Would different 'grades' of driving licence be better?
Starting at sixteen, the driving test as now could be taken to allow you to drive cars upto 500cc, after a year a test could be taken (more strict) to allow 700cc cars to be driven. Over the next few years, stricter and stricter tests encompassing skid control, motorway driving etc etc could be taken to allow you by the age of say 25 or so (if you had passed all tests) to drive any car.
Besides all else this would make driving a proffession, and make the drivers of performance cars better able to handle them by the training, experience and tests that they had been through.
Driving offences could be dealt with by reducing licence by a grade or two, young in-experienced drivers would only be able to drive small low powered cars (regardless of how much money Daddy and Mummy had) and jobs would be created by older people employing younger drivers (with the right licence) to drive their big a*sed cars for them!
Then there is the enviroment, and the cut in road deaths, not to mention the ease at which older drivers could have their licence grades gradually reduced until they give up all together when their last grade is lost (which could be at 50 or 150 years old depending on how good a driver they are).
Answers:
Jester man i cannot agree with you more, in South Africa last year we had 12985 deaths on our roads, it's like a war on our roads. I like your idea of a grading system after all a car is a machine and if not used properly they can kill people.!
no, it will not be nice cause i'm a mess driving, NO GRADES PLEASE!
Yes but in the USA we have capitalistic society. Cars of 500cc or .5L do not exist even 700cc. The smallest engine in USA is 1.5L in an automobile. So the idea is good but who controls politicians? MONEY from automakers.
of course yes! Would you like a lunatic who has a driving licence come speeding down the road, heading the wrong way? No one does! I guess you should add heavier protection as the grades got higher too!For safety reasons!
:D
On the surface, the concept of the idea isn't all that bad.
BUT
How many times are you prepared to both go through and or PAY to have your licence up graded?
How could the police possibly enforce the law?
How many cars do you know of below the 1000cc (990-1000)mark?
The cost of purchasing the cars you would have to get if you were downgraded would be astronomical.
Basically..I think ya tried which is cool, but ya need to go and revisit the idea to see if ya can tune it.
You have a coupleof good ideas there. There is a similar idea for motorcycles, 16 year olds can only have 50ccon the road, then 125and after 21 having passed any size.
Well donrfor having a sensible question
couldnt be bothered to read everything you have written!
but i do think that old grannies should not be allowed to drive at night or on faster roads unless they can prove they're capable.
We have so many Mexicans on our roads who have neither license nor insurance that your system wouldn't help any.
A friend was hit by a Nicaraguan, here illegally, driving a Mexican's uninsured car without permission.
kool
Yes, It already works well for motorcycles
Well, we do have different categories of driving licences.
We have provisional licences whiuch require car-drivers to be accompanied.
We have different categories of licence specific to different types of vehicles such as car, motorcycle, PSV etc etc.
We have full licences which specify the categories of motor-vehicle which the licence holder is qualified to drive.
Then we have the vocational licences such as PSV and LGV; the latter in quite a bewildering array of categories for the uninitiated.
The top licence is, I suppose, the LGV Class 1 licence, which enables someone to drive a large, articulated truck, which requires regular medical examinations and eyesight tests etc.
We therefore have, already, tiers and tiers of regulations, when once we had almost none.
The simple fact is, it is not possible to make the roads safer by creating regulations and piles of cotton-wool in which to wrap people, and apart from anything else, even the best driving test is really only a MINIMUM standard of competence.
In no other area of activity do we seek to control all aspects of competence; save for brain surgeons and the like.
No-one would expect EVERBODY to be a concert-pianist if they learned the rules of music and passed a few exams. So the reality is, that most so-called "drivers" are really "motorists" who have to do it in order to survive or travel to work and back.
This means that MOST drivers are not naturally very good at it, just as most pianists are not concert-pianists.
That is the one thing you cannot change, cannot regulate and cannot anticipate.
As an LGV 1 driver, I have to "play with the traffic" on a daily basis, and it can get quite scary at times. How I haven't killed anyone yet is beyond me, and I have to not only think about my own vehicle, but also anticipate some of the ludicrously dangerous things other drivers do, and take evasive action on their behalf before it becomes a life and death situation.
As a "natural driver" rather than a motorist, I don't think I drive any better now than when I was 17, when I had quite a potent car and dabbled in road-rallies when they were legal-ish.
I didn't crash then, and I don't crash now, and after 2,000,000 miles of safe driving, that's the way I hope it stays.but you never know!
Food for thought, but would it make for better drivers? Education is the key. If you are in UK then organisations such as ROSPA and IAM have excellent schemes. These really do make better drivers. I guess other countries have similar things.
In principle, I agree with the points you have made and agree that these steps would reduce the risk of the in-experience-V-high powered cars, accident ratio..without a doubt!
However, this is not the whole problem. Young drivers are able to insure these high powered cars on their parents policies. Stop this and you will further reduce the problem.
However, once again this would only reduce the risk of further accidents. There is then the risk of bad driving, you can teach a driver skid control but this doesn't mean a drunk or high driver is going to be able to apply these measures under the influence.
