South Australia to put curfew on P-platers

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by flappist

It is the selfish attitude and sense of natural entitlement that is now prolific in the generation who are attaining their licenses at the time.
This is what needs to be addressed as they almost all feel they are untouchable and should be given all the rights and entitlements of everyone else without having to earn them.

There will probably be a lot of "I MUST HAVE IT NOW, GIVE IT TO ME, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO STOP ME DOING ANYTHING" tantrums until they get used to the idea that entitlements are earned not given.

My god, how do you come to know my teenage son so well???

(or do you have one yourself? )

[brydie76]

Originally Posted by flappist

A simple way to fix this would be to not allow any credit below the age of 21 and from that point until 25 only allow up to 25% of their yearly income with the exception of housing or commercial lending.

All of a sudden it require saving up for the latest phone and designer clothes and most importantly your car.
There will probably be a lot of "I MUST HAVE IT NOW, GIVE IT TO ME, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO STOP ME DOING ANYTHING" tantrums until they get used to the idea that entitlements are earned not given.

I fail to see how this will reduce the road toll for P-platers-
a) you are just as likely to be killed in a crash due to inexperience/exuberance in your brand new car you took a loan out for as you are in the old bomb you bought with the cash you saved up over a few months (I would argue the latter is likely a lot worse for serious injury/fatality, and under a no credit rule pretty much the only thing that person could afford- I would rather be in my new Swift that I loaned money for than my old one when I was on my P's and in the high risk crash category!)

b) anecdotally, most young people loan from parents so credit limits would be moot. I am the only person I know under 25 who took out a commercial loan for their car, everybody else either borrowed from their parents or inherited/received from trust a lot of money so they could afford it outright.

c) phones and that really aren't that expensive, and these mostly go on phone plans so the cost is spread out- again, credit but even my iPhone 5 on Telstra, which I got the day they came out and with extra data (so really the most expensive option I could get! ) is less than the petrol I put into my car each month. And again, I am the odd one out here- most young people have their phone plans in their parent's names. Designer clothes- meh, I get my work suits on sale from Portmans so I have no idea about that!

You can't make rules for kids these days as long as the parents are willing to circumvent them for convenience/whatever. It's like fudging the hours in learner log books, that is rife, especially since he hours went up to 120 in NSW. As others have mentioned, mandatory driving training/lessons with professionals is the way to go, as well as better theoretical training- not only stuff like basics of caring for a car (checking oil and tyre pressures etc), but also the father this of crashes, similar to the traffic offenders programs. I think hearing from people who just got their P's and then ruined theirs/somebody else's life would cause a few people to think twice.

ETA- obviously, I am a young person, so I would fall foul of a lot of the 'solutions' being posted here. I also have. Full time professional career and university attendance. I am not an odd one out, many people my age and younger are similar/the same. So you can't tar all lying people with the same brush and say they are irresponsible and don't deserve to be offered that privilege because of the actions of a few. Everybody was young once, and. I bet many people proposing these solutions (not necessarily on here, but in general) would have been outraged had they been put to them at my age!

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Ducati888

Why don't they just fix the problem - take L plate training away from parents for a start. I reckon barely 1 in 10 drivers is capable of teaching a young driver what to do, let alone handle the family car.

Train them to drive, train them to know the road rules, train them in the correct use of indicators and round abouts, make a licence something that you truly need to earn, not something that comes from a cereal packet.

Of course, that would be hard. It's far easier to just pass ridiculous legislation and then put the real problem under the rug.

I've said for a long time - there are no competent people in government, or in any government department, at any level. From the cleaners to the ministers, from the police to the rest of the public servants. Barely adequate at best, but far from competent. This is further proof.

how did you learn to drive. i love these threads. all the people that got their licence by driving down the cop shop (unlicenced), doing a lap of the block and getting a drivers licence from the constable on duty, complain about how easy it is these days for young kids to get a licence and more training is required!! i bet more driving gets done by learners now than ever before in the history of mankind.

ok, the first part of that may be a bit extreme but you get the idea. the problem is, its always the minority that manage to change policy, not the majority. no one likes to hear of people dying, esp the young uns, but instead of categorising all road deaths in to one group, if they singled out those who had alcohol and drugs in their system from the rest of the group, they'd probably find one of the main causes for road trauma. its too easy to just blame the age group or the vehicle etc rather than try to tackle the actual issues.

