# Proposed NEW Anti-Hoon Laws



## Aussiejeff (23 January 2010)

Well, well, well.

Finally, government authorities are forced to make changes to their existing insipid anti-Hoon laws.



> [size=+1]*Hoons to face car crush law in crash wake*[/size]
> DAVID ROOD STATE POLITICAL REPORTER
> January 23, 2010
> 
> ...



http://www.theage.com.au/national/hoons-to-face-car-crush-law-in-crash-wake-20100122-mqro.html

From my understanding and what I remember with my old timer's memory from the local TV news last night, the new laws are proposed to be:

1st offence - 1 week impoundment

2nd offence - 3 mths? impoundment

3rd offence - SELL vehicle at auction if roadworthy / in standard condition, with proceeds towards roads / safety etc (I believe the offender may have the right to purchase their vehicle back at the full selling price if they wish!) or vehicle WILL BE CRUSHED if it has been illegally modified in any way, unroadworthy or badly damaged. 

No-one who owns a stolen car that is subsequently caught in hoon activity will be affected by these new laws.

In general, I applaud these proposed changes, especially the 3rd offence law. If you are so dumb as to be happy losing your wheels for up to 3mths and even more dumber to be caught after that, so be it. Crush the bugger.

Discuss?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 January 2010)

I don't agree with all these new speed limits and radar guns that pick you up just 1k over the limit.

Hoons deserve to be punished but the ordinary bloke who can drive or ride safely at 160kph in the middle of nowhere gets punished.

Yes punish city hoons, or people who hoon at important crossroads like Moonie, and get in the way of me driving from Townsville to Melbourne in a day.

gg


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (23 January 2010)

Its a start but unfortunately too many of these hoons are being crushed in their cars, along with some innocent passengers.

Why won't the government ban high powered vehicles for those below the age of 25?

Most of those high powered vehicles are made in Australia by Holden and Ford. Would the government really want for the vast majority of young drivers to drive foreign built cars? 

The government would rather young Australians lost their lives than allow the Australian car industry to decline further. Disgusting.


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS said:


> Why won't the government ban high powered vehicles for those below the age of 25?




AFAIK, practically ALL modern vehicles (even so-called "low-powered" 4 cyl or diesel versions) are capable of "breaking traction" from a standing start or exceeding 160kph top speed. As others have noted elsewhere in various other forums, "low-powered" vehicles today are 2-3 times more powerful than "low-powered" vehicles of yesteryears. I think my old man's 1961 vintage 1.4 ltr, 4 cyl Vauxhall "Victor" that I got my full licence with (after a mere 3mths on "L"'s + 12 mths on a single "P"... ) had around 50BHP at the flywheel @4,600rpm. It took FOREVER to get to 60 mph (or around 100kph).  

This observation is confirmed in Road & Track's first full test, conducted in 1958, 







> ...which praised the Victor's interior and luggage space, the easy-shifting gearbox with synchronized first (still something of a novelty), and overall familiar American feel.
> 
> Acceleration was lethargic to say the least; the magazine reporting *0-60 mph taking nearly 26 seconds* and the standing quarter-mile 22.6. At least fuel economy was good for the 2,470-pound test weight at 23-29 miles per U.S. gallon.



 Now THAT is what I call s...l...o...w...   Nevertheless, it WAS fun to drive. You had to thrash it to get anywhere, which is part of the fun of driving a very low powered vehicle - you feel like you are driving hard but in reality, you are going v. slow!!! hehe.  




UBIQUITOUS said:


> Most of those high powered vehicles are made in Australia by Holden and Ford. Would the government really want for the vast majority of young drivers to drive foreign built cars?
> 
> The government would rather young Australians lost their lives than allow the Australian car industry to decline further. Disgusting.




Not so sure about that comment either, mate. I've seen plenty of news reports involving hoons wiping out in Porsches, Jap Turbos etc....

I wouldn't mind seeing licencing requirements toughened up to include basic psychological profiling before "L" plates are issued and a more thorough test before "P" plates are issued. Might weed out a few undesirables to start with. Not that that would stop 'em stealing / borrowing someone elses wheels.

Oh well, there's always the possibility of returning to 1 horsepower vehicles....think of the employment opportunities!! Did I hear some of you protesting "Neigh!"??


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (23 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Not so sure about that comment either, mate. I've seen plenty of news reports involving hoons wiping out in Porsches, Jap Turbos etc....




Thanks for your input. I'm not a 'car person' so don't know my horsepower from my horsesh*t 

However, most of the reports I have read regarding hooning fatalities have been Fords or Holdens. I would be very interested to see some stats on fatalities by vehicle make/model and driver age.


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS said:


> Thanks for your input. I'm not a 'car person' so don't know my horsepower from my horsesh*t
> 
> However, most of the reports I have read regarding hooning fatalities have been Fords or Holdens. I would be very interested to see some stats on fatalities by vehicle make/model and driver age.




