Nutters ... gotta love 'em!

[XmisterIS]

Looney fringe nutcase action groups are what gives this country its quirkiness.

Today's nomination goes to the charity BRAKE, who I heard being inerviewed on the BBC world service last night (3am is the best time to interview them, to be honest).

Their newest pantomime donkey is a call to the government to make it mandatory for every driver to have an eye test every year and to re-sit their practical test every five years.

This little crackpot idea is brought to you by the same people who want average speed cameras on every road in the UK, and they also want satellite-controlled tracking devices and speed limiters fitted to every vehicle in the UK. They also call for the motorway speed limit to be 60 mph and for all non-motorway roads to have a limit no higher than 40 mph, with 20 mph limits on all urban roads, everywhere, no matter what.

Minority loonies ... gotta love em!

[BikerMooFromMars]

Looney fringe nutcase action groups are what gives this country its quirkiness.

Today's nomination goes to the charity BRAKE, who I heard being inerviewed on the BBC world service last night (3am is the best time to interview them, to be honest).

Their newest pantomime donkey is a call to the government to make it mandatory for every driver to have an eye test every year and to re-sit their practical test every five years.

This little crackpot idea is brought to you by the same people who want average speed cameras on every road in the UK, and they also want satellite-controlled tracking devices and speed limiters fitted to every vehicle in the UK. They also call for the motorway speed limit to be 60 mph and for all non-motorway roads to have a limit no higher than 40 mph, with 20 mph limits on all urban roads, everywhere, no matter what.

Minority loonies ... gotta love em!

Maybe we should find a way of putting them all down before anyone of importance potentially takes an interest in them?

[bex]

call me a crackpot and put me down but i kinda see where they are coming from with the re-testing. many people on the road pick up bad habits that are potentially dangerous, their driving becomes lazy and they forget the importance of paying attention. plus how many older drivers understand all the new signs that are about. hell my mother was unaware that dual carriageways were 70mph unless otherwise stated.

i would be up for being re-tested

[BikerMooFromMars]

call me a crackpot and put me down but i kinda see where they are coming from with the re-testing. many people on the road pick up bad habits that are potentially dangerous, their driving becomes lazy and they forget the importance of paying attention. plus how many older drivers understand all the new signs that are about. hell my mother was unaware that dual carriageways were 70mph unless otherwise stated.

i would be up for being re-tested

Yeah, re-testing I could see the benefits of - maybe less hardcore tests, and maybe once every 10 years rather than 5? I dunno, I'm hardly a professional

[uk190]

Minority loonies ... gotta love em!

 

minority loonies eh? like the ones who had an interest in politics when they were young.. the same ones who now run the country and european parliament.

its minority loonies that write the laws we are supposed to adhere to. so no, i dont love em.

if the government thought crazy ideas like this had public support and would secure them votes and keep them in power then the speed limits could easily tumble.

throw in a few "donations" from those businesses who would benefit from the implementation of these loonie laws. eg, bosch and compulsary abs on bikes. and the next thing you know we have a new european directive and MAG are organising huge demonstrations to try and put things right.

[techno]

call me a crackpot and put me down but i kinda see where they are coming from with the re-testing. many people on the road pick up bad habits that are potentially dangerous, their driving becomes lazy and they forget the importance of paying attention. plus how many older drivers understand all the new signs that are about. hell my mother was unaware that dual carriageways were 70mph unless otherwise stated.

i would be up for being re-tested

Well you can pay for mine then!

Retesting is a horrible idea, the logistics alone would be a mare!

How about just not giving any Muppet a licence and also high speed training.

I'm with the op these people are crackpots, I've been on the site basically to troll them its about all they deserve!

Wouldn't be a surprise to find a member of here a member of brake.

[BikerMooFromMars]

minority loonies eh? like the ones who had an interest in politics when they were young.. the same ones who now run the country and european parliament.

its minority loonies that write the laws we are supposed to adhere to. so no, i dont love em.

if the government thought crazy ideas like this had public support and would secure them votes and keep them in power then the speed limits could easily tumble.

throw in a few "donations" from those businesses who would benefit from the implementation of these loonie laws. eg, bosch and compulsary abs on bikes. and the next thing you know we have a new european directive and MAG are organising huge demonstrations to try and put things right.