Originally Posted by Ducati888

Kids are no different now to every other generation. The cars and phones are better, that's about it.

this i tend to think is part of the problem. it may seem a little hypocritical given my last sentence above about not blaming cars, but the fact is, cars are much different than 20 years ago. i fanged around in a mini, and a datto 200b. my brother had a cortina, another an alpha gtv. all these cars got thrashed, as kids will be kids, but the difference is, i could hold my foot flat for 10 seconds and only be doing 60 in the 200b or mini. these days, if you hold your foot flat for 10sec, you are well on the wrong side of the legal limit anywhere in australia in most cases, so people being silly are ending up in a lot more trouble. add in some alcohol and drugs and peer pressure and its not a nice recipe.


car restrictions aren't a bad idea if they are done by a power/weight system. blanket bans are illogical.

messing with the system generally only punishes those who care to actually obey the rules. those who cause the most strife, generally don't follow the rules anyway.

[fanboi]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well I can see why they want to do it and with the exception of those who require a license during those hours such as shift workers etc. it will not inconvenience anyone except those who are playing up.

.

Apparently being a responsible young adult and being a designated driver is classified as playing up now.

Some people do like to stay up after Big dog goes to bed, doesnt mean they are hoons or causing trouble

[Ben73]

I don't see how not allowing people to get car loans or phone contracts under the age of 21 will stop people from crashing during the night. I had both a car loan and a new phone at under 21. I have not caused a crash yet.

Did thy consider that perhaps crashes in the middle of the night may be caused by fatigue and not P plate hooning.

[xxx000]

Originally Posted by irish2

Silliest post I have ever read. How can increased skill and knowledge in how to maneuver a vehicle result in more deaths?

My thoughts are increased over confidence in their ability but have a read of this
http://www.qoh.com.au/resources/news...river-training

Post-licence driver training does not prevent accidents!
We commonly see that companies and individuals do advanced driver training in the hope that this will reduce the risks of accident and death. This is clearly well-meant but more and more research shows that this type of training does not reduce accident rates.

An interesting recent article talks about strategies for dealing with young drivers and is well worth looking at: Link

One article states:

"Despite decades of research indicating driver education does not reduce crash involvement among beginning drivers, it still has tremendous popular appeal as a means to improve driver safety. Formal driver education programs enjoy widespread public acceptance around the world as the preferred way to prepare beginners for licensure. For example, a survey in the United States found that 86% considered driver education courses "very important" in training new drivers to drive safely. Only 2% thought it was not important. When the young driver problem is addressed in public forums, there inevitably is an appeal for more or better driver education. Several comprehensive international reviews of the best scientific evaluations of driver education programs for young beginners all come to the same conclusion: There is no difference in the crash records of driver education graduates compared with equivalent groups of beginners who learned to drive without formal education..." Link

Why driver education does not produce safer drivers

From: "Driver education renaissance?" A F Williams and S A Ferguson, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Arlington, Virginia, USA. Inj. Prev. 2004;10;4-7.

"There is little reason to think driver education should produce drivers less likely to crash. The courses generally are of short duration (for example, 30 hours in-class and six hours in-vehicle); in the available time, it is possible to teach only basic driving skills. There is less opportunity to teach safe driving techniques, and any safety messages that are conveyed can be overwhelmed by ongoing parental, peer, personal, and other social influences that shape driving styles and crash involvement. Such influences largely are beyond the reach of driver education instructors. For the same reasons, many short term high school health education programs aimed at influencing smoking, alcohol, and other drug use have failed, although programs that are comprehensive and longer term, targeting the entire community, have had some success. The audience for driver education courses also may be relatively unmotivated by safety concerns. In surveys, most teenagers say they want to get licensed as soon as possible, and the goal of many driver education students is likely to center on learning enough skills to pass the driving test. Developmental and lifestyle features typical of young adolescents (risk taking, feelings of invulnerability, immature decision making) also make it difficult to influence the way they drive through safety messages.