Great timing Ubi!!! Here's one from this mornings news rags.. 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...00kmh-over-limit/story-e6frf7jx-1225822749428


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (23 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Great timing Ubi!!! Here's one from this mornings news rags..
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...00kmh-over-limit/story-e6frf7jx-1225822749428




...but look at the 5 'related coverage' links on that page. 1 Falcon, 1 Commodore and 3 unknown vehicles:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...orror-crash-site/story-e6frf7kf-1225820652996

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,25648976-5003500,00.html


Personally, I don't think sub 25 year olds should be allowed to drive anything above a 2litre engined car. It wouldn't be a bad thing for the environment and their finances either.


----------



## MACCA350 (23 January 2010)

There are already power to weight restriction on P platers, problem is many disregard this and in doing so break the law. It's almost impossible for police to know the power to weight ratio of a modified vehicle without testing it, and with many sleepers on the road they'll only find out when it's too late.

You can have the best laws in the world but without the ability to effectively enforce them they're not worth the paper they are written on. In the end it's not the vehicle that controls the driver, people make stupid decisions and no laws can change that.

cheers


----------



## Mr J (23 January 2010)

> I don't agree with all these new speed limits and radar guns that pick you up just 1k over the limit.
> 
> Hoons deserve to be punished but the ordinary bloke who can drive or ride safely at 160kph in the middle of nowhere gets punished.




Come on GG, speeding is speeding, and all conditions are the same .



			
				UBIQUITOUS said:
			
		

> Why won't the government ban high powered vehicles for those below the age of 25?




Many hoons are over 25. The media doesn't exactly provide balanced coverage.



> The government would rather young Australians lost their lives than allow the Australian car industry to decline further. Disgusting.




Banning reasonably-powered Holdens and Fords won't make a difference, I think that shows that you don't understand the issue. You're also proposing to punish the majority because a minority are irresponsible.



> Personally, I don't think sub 25 year olds should be allowed to drive anything above a 2litre engined car.




And what if I told you that a 2L car could be faster than a 6L car? I don't think you should be making comments on car performance without being at least basically informed.

Age and speed aren't the problems. For those who think they are, maybe you should take a look at Germany's statistics.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 January 2010)

Mr J said:


> Come on GG, speeding is speeding, and all conditions are the same .
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Even the NT has speed limits now. 

I can drive an Arnage safer in woopwoop at 160kph than some 18yo or some 50 year old syphilitic bloody financial adviser playing with an iphone can drive a Lancer or a baby Merc in the city at 60kph.

gg


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (23 January 2010)

Mr J said:


> Age and speed aren't the problems. For those who think they are, maybe you should take a look at Germany's statistics.




Here are some stats on collision mortality rates. As a comparison I am looking at Australia, Canada and USA.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/m..._up_tru_or_van_percap-up-truck-van-per-capita

Australia has 2.5x the mortality rate of Canada (similar population densities), but Oz has far better driving conditions (less ice and mountains)

Australia has almost the mortality rate as the USA, but with 10x less population density.

Also note that Germany has 4x the mortality rate of the UK where <100bhp vehicles are the  norm.

I'm sure its due to a combination of factors - high powered vehicles for the young (the US and Canada have moved to smaller, slower vehicles over the years.  Poor driving instruction, deterrents not strong enough. Maybe Bathhurst has a lot to answer for - young want to be Brocky or Lowndes.

Then again, maybe its just the Australian mentality towards death on the roads "She's a good un, I'll be alright"


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 January 2010)

With the exception of vehicles carrying or towing a heavy load, any modern vehicle (car, 4WD, van, ute, truck, bike, even a bus) can easily exceed the speed limit on just about any road if the driver so desires. Even a 4 cyl hatch has literally twice the power output of the first cars made in Australia by Holden, and it weighs less too.

It is technically pretty simple to limit maximum speeds but anyone interested in modifying their car will quickly work out how to by-pass any such limiter just as they modify all sorts of engine controls at present so as to increase power output.

I can't see any really practical way of limiting speeds beyond catching offending motorists after they've already committed the crime.

The only thing that might work is to fit a GPS tracking device to every car and have enough roadside detection stations to catch and fine anyone without such a unit operating. That's a massive political and logistical exercise however, and one that many will point to being an invasion of privacy.


----------



## Mr J (23 January 2010)

> Australia has 2.5x the mortality rate of Canada (similar population densities), but Oz has far better driving conditions (less ice and mountains)




And I'd bet Canada has no lack of "high-powered" vehicles. Suggests to me that power isn't the issue.



> Australia has almost the mortality rate as the USA, but with 10x less population density.




I don't have figures on hand, but I'm pretty sure rural areas have higher rates of fatal accidents than urban areas.



> Also note that Germany has 4x the mortality rate of the UK where <100bhp vehicles are the norm.




That is a little strange, but there's no comparison of fatalities versus distance travelled. Germany is larger with a great road system, so I would guess that they also have a higher rate of travel. London also has, what, a fifth the English population? Lower fatality rate plus heavy use of public transport. It doesn't explain such a large difference, but I'm sure there's far more to it.

I mentioned Germany because to counter the speed and power argument. We can't simply say that these crashes are caused by high speed and "fast" cars. I'd like to see the statistics of Australian crashes - I'd bet most are close to the speed limit and do not involve "fast" cars.



> I'm sure its due to a combination of factors - high powered vehicles for the young (the US and Canada have moved to smaller, slower vehicles over the years.




We've moved smaller too, but not slower, and neither have the US. Smaller does not mean slower, and cars rarely get slower over time.