Exactly - so...back with the 'putting them down' idea...gas their houses or rat poison??

Or cut their BRAKEs

[Zod]

Sigh. They have nothing better to do other than preach to the government and convince them to make more changes that would piss the majority of road users off.

[Smokin Joe]

i would be up for being re-tested

 

You wouldn't.

I sent 20 years as an ADI and during that time the DSA conducted around 1.6 million L tests a year with an average pass rate of around 43%. There are around thirty million licence holders in the UK and to re-test every five years would mean an extra 5.75 million tests have to be fitted in - that's without retests. It would cost an absolute fortune to increases the number of highly trained and constantly monitored examiners to meet that demand and a huge rise in the number of test centres.

And what would it achieve?

Absolutely nothing. You know that nobber who sat an inch off your number plate at 85 on the motorway, then undertook, gave you the finger and cut you up when he pulled back in front again? He'd piss the test, because although he drives dangerously and frightens the life out of others his standard of car control and understanding of it is up there with the best. That's how he gets away with it. He just happens to be an aggressive prat who doesn't care about anyone else, but if he had to take a test he'd be sweet as pie for forty five minutes and the examiner would thank him for a lovely drive because the guy has bags of confidence and doesn't get nervous. Then he'd drive off and revert to type.

Case 2 would be the courteous driver who is as safe as houses. His job depends on his car so he's a bag of nerves when he gets to the test centre. It's sh1t or bust, fail and the job goes along with his house and everything else. Remember how you felt when you took yours? Even though it didn't matter? You had nothing to lose but another test fee. Remember the waiting room where your nerves were in shreds? Now put youself in the position where you have EVERYTHING to lose. Just one little fecking mistake and you have to walk home from the test centre because you've lost your licence. Think you could drive like you normally do with that on your shoulders?

Now I could pass the test 99 times out of 100. I know everything the examiners want and I was teaching it for so long I could do it in my sleep. But what about time no 100? I'm on a bad day, I make one misjudgement at a critical moment or the examiner takes a dislike to me (it happens) and it's good night Vienna.

Wouldn't be possible and wouldn't do any good. The reason BRAKE want it is because they're a well known minority of assorted Greens and other nutters who want cars off the road and everyone queuing for buses or cycling'

Be careful what you wish for because it might not be what you want.

[BikerMooFromMars]

i would be up for being re-tested

 

You wouldn't.

I sent 20 years as an ADI and during that time the DSA conducted around 1.6 million L tests a year with an average pass rate of around 43%. There are around thirty million licence holders in the UK and to re-test every five years would mean an extra 5.75 million tests have to be fitted in - that's without retests. It would cost an absolute fortune to increases the number of highly trained and constantly monitored examiners to meet that demand and a huge rise in the number of test centres.

And what would it achieve?

Absolutely nothing. You know that nobber who sat an inch off your number plate at 85 on the motorway, then undertook, gave you the finger and cut you up when he pulled back in front again? He'd piss the test, because although he drives dangerously and frightens the life out of others his standard of car control and understanding of it is up there with the best. That's how he gets away with it. He just happens to be an aggressive prat who doesn't care about anyone else, but if he had to take a test he'd be sweet as pie for forty five minutes and the examiner would thank him for a lovely drive because the guy has bags of confidence and doesn't get nervous. Then he'd drive off and revert to type.

Case 2 would be the courteous driver who is as safe as houses. His job depends on his car so he's a bag of nerves when he gets to the test centre. It's sh1t or bust, fail and the job goes along with his house and everything else. Remember how you felt when you took yours? Even though it didn't matter? You had nothing to lose but another test fee. Remember the waiting room where your nerves were in shreds? Now put youself in the position where you have EVERYTHING to lose. Just one little fecking mistake and you have to walk home from the test centre because you've lost your licence. Think you could drive like you normally do with that on your shoulders?

Now I could pass the test 99 times out of 100. I know everything the examiners want and I was teaching it for so long I could do it in my sleep. But what about time no 100? I'm on a bad day, I make one misjudgement at a critical moment or the examiner takes a dislike to me (it happens) and it's good night Vienna.

Wouldn't be possible and wouldn't do any good. The reason BRAKE want it is because they're a well known minority of assorted Greens and other nutters who want cars off the road and everyone queuing for buses or cycling'

Be careful what you wish for because it might not be what you want.