It is not entirely clear why the advanced driving/skid control courses increase rather than reduce the crash risk of young males. It seems likely that the courses inspire overconfidence and/or young people may create extra opportunities to try out these advanced maneuvers, with peer influences playing a part. In any case, this is an example of how skills learned through driver education can interact with developmental and lifestyle factors typical of young people to produce unintended results."

A Cochrane Systematic Review in 2003 found: .."no evidence that post-licence driver education is effective in preventing road traffic injuries or crashes..." Link

Certainly graduated licensing where learners start on more limited (P) licences and over some years the restrictions are reduced have been shown to be effective and Australia is one country to be actively and effectively implementing these.

Experience in driving does reduce the risk of accident but training after getting the licence does not. Any new training needs to be properly evaluated BEFORE it is implemented and promoted. What we do not want to see is people going to untested training which not only costs considerable money, but has no effect on accidents, or worse still increases accident rates.

We recommend that if you are considering driver training for your employees you ensure that the training has been thoroughly and independently researched to ensure that you meet you duty of care as an employer. Although the training if often fun for the staff who attend it, that is not enough to say that it is having desirable effects on accident rates

[Ducati888]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

And here we have the number one problem. the belief that a licence is a right not a privilege. no one has an automatic right to an unrestricted licence and level two learners ( learners who are allowed to drive solo or P platers) are expected to put up with some restrictions until the gain experience and some maturity.

teens would like that?

I don't know what country you are living in au3xr6, but in Australia, where we have a democracy and government by the people for the people (loosely, haha), there is no such thing a s a privilege. That's for people who live in communist countries.

Have you read the constitution? Are you aware of its existence? There is no mention of the word "privilege"in it. We are tax payers, we all have equal rights. There are no 'privileges' in a democracy.

"An hre we have the number one problem" - bleeding hearts who continually give up any semblance of freedom whenever a legislator wants to take them away, under the guise of "won't someone please think of the children". Really, please go away. You are killing it for the rest of us, who think for ourselves.

[Ducati888]

Originally Posted by prydey

how did you learn to drive. i love these threads. all the people that got their licence by driving down the cop shop (unlicenced), doing a lap of the block and getting a drivers licence from the constable on duty, complain about how easy it is these days for young kids to get a licence and more training is required!! i bet more driving gets done by learners now than ever before in the history of mankind.

ok, the first part of that may be a bit extreme but you get the idea. the problem is, its always the minority that manage to change policy, not the majority. no one likes to hear of people dying, esp the young uns, but instead of categorising all road deaths in to one group, if they singled out those who had alcohol and drugs in their system from the rest of the group, they'd probably find one of the main causes for road trauma. its too easy to just blame the age group or the vehicle etc rather than try to tackle the actual issues.



this i tend to think is part of the problem. it may seem a little hypocritical given my last sentence above about not blaming cars, but the fact is, cars are much different than 20 years ago. i fanged around in a mini, and a datto 200b. my brother had a cortina, another an alpha gtv. all these cars got thrashed, as kids will be kids, but the difference is, i could hold my foot flat for 10 seconds and only be doing 60 in the 200b or mini. these days, if you hold your foot flat for 10sec, you are well on the wrong side of the legal limit anywhere in australia in most cases, so people being silly are ending up in a lot more trouble. add in some alcohol and drugs and peer pressure and its not a nice recipe.


car restrictions aren't a bad idea if they are done by a power/weight system. blanket bans are illogical.

messing with the system generally only punishes those who care to actually obey the rules. those who cause the most strife, generally don't follow the rules anyway.

Not sure what you are actually asking prydey. I agree with you. I learned to drive in an XK Falcon, a Series 3 Land Rover, and a Grey Massey Ferguson tractor growing up on a farm, and have been driving since I could reach the pedals when I was 7. Car control is not a problem, but I had to learn the road rules like everyone else when I was old enough to go for my licence. There were no log books back then, and I doubt I did more than 4 or 5 hours on the roads as an L plater with my parents (1989).