> Then again, maybe its just the Australian mentality towards death on the roads "She's a good un, I'll be alright"




Blaming people is a good start. Don't blame the cars, don't blame the roads (well, not always).


----------



## stockGURU (23 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS said:


> Why won't the government ban high powered vehicles for those below the age of 25?




Instead of restricting people's freedom, how about having punishments that actually make people think twice about driving like idiots?

For anyone driving more than 100km/hr over the speed limit I'd impose the following punishments:

First offence: Loss of license for a year and a $2,500 fine.
Second offence: Loss of license for 5 years and a $10,000 fine.
Third offence: Loss of licence for life, $25,000 fine, forfeiture of vehicle and 12 months in prison.

The only thing that works are real deterrents. Hoons just laugh at the law otherwise.


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (23 January 2010)

stockGURU said:


> Instead of restricting people's freedom, how about having punishments that actually make people think twice about driving like idiots?
> 
> 
> The only thing that works are real deterrents. Hoons just laugh at the law otherwise.




Restricting people's freedom? Lets not get melodramatic here. A car is a form of transport. THAT'S ALL. It is not a human right to drive fast/powerful vehicles. I've yet to hear of 22 year old's life being negatively impacted because he/she drives a Corolla instead of a XR6.

It's time these playthings were left for those old enough to respect the power which that they wield. I would guess that there are more irresponsible drivers aged 20 than aged 30. Yes some mature/sensible youngsters will miss out, but thats life as laws cannot be made to suit everybody.

How about making comprehensive insurance compulsory on high powered/fast vehicles, and have insurance premiums at $5k per year for drivers below a certain age - not necessarily 25 years old....maybe 22.

I agree with having a stronger deterrent though, just like drink driving. Speeding at >30k above the speed limit results in instant 18month ban.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 January 2010)

stockGURU said:


> Instead of restricting people's freedom, how about having punishments that actually make people think twice about driving like idiots?
> 
> For anyone driving more than 100km/hr over the speed limit I'd impose the following punishments:
> 
> ...




Driving at 200kph is not that much fun, so I think the punishment is way over the top for that one.

I do hope you are talking about city limits.

gg


----------



## gav (23 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> No-one who owns a stolen car that is subsequently caught in hoon activity will be affected by these new laws.




Tell that to this poor Doctor in Perth.  He took his Lamborghini in for a service and the mechanic got done doing 60KM over the limit and the Doctor's car was impounded for 28 days!  And his application to have his car returned was declined!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/07/2787603.htm?site=perth


----------



## Mr J (23 January 2010)

> Restricting people's freedom?




Of course it is. It doesn't seem it means much to you, but it does to others. Would you like to have any of your pleasures restricted because others don't appreciate it?



> A car is a form of transport




For many yes. For many it is a passion. Some people fish, others golf, and some people like cars.



> I've yet to hear of 22 year old's life being negatively impacted because he/she drives a Corolla instead of a XR6.




"She took one look at my car...".



> It's time these playthings were left for those old enough to respect the power which they wield. I would guess that there are more irresponsible drivers aged 20 than aged 30.




One of the groups at highest risk on the road are the 40-50 year olds who buy a motorbike.



> How about making comprehensive insurance compulsory on high powered/fast vehicles, and have insurance premiums at $5k per year for drivers below a certain age - not necessarily 25 years old....maybe 22.




This sounds like the politician's answer of taxing the problem. Yes, let's charge every 22 year old $5k for their pride and joy because a minority give them a bad reputation. I don't see any sense in this.



> I agree with having a stronger deterrent though, just like drink driving. Speeding at >30k above the speed limit results in instant 18month ban.




If we were to apply your suggestion, someone driving across the Sydney Harbour Bridge at 90km/h in the dead of night would lose their licence for 18 months. Someone driving through a school zone at 60 would not (unless there's a specific rule that I'm not aware of). It's senseless to apply rules in this fashion. None of this addresses the cause of the problems, and simply seeks to limit them through punishment. It hasn't shown to be effective yet, so why expect it to be more effective in the future?


----------



## GumbyLearner (23 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Well, well, well.
> 
> Finally, government authorities are forced to make changes to their existing insipid anti-Hoon laws.
> 
> ...




At least the proceeds from the crushed cars (after any outstanding debts are satisfied) go to the victims of crime. That ain't such a bad thing.


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (23 January 2010)

Mr J said:


> Of course it is. It doesn't seem it means much to you, but it does to others. Would you like to have any of your pleasures restricted because others don't appreciate it?




I love to drink and drive. That's my pleasure. How dare the authorities restrict it.




Mr J said:


> For many yes. For many it is a passion. Some people fish, others golf, and some people like cars.




Some have a passion for guns. Can you please provide a link to a news report with a heading such as: '6 teenagers die from fishing too much' ?



Mr J said:


> "She took one look at my car...".



Try using your personality instead of a lump of machinery. It still works on the girls worth having.




Mr J said:


> One of the groups at highest risk on the road are the 40-50 year olds who buy a motorbike.



 '6 teenagers die from crowding onto a motorbike and riding it at speed' ?




Mr J said:


> This sounds like the politician's answer of taxing the problem. Yes, let's charge every 22 year old $5k for their pride and joy because a minority give them a bad reputation. I don't see any sense in this.



