous with "driving like you stole it." There is a gulf between assertive and aggressive. It's a strawman argument and it's getting tedious.
end of the dual – 2 cars came past after me. i was just getting it done quickly.
Given it's the A9 I'm now assuming all three of you drove across the hatchings
Nope - I was in the inside lane well before the hatchings. dunno about the cars behind me.
@gwaelod even if I did own an autonomous car in the future, the drive to my local shop is 30 minutes as I live in the countryside. The walk would take a fair bit longer due to the hills in Northumberland.
anyone doing the school run should have a camera! IME the most dangerous drivers are those doing the school run. Followed by white man van, then youngsters, then oldies.
I know an old dear who at 98 still drives for her paper or to the local farm shop, she is so switched on I thought she was only 95
Definitely no sign of dementia etc arthritis in the fingers she tells me
Try telling your dad at 87 he's no getting to drive again caused a big stooshie
It’s a strawman argument and it’s getting tedious.
Noted.
On a related note about electric / self driving vehicles, I can actually see a point where they're creating more problems than they're solving.
At the moment, there's at least some acknowledgement some of the time that driving is bad in terms of pollution and, just maybe, some people will occasionally walk / cycle / use public transport instead as their inner environmentalist kicks in. I can see the point where the mental attitude changes to "oh it's an EV, I can drive wherever I want cos it's non-polluting / carbon neutral" and we then end up back in absolute gridlock, trying to build more roads.
I've been a believer for a while that once you hit a certain age you should have to have a new driving test. Not as comprehensive as the first but something to gauge reaction times etc. This should then continue every say 5 years and when you hit borderline you start to be warned about future tests which will declare you unfit to drive and perhaps then the time gets shortened. Once you fail the test you are declared unfit to drive. I think it would prevent a lot of accidents and would save the awkward conversations with parents about the state of their driving. I personally dread having to tell my dad that I don't think he should drive any more but once the time comes I'll definitely voice my concerns. However, I know a lot of people don't have that conversation when they should for fear of repercussions but they already know they shouldnt be on the road.
I have this with my parents. I have told them they shouldn't be driving in their mid / late 80s. eyesight and reactions just not good enough Very angry reaction from them. I haven't got in a car with them for 5 years but they have not yet worked this out.
Should over 70’s be required to have a camera in their car?
For driving, yes; dogging, no.
It's got nothing to do with being old. The woman who pulled out in front of me and got my bumper in her door looked about 22 ish.
An acceptable manouver and speed on an empty dry road would be horrendously innapropriate in the rain outside a school.
As for black boxes - they don't automatically dob you in if you accelerate hard. They (the current ones) build a profile of the way you drive consistently, based AFAIK on acceleration and sudden braking and things like that. They aren't there to penalise specific incidents like cameras are.
Cameras – no
Black Boxes – no
More autonomous control – no
More Ruddy Touch Screen controls – no
More testing of over 70s – yes. Doesn’t need to be a full test, just a basic competency test.
Cos it's all the oldies' fault, of course it is!
If your mum needs a taxi to get to hospital, you should have thought of that sooner.
But then your perfectly innocent mother suffers from her son's idiocy. Hardly fair is it?
I plan to stop driving at 70, my Jetpack order should have arrived by then.
I think it would prevent a lot of accidents
Any statistics to back that up?
(I vaguely recall but can't be arsed googling that going from insurance data, 83 is the age when risk levels return to those of teenage drivers.)