I am also a motorcyclist, and have been riding longer than I've been driving. I can tell you, that my observations of driver competence are such that L Plate training needs to be taken from parents. The biggest fundamental flaw in driver training is the L-Plate system of parental training. If the parents show their kids to drive the same way they do, then the kids have no hope.

Surely you have seen first hand what I'm saying, if you've spent any time in traffic. They may teach a kid how to make a car move, but they don't teach them correct indicator use, mirror use, head checks, get the hell out of the right lane. I suspect that most don't ever even check their tyre pressures - the single most important thing in avoiding a crash in an emergency stopping situation (assuming the tyres are roadworthy).

Do they talk about tyre pressures when you go for your licence? No? Thought not.

You are right though prydey, cars are much better now. My first car was a 71 Capri 2L that was topped out at 120kph, but it had moderate suspension and tiny brakes, and was very light. Modern cars may go much faster, but they are also considerably safer, such that urban crashes that occur at or below the speed limits of 80 or 60kph, are rarely fatal. It doesn't matter what car you are in out in the country, old or new, if you crash at 100kph or more, you are generally gone.

The biggest issue I think that needs exploring is this - there is no research into the true cause of many single occupant male crashes out on open roads, other than to spruik the tired mantra that "speed was an issue". I believe that there's often more to it, such as suicide. The stats say speeding, but it's not always why the car crashed. This is 'too hard basket' for too many people, but it needs exploring.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Ducati888

I don't know what country you are living in au3xr6, but in Australia, where we have a democracy and government by the people for the people (loosely, haha), there is no such thing a s a privilege. That's for people who live in communist countries.

Have you read the constitution? Are you aware of its existence? There is no mention of the word "privilege"in it. We are tax payers, we all have equal rights. There are no 'privileges' in a democracy.

"An hre we have the number one problem" - bleeding hearts who continually give up any semblance of freedom whenever a legislator wants to take them away, under the guise of "won't someone please think of the children". Really, please go away. You are killing it for the rest of us, who think for ourselves.

Hmm very good point. Obviously well researched and thought through.

Can you show us all the part of the constitution that gives you the right to drive please, I couldn't find it.

In fact can you show us what rights the constitution actually gives us.........

Here is a link just in case you can't find it http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c..._act/coaca430/

[The Yeti]

I got to say I think its a pretty good idea

[prydey]

Ducati - i think we kind of agree but are saying it in different ways. one thing regarding learners though, we all start somewhere, and i think there are many who are guilty of labelling current learners worse than previous generations when in fact there is probably very little difference except those who are older choose to forget their learning years. regarding being taught by your parents, you still have to be passed by a qualified instructor to get your P's, although that is generally only for 1 or 2 tests drives, so if you nail them you can then fall back to all your parents bad habits.

my parents did very little teaching of me. my licence cost me probably a lot more than most as i paid for many lessons with a driving instructor. commonly referred to as 'log book'. not sure if it made a difference or not but to this day i'm still correcting some of my folks bad traits

Originally Posted by Ducati888

urban crashes that occur at or below the speed limits of 80 or 60kph, are rarely fatal. It doesn't matter what car you are in out in the country, old or new, if you crash at 100kph or more, you are generally gone.

this to me is an example of how the minority are the ones who inflict change. normally the only time we hear about changing the legislation for learners and P plate drivers is when some young person (often with a car load of similar age or less people) wraps themselves around a solid object as a result of trying to break the sound barrier. these are a minority but they normally take out multiple lives at a time and sway the statistics.

the number of L and P plate drivers who die as a direct result of poor training would be very few. the most common would probably be inexperience on rural roads. very few would be as a result of normal day to day driving within the confines of the law.

[MercurySilver]

i dunno...

we're up to quoting stuff from 2003 from an usa based artivle/survey on driver education
and
talking about a friggin constitution

[atec77]

Originally Posted by MercurySilver

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/bre...-1226606348250


FIRST-YEAR P-plate drivers will be banned from driving between midnight and 5am, under a South Australian government proposal.


The drivers also will be banned from carrying more than one passenger aged 16 to 20, although immediate family members are exempt.