F**K pride and joy. This is a serious issue here. Perhaps those 22 year olds will go and find something else to be proud off, like getting their priorities right.




Mr J said:


> If we were to apply your suggestion, someone driving across the Sydney Harbour Bridge at 90km/h in the dead of night would lose their licence for 18 months. Someone driving through a school zone at 60 would not (unless there's a specific rule that I'm not aware of).



Yep. One rule for all. As for school zones, due to the variable speed limits at different times, this is why I am not saying 20kph over the limit.



Mr J said:


> It's senseless to apply rules in this fashion. None of this addresses the cause of the problems, and simply seeks to limit them through punishment. It hasn't shown to be effective yet, so why expect it to be more effective in the future?




The reason that the current deterrents haven't been effective yet is because the punishments aren't tough enough. "Hey, I've got zero points on my license, so I'm allowed to get caught speeding 4 times before I get banned, unless its a double demerit points long weekend. Then I will speed no more than twice"

Youths have got it easy these days. Their bleatings about freedoms are laughable. Its about time they were reminded about the harsh realities of life.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 January 2010)

You guys and gals are a bit uni-dimensional and punitive in your approach.

There are many elements in this argument.

Young men
Testosterone
Young women 
Alcohol
Illicit substances
Fast cars
Slack laws
Peoples "rights"
Lack of responsibility for one's own actions generally in society.
The small numbers killed by hoons
The disproportionate interest in their crimes by the public.
The media's demonisation of youth who make mistakes.
Chance 
Bad luck
Better vehicles than in the past, faster, more responsive in the right hands.

Many of these elements have been around forever and won't change.

I reckon the media make a meal of this and fuel the whole thing.

And the politicians are lickspittles of the media.

gg


----------



## Mr J (23 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS said:


> I love to drink and drive. That's my pleasure. How dare the authorities restrict it.




Drinking and driving is a little different to a 20-something owning a fast car.



> > "She took one look at my car...".
> 
> 
> 
> Try using your personality instead of a lump of machinery. It still works on the girls worth having.




If someone wants to use their car to get a girl, or is happy with a girl that judges a guy by their car, then what is that to you?



> '6 teenagers die from crowding onto a motorbike and riding it at speed' ?




I don't see your point.



> F**K pride and joy. This is a serious issue here. Perhaps those 22 year olds will go and find something else to be proud off, like getting their priorities right.




The "serious issue" - which is a minor issue in the grand scheme of things - is a minority acting irresponsibly. Why do you insist on punishing all youngsters for the actions of a minority? This is about as reasonable as banning males from sitting next to unaccompanied children on planes.



> > If we were to apply your suggestion, someone driving across the Sydney Harbour Bridge at 90km/h in the dead of night would lose their licence for 18 months. Someone driving through a school zone at 60 would not (unless there's a specific rule that I'm not aware of).
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. One rule for all. As for school zones, due to the variable speed limits at different times, this is why I am not saying 20kph over the limit.




Was that "one rule for all" sarcastic, or serious? 30km/h over the limit at a certain place at a certain time is completely different to 30km/h over somewhere else at another time.



> The reason that the current deterrents haven't been effective yet is because the punishments aren't tough enough.




Ask Americans how well the death penalty or 3-strike system have worked. The ultimate punishments are death, being permanently injured, having to live with deaths etc. These punishments don't deter these acts, so what makes you think slighter harsher normal penalties will be more effective? 



> Youths have got it easy these days. Their bleatings about freedoms are laughable. Its about time they were reminded about the harsh realities of life.




Yes, youths have got it easier in a time of far stricter enforcement and harsher penalities. If they only knew what the roads were life when their parents were kids.

Do you simply have an axe to grind?


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 January 2010)

Mr J said:


> "She took one look at my car...".



No offence to those genuinely with a passion for cars, but in my experience I'd say that the vast majority of females attracted to men with fancy cars aren't overly interested in either. There are exceptions of course, but I've seen it all unfold rather a lot of times and it's a very predictable story...


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 January 2010)

Mr J said:


> The ultimate punishments are death, being permanently injured, having to live with deaths etc. These punishments don't deter these acts, so what makes you think slighter harsher normal penalties will be more effective?



It's not the penalty per se, but rather it's the combination of the penalty and the probability of it being applied.

Going to extremes, but if there was a 50% chance that each individual incident of speeding would result in 6 months in prison then I'd be pretty confident that we won't see too many speeding motorists on either side of the prison fence. But drop the probability to 0.0001% and nobody will worry about it, and motorists will speed, despite the penalty being the same.

I'm not advocating 6 months in prison, but it makes the point. Harsh penalties aren't just about the punishment, they are equally about the probability of the offence actually resulting in that punishment being applied.


----------



## Aussiejeff (24 January 2010)

We also have to accept the fact that NO form of penalty will stop underage, unlicenced, "bullet-proof-in-their-own-minds" juvenile idiots either.....