 

What an IMMENSE reply. Can you put this to the BRAKE campaigners? Seriously! Very good points here, stuff I wouldn't have even contemplated.

[Matt Strange]

The reason BRAKE want it is because they're a well known minority of assorted Greens and other nutters who want cars off the road and everyone queuing for buses or cycling'

 

 

For everyone except for them, because they likely have private parking at the council offices they occupy & company vehicles.

[Grumpy Old Git]

i would be up for being re-tested

 

You wouldn't.

I sent 20 years as an ADI and during that time the DSA conducted around 1.6 million L tests a year with an average pass rate of around 43%. There are around thirty million licence holders in the UK and to re-test every five years would mean an extra 5.75 million tests have to be fitted in - that's without retests. It would cost an absolute fortune to increases the number of highly trained and constantly monitored examiners to meet that demand and a huge rise in the number of test centres.

And what would it achieve?

Absolutely nothing. You know that nobber who sat an inch off your number plate at 85 on the motorway, then undertook, gave you the finger and cut you up when he pulled back in front again? He'd piss the test, because although he drives dangerously and frightens the life out of others his standard of car control and understanding of it is up there with the best. That's how he gets away with it. He just happens to be an aggressive prat who doesn't care about anyone else, but if he had to take a test he'd be sweet as pie for forty five minutes and the examiner would thank him for a lovely drive because the guy has bags of confidence and doesn't get nervous. Then he'd drive off and revert to type.

Case 2 would be the courteous driver who is as safe as houses. His job depends on his car so he's a bag of nerves when he gets to the test centre. It's sh1t or bust, fail and the job goes along with his house and everything else. Remember how you felt when you took yours? Even though it didn't matter? You had nothing to lose but another test fee. Remember the waiting room where your nerves were in shreds? Now put youself in the position where you have EVERYTHING to lose. Just one little fecking mistake and you have to walk home from the test centre because you've lost your licence. Think you could drive like you normally do with that on your shoulders?

Now I could pass the test 99 times out of 100. I know everything the examiners want and I was teaching it for so long I could do it in my sleep. But what about time no 100? I'm on a bad day, I make one misjudgement at a critical moment or the examiner takes a dislike to me (it happens) and it's good night Vienna.

Wouldn't be possible and wouldn't do any good. The reason BRAKE want it is because they're a well known minority of assorted Greens and other nutters who want cars off the road and everyone queuing for buses or cycling'

Be careful what you wish for because it might not be what you want.

 

Spot on!

[essbeebee]

They do retesting in Yankland don't they? I don't think it's safer there than here.

Mind you I'm all for stricter limits in built up areas. Especially for the 4x4 drivers, like the one who almost took me out as I was on the zebra crossing on Saturday. Didn't slow down as I leapt out the way just kept looking ahead and pretended I wasn't there. Oh sorry this isn't NotD thread. Got a bit carried away.

[XmisterIS]

They do retesting in Yankland don't they? I don't think it's safer there than here.

Mind you I'm all for stricter limits in built up areas. Especially for the 4x4 drivers, like the one who almost took me out as I was on the zebra crossing on Saturday. Didn't slow down as I leapt out the way just kept looking ahead and pretended I wasn't there. Oh sorry this isn't NotD thread. Got a bit carried away.

 

The trouble is, you can put as low a limit as you want on built-up areas, and some people will still come tearing through. Most drivers will obey the limit - just not the dangerous ones - and they are the ones who cause accidents. So BRAKE's speed limit fetish is somewhat misguided, to say the least.

[techno]

Most stringent laws are misguided, people who break them now still will, drink drive laws any gun controls, knife laws, drug laws etc on and on.

As for nutters and any groups they may sometimes have a point, but any good they do is always then over shadowed by the fact they take things too far, brake, religious organisations, all these equal rights groups, health and safety, environmentals sometimes have good ideas but have already been labelled nutters because of one dumb idea.

[Fozzie]

Eye test for drivers...

Ah ok, I forgot regular people who might, not knowing, have bad eye sight and walk into the road not seeing the lights changed and a bike/car/bus was already going at speed towards them. I guess that would warrant retesting and more eye tests of the driver...

Another party who can only ever lay fault on the motorist... What a shock

[essbeebee]

Eye tests. Isn't that prejudiced against blind people?