Road Safety Minister Michael O'Brien said the proposed changes were aimed at protecting young drivers and their passengers.

"Young people make up five per cent of our population, but account for 12 per cent of fatalities and serious injuries on our roads," Mr O'Brien said in a statement on Tuesday.

"These initiatives, which were shaped by extensive consultation and feedback from the community, are about saving young drivers' lives."

He said young drivers are up to seven times more likely to crash when driving late at night.

And carrying two to three passengers under the age of 21 increases the risk of a young driver crashing by four to five times compared to driving alone.

The passenger restrictions and curfew will not apply if the driver is aged over 25 or if a qualified supervising driver is a passenger.

A bill will be introduced into parliament later this year.



discuss
image

Didn't work when it was tried 40 odd years ago , certainly didn't stop me driving nor many others
The right thing is better training not how to pas the test

[prydey]

Originally Posted by atec77

The right thing is better training

what training did you have prior to getting a licence?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by prydey

what training did you have prior to getting a licence?

Well I don't know about him but as I am about the same age I will tell you about my training.

I had 12 years of school during which time I taught to respect others and authority. I was forced to actually compete for everything I did and if I was not up to scratch in something I was failed until I was actually of a suitable standard.

I was taught that I was personally responsible for what I did and could not blame my upbringing or the Government or TV or anything else.

I learned that there were consequences to my actions and when I stuffed up I had to sort the problem not just run and hide because it was too hard and pretend it did not happen.

I learned to appreciate every thing I was given and if I wanted something I had to work for it which sometimes took a long time.

I learned that I had responsibilities to others and the community in general and that the world did not owe me anything at all and while I was being given things without earning them I was bound by the rules and restrictions of those who were providing.

THEN I learned how to drive a motor vehicle.........

[Ducati888]

Originally Posted by flappist

Hmm very good point. Obviously well researched and thought through.

Can you show us all the part of the constitution that gives you the right to drive please, I couldn't find it.

In fact can you show us what rights the constitution actually gives us.........

Here is a link just in case you can't find it http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c..._act/coaca430/

Its a document of exclusion not inclusion. If it doesn't specifically prohibit something, then it's allowed (within reason).

Do you honestly think that in 1900, the legislators sat there and wrote down everything a free man CAN do, rather than what they CAN'T in a free society?

Have you read it? There is a section in there that says clearly "a man shall have free access to all roadways". I haven't got time to find the direct clause number, but trust me, it's in there. I might indulge your ignorance by finding it tonight for you, but then again, why don't you just download it and read the thing yourself?

[prydey]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well I don't know about him but as I am about the same age I will tell you about my training.

I had 12 years of school during which time I taught to respect others and authority. I was forced to actually compete for everything I did and if I was not up to scratch in something I was failed until I was actually of a suitable standard.

I was taught that I was personally responsible for what I did and could not blame my upbringing or the Government or TV or anything else.

I learned that there were consequences to my actions and when I stuffed up I had to sort the problem not just run and hide because it was too hard and pretend it did not happen.

I learned to appreciate every thing I was given and if I wanted something I had to work for it which sometimes took a long time.

I learned that I had responsibilities to others and the community in general and that the world did not owe me anything at all and while I was being given things without earning them I was bound by the rules and restrictions of those who were providing.

THEN I learned how to drive a motor vehicle.........

i'm only 36 but had the same upbringing.

imagine the uproar if the pre requisite to even sitting for a learners was to demonstrate the above traits and have a good school report probably wouldn't be a bad start though!!

[Ducati888]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well I don't know about him but as I am about the same age I will tell you about my training.

I had 12 years of school during which time I taught to respect others and authority. I was forced to actually compete for everything I did and if I was not up to scratch in something I was failed until I was actually of a suitable standard.

I was taught that I was personally responsible for what I did and could not blame my upbringing or the Government or TV or anything else.

I learned that there were consequences to my actions and when I stuffed up I had to sort the problem not just run and hide because it was too hard and pretend it did not happen.

I learned to appreciate every thing I was given and if I wanted something I had to work for it which sometimes took a long time.