> *THREE teenage girls were seriously injured when a joyride almost ended in tragedy near Wilsons Promontory last night.*
> 
> Just a week after five teenagers died in an alcohol-fuelled, high-speed crash in Mill Park, ambulance and police officers were again faced with the horror of another smash involving several youths.
> 
> ...




http://www.theage.com.au/national/crash-girls-lucky-to-be-alive-20100123-mrv1.html

**Note** - A SMALL car travelling at HIGH SPEED!

I guess we have to accept that since these sorts of "unfortunate accidents" involving juveniles have been going on since the dawn of humankind (plenty of kiddies maimed and killed in eons gone by as a result of stupid or miscreant behaviour involving horses and/or carts) that no level of oversight by "modern" societies will ultimately stop these unfortunate events involving today's youngsters. The "school of hard knocks" will still exact a deadly toll.

So many factors involved too, including an all time record lack of father figures or any form of effective discipline for juveniles within so many broken families, plus whole generations of youngsters growing up in a legal system that says "do whatever you like - we won't really punish you". Can we really expect less?

I agree in principle with these tougher anti-hoon laws, but like others have commented, they should also be applied to moronic repeat drug or drink driving affected drivers - many of whom have ridiculous multiple serious charge records - none of whom have ever lost their beloved wheels for such behaviour, but who continue driving (and crashing) their cars while unlicenced. 

IMO the new proposed laws ARE a very small step in the right direction, but it still shows  today's OZ government's are really only interested in considering politically motivated "kneejerk" & "piecemeal" solutions. 

aj


----------



## Mr J (24 January 2010)

Smurf1976 said:


> in my experience I'd say that the vast majority of females attracted to men with fancy cars aren't overly interested in either.




My comment was a joke, but it's based in fact as well. A lot of girls do care what car a guy drives (for a variety of reasons). I wasn't making any statement on whether this is a good thing or these are the girls guys should be looking to attract .



> I'm not advocating 6 months in prison, but it makes the point. Harsh penalties aren't just about the punishment, they are equally about the probability of the offence actually resulting in that punishment being applied.




Your point is made, but I think the example is too extreme for it to count :. Harsh penalties may have an effect at some point, but how far, and at what cost?


----------



## jbocker (24 January 2010)

Remember as a young kid belting my brother with a plastic sword. The old man took it off me, and I missed it dearly, I had a lot of harmless fun with it most of the time.
I did eventually earn my sword back, again I was invicible. Eventually my brother copped another whack. The sword was destroyed, and I was grounded. From memory I dont recall ever hitting my brother with anything since (maybe he didnt give me reason to too ). Maybe I just grew up to what responsibility meant
So on that (poor) analogy wrt hooning remove the car long enough for it to hurt (3-6 months) second time destroy it (if its a friends car (s)he is driving impound it for 3 months - teach the friend for loaning his/her car to a dkhead). 

As to a stolen car used for hooning (like the poor doctor in Perth, the law has teething problems that will get resolved. Stolen car should be returned promptly although there is some time delay wrt stolen cars being returned anyway.
Good discussion folks on a difficult problem/cure. Somehow the hoon has got to be taught responsibility and you need to keep it simple.


----------



## gav (24 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS - Young people pay far too much for car insurance as it is, just because of the actions of a small minority.  And I don't see how raising insurance premiums is going to stop hoons from being hoons?  If risking their own life (and the lives of others) isn't enough, you think adding a $5k insurance premium will slow them down?  

According to health groups, 5400 Australians die of obesity every year. That's *triple* the deaths on our roads each year!  Does this mean we should ban sweets and fatty foods from our supermarkets, close down McDonald's and KFC?  

Or if you want to impose $5k insurance premiums on young people (punishing many for the faults of a few), how about adding a $5k tax each financial year to anyone deemed "overweight", so they can contribute to the billions spent on obesity related diseases each year. 

Restrictions and fines will not fix the problem at all.  People need to take responsibility for their actions. 

And your _"youths have it easy these days"_ comment is laughable.  All it does is make you sound like a grumpy old fart reminiscing over the "good old days".  The same would have been said about the youth when you were young, and the youth before your generation.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (24 January 2010)

when I was a young man I
Drank too much
Chased girls
Drove too fast
Drove when I was pissed
Got away with it.

Some of my mates didn't.

No amount of legislation will change the behaviour of youth.

All you can do is keep on hammering the messages of doom home, and hope your kids don't do stupid things.

gg


----------



## jbocker (24 January 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> when I was a young man I
> Drank too much
> Chased girls
> Drove too fast
> ...




To be prefectly honest GG I confess to doing the same. But I did get caught, Penalty I got did help change my behaviour, it helped me stop doing most stupid things. 
Today, I believe youth in the main HAVE changed their behaviour, I believe they are more aware and probably more responsible than most of my generation when we were their age. Of course there are hoons who are not the norm the penalty should be aimed squrely at them for the crime they commit. Not penalise the responsible young for having a high powered car, pay higher insurances etc.
Yep agree entirely keep hammering the message at home.


----------



## jbocker (24 January 2010)

gav said:


> ...
> 
> 
> Or if you want to impose $5k insurance premiums on young people (punishing many for the faults of a few), how about adding a $5k tax each financial year to anyone deemed "overweight", so they can contribute to the billions spent on obesity related diseases each year.
> ...


