Driving Standards

[existentialist]

I doubt this would cost the taxpayer very much, and it would be very effective. Just send a few cops out on bikes with cameras.



But the penalty for texting whilst driving needs to be increased to a more fitting level, similar to that of drink driving, because it's every bit as dangerous.


I don't think there's anything the cops could do without video evidence.
I see it every single day, and it's endemic amongst younger people. It's almost as if the world would end if they went more than 10 minutes without typing "OMG hon! U OK?"

The trouble is, we're operating in a climate where putting expensive police officers on the ground, rather than the much cheaper camera type options, just isn't seen as cost-effective. It's back to that old thing about "we choose to measure the things that are easiest to measure". It's dead easy to set a speed limit and then decide whether someone is exceeding it or not. It's not so easy to decide whether someone's using a mobile without getting eyes on, or tailgating, middle-lane-hogging, changing lanes dangerously, driving hesitantly, etc., etc., so we tend to choose not to measure those things. Whatever the risk they might present to other road users.

Actually - as if I even needed to say this - it isn't about cost benefit analyses, but that's what happens when we try to pare the costs of doing anything to the bone. All the unintended consequences come out, and, in essence, the insidious bad habits that underly all accidents are largely allowed to operate. To the point that people believe, because they rarely get caught, that it must be OK. We know they think like that, because they think the same way about speed limits - "but officer, I wasn't exceeding the speed limit, how can I have been driving too quickly for the conditions?".

Personally, I'd like to see the current driving test as the entry point to driving - a chance to hone your solo driving skills to the point where, a year or so later, you might be ready to take the full driving test. I suspect that, even if we subsidised it to the point of letting people do it (first go at least) for free, we'd save money on the carnage and hassle that shoddy driving causes. Maybe we could get the insurance companies to support the funding - it'd save them a lot of money too.

And then enforce the laws. All of them. Properly. Catch people, but respond proportionately. First offence of texting while driving - remedial driving course (at driver's expense) and a stiff warning. Second offence - throw the book at them. Etc.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

£500 and six points. Self funding.

 

[BigTom]

Also prosecute from third party video footage - dash cams, bike cams, mobile phones - there's enough people genuinely fucked off by mobile phone usage now to film and send it in and i think you'd get enough people prosecuted that way to have an actual effect, by creating a fear of prosecution.

 

[Dogsauce]

It’s not just the concentration thing with mobiles, I often encounter people turning into side roads badly (cutting the corner turning from right or going over the centre from the left) because they’re only using one hand to steer, with the other clamped to the side of their head. A real danger if you’re sat near the centre line on a bike waiting to turn right (especially as the reduced concentration means they might not notice a smaller vehicle). Had several close encounters like this. Dicks.

 

[bimble]

I somehow didn't even know that this was a thing, people actually driving (moving their cars) whilst texting. Have seen it at red lights. Am kind of terrified by this but also shouldn't be surprised.

 

[Looby]

I somehow didn't even know that this was a thing, people actually driving (moving their cars) whilst texting. Have seen it at red lights. Am kind of terrified by this but also shouldn't be surprised.

One of my colleagues was following another to a visit. He claims he pulled up behind her at lights and she had her phone in one hand and work iPad in the other.

You can tell someone is on their phone from the head bob. Someone nearly hit me the other day as I was pulling into a petrol station and they hadn’t looked up for ages so weren’t slowing down.

Also recently is the bloke who was looking for something. Seatbelt off, head barely visible except when he popped up to check he was still on the road. It went on for a good 2-3 minutes.

I don’t pretend I’m the best driver. I’m stroppy and people think I drive too slow (the speed limit) but I know I don’t take fucking stupid risks like these. Other people terrify me.

 

[bimble]

There was a poster campaign recently aimed at young pedestrians, really hard hitting one warning about not crossing roads whilst looking at your phone. I don't know if that worked but something similar for drivers would be a start.