I learned that I had responsibilities to others and the community in general and that the world did not owe me anything at all and while I was being given things without earning them I was bound by the rules and restrictions of those who were providing.

THEN I learned how to drive a motor vehicle.........

All very good foundations to lead an exemplary life. I was the same. My trust in authority was shaken more recently (the police) and will never be restored, but all the other stuff is spot on.

I believe (and I may be goind out on a limb for some here) that the current generation are way over protected. I'm 42, and it's the Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers who are to blame for the nanny state mentality under which we all live now.

We ran amok when we were kids, jumped off garage rooves, put stones on train lines and some stuff a whole lot worse, did the hip & shoulder whilst playing football, got in to fights on the oval after school. We got hurt, we healed and moved on. We are also generally more highly educated than our parents (though not necessarily any more intelligent) and generally are able to reflect on the potential dangers we put ourselves in. Therefore, we now wrap our kids in cotton wool and bubble wrap, and try to prevent them exploring the world the way we did, because we know the risks we took, the lies we told our parents, and we must protect the children. So, they don't compete at school, they don't use red pen to put a cross on bad spelling, they musn't try pot or binge drink, they must do 200 hours of poorly supervised driver training, they must do this they must do that. They are told that they are 'special' and are capable of doing anything. The world is their oyster and they can do it now.

It's unhealthy to lie to kids and treat them in this way. They are not special. They are generic and the same as everyone else. When they find that out, how distraught they become. They must find their own way without the protection of bubble wrap. The problem is that they are protected from adversity early on so any small thing that happens later in life is shot way out of perspective in its seriousness, like for example the family dog dying or a broken arm (personal experience on both). It's just a dog. Move on. Arms heal, move on. Pressures are big enough through peer groups and needing to belong, fashion, cyber-bullying and all the crap that has evolved a million-fold since I was a kid. It's our fault, not theirs. Kids are the same as they have always been, but they are guided by the misguided now. Poor things.

I'm not sure I've articulated clearly what I mean, but I'm sure you get the drift.

[prydey]

you raise some valid points Ducati, and being a parent now myself, i'm probably guilty of being over protective in many things. society is different now as well though.

when i was a young un, i'd ride my bike all around the neighbourhood, often without even letting my parents know where i was going. we weren't up to mischief, nicking off doing illegal activities or anything, we were just riding bikes, throwing rocks in the creek etc. i now have a 12yr old daughter and i couldn't bring myself to let her ride around the local streets. i guess its the thought of all the sicko's out there that puts me off.

[T-Pak Addict]

I get what you are saying... Problem is most times these days we cant bring up the kids the way we want too these days. I am the first to admit I was a right little basket when I was groing up, always getting trouble when I was youger. I lived with "wait til your father gets home" then I knew I was screwed.... School tells them parents cat do this or cant do that etc etc... I have lost count the number of times I got given the cane, beach bat (that stigs oh boy), or the metre ruler across my backside at school only to cop it later when dad got home.....

But I did have a understanding that you did something wrong you got punished... Seems these days you can always blame someone else for they way you act. News is often filled with how someone got a reduced sentance cos of this or that....

Restrictions should be placed on P Platers to a certain extent but only with the number of people they carry thats it... Thats the only thing really that makes sense... Take away the peer pressure til they learn to drive properly.

[Ducati888]

Originally Posted by prydey

you raise some valid points Ducati, and being a parent now myself, i'm probably guilty of being over protective in many things. society is different now as well though.

when i was a young un, i'd ride my bike all around the neighbourhood, often without even letting my parents know where i was going. we weren't up to mischief, nicking off doing illegal activities or anything, we were just riding bikes, throwing rocks in the creek etc. i now have a 12yr old daughter and i couldn't bring myself to let her ride around the local streets. i guess its the thought of all the sicko's out there that puts me off.

I completely agree mate. I have a daughter too. The thing is, the sickos were always there, in the same proportions as they are now. Jeez, people used to send their kids to church choir. Need I say more. They were also in denial back then.