----------



## 1q2w3e4r (24 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS said:


> Restricting people's freedom? Lets not get melodramatic here. A car is a form of transport. THAT'S ALL. It is not a human right to drive fast/powerful vehicles. I've yet to hear of 22 year old's life being negatively impacted because he/she drives a Corolla instead of a XR6.
> 
> It's time these playthings were left for those old enough to respect the power which that they wield. I would guess that there are more irresponsible drivers aged 20 than aged 30. Yes some mature/sensible youngsters will miss out, but thats life as laws cannot be made to suit everybody.
> 
> ...




That's a simple minded view, by that reasoning a house is simply a means of shelter.  Doesn't account for the fact that some live in 1 bedroom studios and others in waterfront houses on Sydney Harbour.  

Insurance premiums are high for younger drivers, especially those with "performance cars".

Fact is, speeding doesn't kill, its the impact when you hit something that does.  A corolla is just as capable of doing 150 km/h as a sports car.  

Driver education is what is severely lacking, restricting cars or access to "high performance" cars isn't a solution.  Its about educating people about the limits of vehicles in a controlled environment so they don't experience it on the road.  If you want to drive fast, go to a race track or out to WSID or one of the other drag strips.  

Power of the vehicles isn't the problem, its the education of drivers and the simplicity of obtaining a licence that is the issue.


----------



## Aussiejeff (25 January 2010)

1q2w3e4r said:


> Fact is, speeding doesn't kill, its the impact when you hit something that does.  A corolla is just as capable of doing 150 km/h as a sports car.




True - to the extent that a speed of 150kph IS achievable by both a sports sedan and a lowly Corolla, except that standard Corolla safety features (suspension, brakes, harnesses, seats, chassis strength, tyres etc, etc) are NOWHERE near as capable of safely stopping or swerving that car in "an emergency" at those speeds, nor offering the occupants a reasonable chance to survive an impact at that speed compared to, say, a standard optioned BMW M3, Porsche or Merc sports sedan etc!! For example, this from Merc's current 2010 E-Class sports sedan specs make enlighteniong reading - 



> * Automatic emergency braking when a collision is imminent.*
> 
> The well-proven, radar based assistance systems from the S-Class are now also optionally available to E-Class customers. A further development of the long-range radar sensor now has a range of 200 metres (previously 150 metres), and is able to monitor the mid-distance so that dynamic events such as a vehicle ahead suddenly pulling out to overtake can be detected even more effectively. The two wide-angle short-range radar sensors, which have a range of around 30 metres, continue to be included in the system.
> 
> ...



http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cach...m+speed+crashes+2010&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

BMW, Audi and other high spec manufacturers are also moving slowly towards this level of inbuilt safety, so, at least SOME manufacturers are making a bit of progress, but generally for the top dollar, non-mainstream models. 

Speaking of high speed impacts, have you noticed how many race drivers (F1, Rally, Drag etc) walk away with minor injuries from truly horrendous high speed crashes (many over 200+kph) that TOTALLY and UTTERLY destroy the vehicle - except for one very important piece - the driver/passenger compartment. They generally have NO AIRBAGS fitted!

Surely, the scientific proof beyond any reasonable doubt that big improvements in recent years of reducing driver/passenger compartment crushing in all these thousands of high speed, survivable motorsport crashes is all legislators need to take the next BIG step forward in motor vehicle crash safety for the general population? Clearly, IMO the best way to increase crash survivability under almost ANY circumstance for the mainstream population is for ALL car manufacturers to be FORCED BY LEGISLATION if necessary to significantly beef up passenger compartment crash survivability (much better deformation resistance using beefier roll cage technology etc, better driver/passenger seats and harnesses etc)? 

Sure, this WILL add extra weight and cost, but SO WHAT? Most other options that authorities are looking at are "soft" or "cheap" options - and won't ultimately provide anywhere near the beneficial results of significantly beefing up passenger compartment crash strength and survivability in ALL new cars.




1q2w3e4r said:


> Driver education is what is severely lacking, restricting cars or access to "high performance" cars isn't a solution.  Its about educating people about the limits of vehicles in a controlled environment so they don't experience it on the road. * If you want to drive fast, go to a race track or out to WSID or one of the other drag strips.*




Great idea! Totally agree there. Exactly what I did for myself and son shortly after he got his "P's in Perth in 1986. I signed us both up to Wanneroo Sporting Car Club, after which we undertook their basic race driver course and then regularly attended "track days" at Barbagallo Raceway where members could race their street cars alongside the best race machinery in the West at the time (it's a brilliant driver's track, BTW). We swapped drives in his (my old) "modified sports sedan" (a Datsun Skyline with de-tuned 280Z overbore 3.0ltr race motor, race suspension & beefed up brakes - entirely road legal at the time!) and a modified Mazda 626 1.8ltr (again "race" suspension and beefed up brakes). We had some of the best fun ever driving fast "on the edge" with an array of local machinery on the track at the same time, including the likes of club stalwart Brian Smith (Ricciardello Alfa sports sedan). We had some amazing friendly "battles" with the HQ Racing boys - they could outbrake our Skyline (but not the Mazda) at the end of the two straights since they had race slicks to our street rubber-shod cars - but the Skyline could just out-accelerate them and get back past in the straights. 