 

[plurker]

I somehow didn't even know that this was a thing, people actually driving (moving their cars) whilst texting. Have seen it at red lights. Am kind of terrified by this but also shouldn't be surprised.

I see texting whilst moving pretty much daily, and about once a week therell be someone watching TV/videos. I call them out on it if I get to pass them at lights but usually they either shrug or get aggressive.

One person the other day was slowly rolling forward thru a red light, eyes down at phone and nearly hit my son's pram as the OH was pushing it at a crossing. I banged on the bonnet and the window went down " I'm stopped at the red, what's your problem?"

YOU WERE NOT STOPPED YOU FUCKNOODLE, THAT'D BE THE ISSUE.

grrr.

 

[George & Bill]

Most people will be aware that those other things are external to actually driving. You're not nearly so likely to accidentally get stoned while driving as you are to accidentally go too fast, and the same goes for texting. Driving faster than the speed limit, like tailgating, cutting people up, hogging the middle lane, etc., are all things people can do as an intrinsic part of their driving behaviour. Yet we only really focus on the speed thing, probably because it's technologically easier and cheaper to enforce.

This is bizarre post factum hair splitting. Going too fast, getting drunk before driving, and using a phone while driving are all things that people generally know when they're doing, and which many other people are understandably unhappy when they do. Yes, sometimes people speed accidentally, just likes sometimes they get behind the wheel the next morning after a heavy night, forgetting what's still in their bloodstream – but both are minority cases.

I'm going on about this because when I see people say things like 'there's too much emphasis on speed', while that may be technically true, it's a point that's almost never made in good faith. It's like when the gay marriage law was going through and a bunch of homophobes blabbed on about how 'it's just not the biggest priority now'. Yes, these things are not the biggest priority, but they're still significant, and if people genuinely want to move on to bigger but also more complex things then getting behind what ought to be a no-brainer consensus on this sort of thing would be a good way to start.

Except they won't do that, because 90% of the time, 'it's not the biggest priority' means 'I support something that's ultimately indefensible, but I'm too chickenshit to make a straight-up argument for it'.

 

[Saul Goodman]

This is bizarre post factum hair splitting. Going too fast, getting drunk before driving, and using a phone while driving are all things that people generally know when they're doing, and which many other people are understandably unhappy when they do. Yes, sometimes people speed accidentally, just likes sometimes they get behind the wheel the next morning after a heavy night, forgetting what's still in their bloodstream – but both are minority cases.

I'm going on about this because when I see people say things like 'there's too much emphasis on speed', while that may be technically true, it's a point that's almost never made in good faith. It's like when the gay marriage law was going through and a bunch of homophobes blabbed on about how 'it's just not the biggest priority now'. Yes, these things are not the biggest priority, but they're still significant, and people who genuinely want to move on to bigger but also more complex things should suck it up and quit whining.

Absolute nonsense. Getting drunk before driving, and using a phone whilst driving are both deliberate acts. Accidentally drifting slightly over the speed limit isn't a deliberate act, and it's very easily done.
Deliberate acts that endanger others are what we should be punishing.

 

[George & Bill]

Absolute nonsense. Getting drunk before driving, and using a phone whilst driving are both deliberate acts. Accidentally drifting slightly over the speed limit isn't a deliberate act, and it's very easily done.
Deliberate acts that endanger others are what we should be punishing.

Accidentally doing something is accidental – congrats on figuring that one out

Except as i pointed out, accidentally being over the limit is not impossible, and meanwhile, in 20 zones where everyone speeds, that is being done knowingly.

Again, you're splitting hairs to deflect attention from the fact you support maiming kids. Not exactly like a nonce. But not exactly unlike on either.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Accidentally doing something is accidental – congrats on figuring that one out

Except as i pointed out, accidentally being over the limit is not impossible, and meanwhile, in 20 zones where everyone speeds, that is being done knowingly.

How do you know it's being done intentionally? Are you in every car that does it?