Further, you have to take inbto account peer pressure and adrenaline. These are two factors that too often cause a driver (of any age) to push his/her limits beyond their comfort zones. How do we control that? Maybe a 500cc two seater, to reduce the number of passengers. Is a driver is less likely to be pressured into dangerous driving by one passenger?
How the "Dickens" do we control driving under the influence of drink or drugs?
Yes they did it with motorbikes in the 1990s. It seems to have helped cut the death toll, so therefore it's a success. My son and his friends who passed there driving test's mainly first time have all had accidents, within the first two years, my son had head injuries, because he didn't know how to do an emergency stop properly, it's not compulsory on the test now. Only a percentage of learners on there test have to do one. A friend of my son skidded on the motorway slip road in wet condition's and didn't know what to do, the same with someone else didn' t know what to do in icy conditions, the list goes on and on. Drink drivers should be banned from driving for 10 years, anyone who kills whilst driving illegally should also be banned for life. Try telling families these people have learned there lessons after a paltry 12 months ban and £200 fine. When the families sentence is life long.
I'm 34 and only learned to drive at 32, passed 1st time. I learned in a 1600cc and 6 weeks after passing my test got myself a big a*sed 2000cc. Where would you put me on your grading system as you appear to assume that all new drivers are young?
The worst/most reckless drivers I have encountered in the last 2 years have been men in their 30s and 40s and they are quite proud of their poor driving habits.
No grading system, people just need to be responsible on the road.
Yes I think it would be a very great help and make a lot of difference. You are limited to the size of engine you can have in a motor bike when you first pass your test and it should be the same for a car. You will always get idiots but it would certainly cut back on some of the carnage. I also feel that older drivers should be restricted to the size of engine they drive. I believe all over 60's should be tested every five years. I am in that age group so this isn't ageism! You have put a lot of thought into this question and I hope that you get the quality of answers you deserve.
Driving a less powerful vehicle doesn't always mean you drive better.
Perhaps we should have a more comprehensive training for all drivers that includes motorway and night driving after the basic driving test, before being allowed out in those very different conditions.
The police can already ask to see your license when you do something stupid!
However, the problem is drivers who are on the road without insurance, MOT, or even a driving license! Although your idea is good, it will only apply to those of us who are law-abiding. For those who cannot be bothered to obey the rules, it will not make a ha'porth of difference. It is these people we have to deal with.
I think we have to make the punishment fit the crime - at the present, the fines for not having insurance are lower than the insurance will cost. Why not make the fine start from £5,000 for a mini (for example) - and this should be a minimum, not a maximum (do not reduce it to £100 just because someone is on benefits or a low income!).
And what do we do about drivers under the influence of drugs? There is not a roadside test covering all drugs (as far as I know) - and, unless they have reason to test you at the Station, the police can do nothing about it. They may believe you have been smoking or sniffing but they are powerless unless they have proof.
And if you are found to be driving without a license (especially if it has been taken off you!), you should be jailed immediately - and not given bail. My mum was a magistrate and someone drove to court (!) where they were being dealt with because they had been stopped while driving with a suspended license - and she was not allowed to send him straight to jail because there had to be 'reports'!
Don't get me wrong, I do have a rather heavy left foot at times (but luckily have always had a clean license!) but it annoys me when people say that old drivers are dangerous. My grandfather had to keep taking tests every so often (he was 97 when he died) to make sure he was a safe driver. His biggest bugbear was when people shouted at him that he should not be on the road because he was driving too slowly. I heard one of the rather rude remarks. His crime? He was doing 30! (oh, and this was when driving through a built-up area - and guess what the speed limit was!)
With regard to you idea, why not do what the French do? (they do have some good ideas!) - they limit the speed you can drive at for the first year of driving. This gives you experience on the road, but you have a green P sticker on your car (like our L plates) so other road users realise you have not been driving long.
Sorry for my rant - I feel better now! But I really believe our biggest problem is not powerful cars (although a contributory factor), it is drivers who are not supposed to be on the road at all! All you need to do is STICK TO THE SPEED LIMIT, AVOID ALCOHOL, HAVE A DRUGS TEST AVAILABLE AT THE ROADSIDE - and have a VALID LICENSE!!
I think it would be a good idea it will enable the more competent drivers to drive cars to their ability
certainly not, however I would go on to day that it is as you say, experience that makes a good driver, far too often people who have never driven at all are permitted to go behind a wheel, the schools open in some areas where by learners drive on fake roads are much better I learnt in the army that way I drove every day for a week before I was permitted to drive on the public highway, it worked I have never had accident and have been driving now since 1972.
too many young people drive, sixteen is far too young to drive a car for that car can be a lethal weapon, we do not send troops to war until at least 17.5.
Older drivers are a risk also and should be tested on a minimum of 12montly basis once they reach the age of 65.
Anyone who kills anyone whilst driving be it by accident or not, by the way there is no such thing as an accident its just someones fault every time, then they should face at least manslaughter charges.
The answers post by the user, for information only, UKQnA.com does not guarantee the right.