I was proud as punch to see how my son progressed from spinning like a top every lap when he first started driving at track days, to only being 1/2 a sec slower than his old man in that beast, when we left the club in 1994. I have no doubt whatsoever that we both became technically much better drivers for the experience. I still find myself subconsciously looking for "bail-out" areas wherever I drive, in case of some mechanical failure or some idiot launching themselves at me! When you are driving at the limit on a racetrack with high-powered 300kph "beasts" like Smithy blasting past, your self-preservation reflexes certainly turn up a notch!  

After those track days, we would be exhausted from the extra G loads and subsequently carefully drive the 50 or so km back to Kelmscott without exceeding the limit - while noting how many other idiots were racing each other in heavy traffic. That is the first thing that hits you when you get back into the traffic on public roads. You feel much less safe than the racetrack you just left, where you had been hitting 200+kph and on the edge, door to door!!  




1q2w3e4r said:


> Power of the vehicles isn't the problem, its the education of drivers and the simplicity of obtaining a licence that is the issue.




Too true. I guess what I just waffled on about goes someway to supporting that view too. Which brings this thought to mind - instead of KRudd 'N Co. blowing $AUBillions on empty halls for every school in the land, it may have been better to allocate at least half to building a large number of Federal School Driving Education Centres across the nation? You know, school based centres that would have a small fleet of cars and qualified instructors available to give advanced driver training to 15-16 year olds BEFORE they even get their "P"'s? There are plenty of race tracks that could be used for student track days to give the real budding "petrol heads" the opportunity to impress their peers (more likely a touch of humble pie!) and a taste of the "real thing" that could even lead to motor sport careers if such a national program was linked to motorsport organisations around the country? Who knows, we might even get a new F1 Champ out of it? 

Yeah, I know - Pie In The Sky And Pigs Might Fly... 

Anyway, my further


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (25 January 2010)

All cars here should have delimeters set to 110kph. Okay, it won't stop lower speed deaths, but its a start.


----------



## explod (25 January 2010)

1q2w3e4r said:


> Driver education is what is severely lacking, restricting cars or access to "high performance" cars isn't a solution.  Its about educating people about the limits of vehicles in a controlled environment so they don't experience it on the road.  If you want to drive fast, go to a race track or out to WSID or one of the other drag strips.
> 
> Power of the vehicles isn't the problem, its the education of drivers and the simplicity of obtaining a licence that is the issue.




Absolutely,  *EDUCATION*  and the elimination of hoons through breeding/education

Why is a hoon a hoon?    lack of education, poor family background.  Some come from good backgrounds but family too busy to bring the child (becomeshoon) up properly.   My kids were too busy playing sport and involved in other social activities to even think about hooning.

The problems of youth will never be solved by punitive action.


----------



## jbocker (25 January 2010)

Great Post Aussiejeff, particularly to read about Wanneroo track and the commendable experiences with your son. Interested to know if the desire to 'push it harder' on the local streets is ever a temptation with yourself or your son. Please be honest it is probably one of the 'concerns' that it might give a young bloke too much confidence - on the streets where he is not driving on ideal roads and with a lot of other hazards close by (eg houses, people, cross roads and inexperience drivers.) I appreciate the comments of your trip home, I am more thinking after a few weeks or so. Would it be different if someone only went to the track once or twice?

I have never really been interested in high powered cars, do you know what is on offer for those who drive the standard family car etc. I live in Perth too.

Finally, thanks for the post, you have change my perception on a couple of points.
cheers


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS said:


> All cars here should have delimeters set to 110kph. Okay, it won't stop lower speed deaths, but its a start.




so what happens if you want to pass some old geezer doing 95kph on a busy 2 lane road.??

gg


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (25 January 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> so what happens if you want to pass some old geezer doing 95kph on a busy 2 lane road.??
> 
> gg




Is it okay to break the speed limit while overtaking?


----------



## Happy (25 January 2010)

95 k on the road with 100 k speed limit is OK.

I just cannot believe everybody so bent on doing at least speed limit only because it is legal.

No margin of safety for slight slope, accuracy of equipment, wind and probably few more factors contributing to our actual speed.


----------



## gav (25 January 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> so what happens if you want to pass some old geezer doing 95kph on a busy 2 lane road.??
> 
> gg




It means you'll be stuck behind Ubiquitous for the next 30km


----------



## Surly (25 January 2010)

I had always believed the tenets of law required them to be fair and just.

A law with a punishment based on the vehicle you happen to be in at the time of commiting a crime is neither.

I do not believe any state needs "Hoon Laws" as there are already traffic offences to deal with what is happening. It is another example of nanny state pandering rather than actually putting police on the roads or education of drivers or some REAL attempt at fixing the problem.

If we insist on needing these knee jerk laws the penalties need to be the same for every person. A fine or prison sentence or licence suspension or whatever but the same for every person.

cheers
Surly


----------



## Happy (25 January 2010)

No big disagreement from me here, but I would like repeat offenders be given penalty bonus something like 100% more penalty every time they re-offend.

Driving without license, jail, to make sure they do not drive while disqualified.

Reckless driver causing death should be treated like murderer.

Should do for starters.