 

[weltweit]

Driving while texting / facebooking should be an instant ban.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Driving while texting / facebooking should be an instant ban.

I agree. It should be similar sentencing to drink driving.

 

[mojo pixy]

Driving while texting / facebooking should be an instant ban.

Instant 6 points, so twice = ban. Basically you get one chance to not do it again, if you do then fuck off.

 

[weltweit]

Instant 6 points, so twice = ban. Basically you get one chance to not do it again, if you do then fuck off.

Why so lenient? It is an extremely dangerous thing to do, and amazingly stupid - 28d ban

 

[George & Bill]

How do you know it's being done intentionally? Are you in every car that does it?

If you have a situation where people are consistently speeding, they're either doing intentionally, or they're being careless.

As I've said before, I'm not for throwing the book at someone the first time they're caught doing 23 in a 20. I think the penalty should be progressive, starting gentle for small oversteps/first offences, but then ramping up steeply.

 

[mojo pixy]

I think being caught once and having one more chance to change, is more of a motivator than just being outright banned first time. Even the Causing Death offences are only 11 points atm.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Why so lenient? It is an extremely dangerous thing to do, and amazingly stupid - 28d ban

Why so lenient? It is an extremely dangerous thing to do.
6 month ban, then 12 months if you're caught doing it again, then a lifetime ban for a third offence.

 

[Saul Goodman]

If you have a situation where people are consistently speeding, they're either doing intentionally, or they're being careless.

As I've said before, I'm not for throwing the book at someone the first time they're caught doing 23 in a 20. I think the penalty should be progressive, starting gentle for small oversteps/first offences, but then ramping up steeply.

I'm sure a lot of people do intentionally break 20mph limits. Maybe a lot of them are doing it because they feel pressured to do it by those tailgating them.

 

[bimble]

I don't actually get why it is that for new drivers 6 points in your first 2 years means you lose your license but it isn't so for people who've been driving for years.

 

[weltweit]

Why so lenient? It is an extremely dangerous thing to do.
6 month ban, then 12 months if you're caught doing it again, then a lifetime ban for a third offence.

Well it should be publicised more - that though shall not do it - or else

 

[weltweit]

I don't actually get why it is that for new drivers 6 points in your first 2 years means you lose your license but it isn't so for people who've been driving for years.

I didn't know about that .. is that the rule?

 

[bimble]

I didn't know about that .. is that the rule?

yep. Penalty points (endorsements): New drivers - GOV.UK
Why not make it like that for everyone is what I don't get. It helps focus the mind.

 

[weltweit]

yep. Penalty points (endorsements): New drivers - GOV.UK
Why not make it like that for everyone is what I don't get. It helps focus the mind.

Hmm ... I don't know. I didn't know it was the rule.
But new drivers shouldn't be getting into bad habits.

 

[George & Bill]

I'm sure a lot of people do intentionally break 20mph limits. Maybe a lot of them are doing it because they feel pressured to do it by those tailgating them.

Sure, which is why there should be a robust information and enforcement campaign for 20 zones, and why anyone who isn't a cunt should get behind them.

 

[Saul Goodman]

yep. Penalty points (endorsements): New drivers - GOV.UK
Why not make it like that for everyone is what I don't get. It helps focus the mind.

I think it's a good idea that new drivers get less slack. Mostly because I'm not a new driver

 

[weltweit]

As long as the rules are clear and drivers know what is expected of them.

For example I don't think people should be excited about 80mph on a dry non busy motorway in good visibility. But 40 in a 30 in a built up area you should expect to be punished.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Sure, which is why there should be a robust information and enforcement campaign for 20 zones, and why anyone who isn't a cunt should get behind them.

I personally don't think 20 zones should exist, but that's another story.

 

[mojo pixy]

There should be regular re-tests every 3-5 years in order to keep the license, just a cut-down practical test. But, fail and you're back to a provisional license and having to do the full test again, theory and practical.