We aren't now, and we have a 24 hour news cycle telling us all the bad stuff, all the time. You used to just get the 6pm news and the daily paper, so what was in there was worth listening to, but there is so much medium for tid bits and any news now, it's any wonder we are all neurotic. It takes a strong mind to cast off that crap and stay positive, but it's worth it.

[Kable72]

I did the same, rode my bike all the time pretty much anywhere I wanted, just told mum I was going for a ride. Played tackle footy at school, skateboarded at the bowl rode on the BMX track unsupervized (look out, rebel in the making) and I'm 21 on Monday. I was taught the same as most of you here, respect authority, appreciate what you're given, earn what you want and I'm still a P plater.

Blanket rules do not work as they punish those that don't do anything wrong. The only time you hear of a P plater on the news is when they get busted speeding, drink driving, in a car crash but the same happens when you hear of someone on their open licence as well. Should we blanket ban open licence holders from driving high powered cars, driving after midnight, driving with passengers or modifying their cars? There are just as many inexperienced/terrible drivers that do hold their open licence as there are P platers. Age is not a factor in how well you can drive a car.

[Ducati888]

The law only works if you get caught. There's plenty of examples of serial drink drivers and serial speeders who have lost their licences who have been caught driving - but how many have got away with it? Heaps I reckon. All you need to do is not draw attention to yourself.

Not many were in the 18-25 age group either. So much for setting an example.

[fanboi]

Originally Posted by flappist

Hmm very good point. Obviously well researched and thought through.

Can you show us all the part of the constitution that gives you the right to drive please, I couldn't find it.

In fact can you show us what rights the constitution actually gives us.........

Here is a link just in case you can't find it http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c..._act/coaca430/

Is that like how you researched any kid out at night is up to trouble

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by buggo

I don't see how having a law to stop driving after midnight for every P-plater will stop crashes any more than a law saying 'don't do burnouts and race ya mates in ya commy at the industrial park and spill ya Jack Daniels and end up in a tree'. Because, unless I'm mistaken, there is already a law that says that, just not in those words.

I think the problem is when the police turn up at 3am, the young people just sit around saying they weren't doing burnouts and you can't prove we were.

[FGII-XR6]

Originally Posted by Ducati888

I don't know what country you are living in au3xr6, but in Australia, where we have a democracy and government by the people for the people (loosely, haha), there is no such thing a s a privilege. That's for people who live in communist countries.

good to see you are well educated but there are obviously things your teacher never told you (maybe your teacher was a left wing loon who sprouted persecution propaganda, they do exist). in my country ( AUSTRALIA) there are many things that are a privilege that you need to earn, a licence is a qualification to drive a motor vehicle and as with any qualifications the issuers of that qualification can and do impose restrictions for novices in the early stages of learning. sound familiar? like P plate restrictions? all people have the opportunity to advance to an unrestricted and even a heavy vehicle licence if the pass the correct tests and meet the criteria laid down by the issuer of the qualification.
it is not undemocratic to make sure inexperienced people are restricted while gaining the requisite skills it is actually an obligation of the issuer of the qualification to ensure public safety.
here are a number of qualifications that have restrictions imposed on novices

1. pilots licence
2. most trades
3. legal profession
4. medical profession
5. nursing
6. commercial boating licence

just to name a few and this is not discrimination they all have to earn the privilege of their qualification by gaining the requisite skill and experience before having restrictions lifted

[brydie76]

Originally Posted by prydey

i'm only 36 but had the same upbringing.

imagine the uproar if the pre requisite to even sitting for a learners was to demonstrate the above traits and have a good school report probably wouldn't be a bad start though!!

I'm 21 and my upbringing was very similar! It's been the same for generations, there are the parents who do the right thing, and then there are those who bubble wrap the kids and expect them to grow up and be Prime Minister. I think the proportion of each type has changed over time, but its always been there IMO.

[svo supporter]

Unfortunately there is no magic fix for youngins and accidents....You can try defensive driving courses (which are terrific)....you can try limiting passengers, but it only takes one rogue youngin driver and mate for a fatal accident to occur (which is what the gov't is trying to prevent) with the eggin' on process...

If there was a fool proof solution, I'd be all for it....But there isn't....The whole thing appears to be some bandaid fix, which might slow the toll down, but not solve it...

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by brydie76

I fail to see how this will reduce the road toll for P-platers-
a) you are just as likely to be killed in a crash due to inexperience/exuberance in your brand new car you took a loan out for as you are in the old bomb you bought with the cash you saved up over a few months (I would argue the latter is likely a lot worse for serious injury/fatality, and under a no credit rule pretty much the only thing that person could afford- I would rather be in my new Swift that I loaned money for than my old one when I was on my P's and in the high risk crash category!)

b) anecdotally, most young people loan from parents so credit limits would be moot. I am the only person I know under 25 who took out a commercial loan for their car, everybody else either borrowed from their parents or inherited/received from trust a lot of money so they could afford it outright.

c) phones and that really aren't that expensive, and these mostly go on phone plans so the cost is spread out- again, credit but even my iPhone 5 on Telstra, which I got the day they came out and with extra data (so really the most expensive option I could get! ) is less than the petrol I put into my car each month. And again, I am the odd one out here- most young people have their phone plans in their parent's names. Designer clothes- meh, I get my work suits on sale from Portmans so I have no idea about that!

You can't make rules for kids these days as long as the parents are willing to circumvent them for convenience/whatever. It's like fudging the hours in learner log books, that is rife, especially since he hours went up to 120 in NSW. As others have mentioned, mandatory driving training/lessons with professionals is the way to go, as well as better theoretical training- not only stuff like basics of caring for a car (checking oil and tyre pressures etc), but also the father this of crashes, similar to the traffic offenders programs. I think hearing from people who just got their P's and then ruined theirs/somebody else's life would cause a few people to think twice.

ETA- obviously, I am a young person, so I would fall foul of a lot of the 'solutions' being posted here. I also have. Full time professional career and university attendance. I am not an odd one out, many people my age and younger are similar/the same. So you can't tar all lying people with the same brush and say they are irresponsible and don't deserve to be offered that privilege because of the actions of a few. Everybody was young once, and. I bet many people proposing these solutions (not necessarily on here, but in general) would have been outraged had they been put to them at my age!

Good Response !!

Some youngsters these days are certainly like you describe. Some parents are as you describe. However, not all are like you describe (getting bloody close though). The youngster that works to earn a living is usually one who respects his posessions to a larger degree than those who are blessed with free gifts.

Working and skimping to save for a deposit on my first car didn't hurt me. Was I a model citizen on the roads when young? Looking back ... bloody idiot. I changed direction though .. I built a saloon car and went speedway racing which taught me how to repair a vehicle and how to drive one. That flogged the stupidity out of me ... the streets and highway have no safety barriers, the cars have no roll cages and we don't wear the safety clothing. I like to think I survived to be an old bugger by taking note of what I learned.

I passed on my knowlege and experience onto my kids. Did they obey everything? They thought I believed they did ... but I knew different. They were like me .. young and bullet proof but willing to learn. They survived to be parents.

That's all we can really hope for. So curfew? No .. stupid idea. (Crikey .. that was a long winded way to say that !!)

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

good to see you are well educated but there are obviously things your teacher never told you (maybe your teacher was a left wing loon who sprouted persecution propaganda, they do exist). in my country ( AUSTRALIA) there are many things that are a privilege that you need to earn, a licence is a qualification to drive a motor vehicle and as with any qualifications the issuers of that qualification can and do impose restrictions for novices in the early stages of learning. sound familiar? like P plate restrictions? all people have the opportunity to advance to an unrestricted and even a heavy vehicle licence if the pass the correct tests and meet the criteria laid down by the issuer of the qualification.
it is not undemocratic to make sure inexperienced people are restricted while gaining the requisite skills it is actually an obligation of the issuer of the qualification to ensure public safety.

here are a number of qualifications that have restrictions imposed on novices

1. pilots licence
2. most trades
3. legal profession
4. medical profession
5. nursing
6. commercial boating licence

just to name a few and this is not discrimination they all have to earn the privilege of their qualification by gaining the requisite skill and experience before having restrictions lifted

You must be a carpenter ... you nailed it. Well written.