----------



## Aussiejeff (25 January 2010)

jbocker said:


> Great Post Aussiejeff, particularly to read about Wanneroo track and the commendable experiences with your son. Interested to know if the desire to 'push it harder' on the local streets is ever a temptation with yourself or your son. Please be honest it is probably one of the 'concerns' that it might give a young bloke too much confidence - on the streets where he is not driving on ideal roads and with a lot of other hazards close by (eg houses, people, cross roads and inexperience drivers.) I appreciate the comments of your trip home, I am more thinking after a few weeks or so. Would it be different if someone only went to the track once or twice?




Hi jbocker. Actually, it would have defeated the whole purpose of our joining the Club in the first place if we had driven straight out on the roads and continued "racing"! Though I couldn't speak for my son, coz I never followed him around late at night into his 17-19 year old phase, though he tells me he only "put the foot down" a couple of times after joining the club and was generally happy to wait for a tuning day to get his relatively SAFE fun. For myself, it was always enough to know another track day (or "tuning day") wasn't too far away. I just had a look at 2009 WA Sporting Car Club calendar and they had 14 "Private Practice Tuning Days" at Barbagallo between Jan & June 2009 - plenty to satisfy any latent urges! 

However, I guess the less time somebody spent at tuning days, the more they MIGHT be tempted to put the foot down in the meantime. We couldn't wait for each tuning day to come, though the wallet got a bit hot sometimes!




jbocker said:


> I have never really been interested in high powered cars, do you know what is on offer for those who drive the standard family car etc. I live in Perth too.
> 
> Finally, thanks for the post, you have change my perception on a couple of points.
> cheers




Actually, there were plenty of members who would throw a bit of air into the family station wagon's tyres and take it for some laps too! All you needed then (not sure what it is now)  is to complete a track day course (basic track courtesy, how to read the flag marshalls etc, track safety, basic track driving with an instructor to see if you can reasonably handle a car), sign an idemnity form (you are on your own if you get injured) and aren't too fussed about your car insurance if you should have a big bingle on track. Minor bingles aren't so bad as you can drive out of the circuit before calling the RAC! You would need to check with them to see what is on offer for yourself.    http://www.wascc.com.au/

Cheers,


aj


----------



## 1q2w3e4r (25 January 2010)

UBIQUITOUS said:


> All cars here should have delimeters set to 110kph. Okay, it won't stop lower speed deaths, but its a start.




Yes.  That heavy handed, broad stroke brush approach will defiantnly lower the road toll.  

It has nothing to do with speed, rather driver education.  Also, since my car is capable of 300 km/h and thus part of the design process is inherently built into it to operate at that speed, how is it justifiable to "restrict it" and have a "limiter." (not delimiter) set to it?  Because a bunch of people aren't capable of operating a motor vehicle in either the correct manner or environment?  Limit it to travel at the same speed as grandma's 1970 toyota?  Doesn't matter that it probably brakes from 150 kph in less distance than gradma's said toyota does from 100. 

Your quite obviously not into cars or motor sport, thats entirely fine.  From someone who is however that type of approach doesn't solve anything, especially by way of reducing the road toll.  You still get killed when you hit a stationary object when travelling at 110 kph as opposed to 150.

I'd hazard a pretty safe guess I'm in the same camp as AussieJeff, into cars, and motorsport, the Mrs and I drive Euro cars due to the safety and performance aspects and I use them as they are capable of on the race track or at the drag strip.  The fastest car I've had and since sold was a modified GTR.  It clocked 3.3 seconds to 100 kph and a 96-210km/h time of 7.1 seconds on the way to an 11.0@133 mph (214 km/h) pass in it at Western Sydney International Dragway.    

Generally its joe public who gets nabbed speeding or doing something stupid, regardless of how powerful the car is, not the guy or girl who goes out to club events and track days.  They don't have any need to drive recklessly or at high speed on the public roads as they have an outlet for it.  Most if not all have also done multiple forms of driver training and education.  

Ask someone how far it takes to stop a car from 60 km/h in meters.  Then ask them how far it takes to stop from 120 km/h.  I can guarantee you it doesn't matter if they drive a corolla, XR6, family 4WD or super car.  Only those that have been out and had driver training and used their cars to test their limits in a controlled environment will answer that one correctly.


----------



## jbocker (25 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Hi jbocker. Actually, it would have defeated the whole purpose of our joining the Club in the first place if we had driven straight out on the roads and continued "racing"! Though I couldn't speak for my son, coz I never followed him around late at night into his 17-19 year old phase, though he tells me he only "put the foot down" a couple of times after joining the club and was generally happy to wait for a tuning day to get his relatively SAFE fun. For myself, it was always enough to know another track day (or "tuning day") wasn't too far away. I just had a look at 2009 WA Sporting Car Club calendar and they had 14 "Private Practice Tuning Days" at Barbagallo between Jan & June 2009 - plenty to satisfy any latent urges!
> 
> However, I guess the less time somebody spent at tuning days, the more they MIGHT be tempted to put the foot down in the meantime. We couldn't wait for each tuning day to come, though the wallet got a bit hot sometimes!
> 
> ...




Thanks Aussiejeff. I am going to make a few enquiries, I have a son and a couple of girls with lads. Might organise a day out. They are all level headed but you can never learn enough. For most of us who drive, driving is probably the most life threatening thing we do.
I agree with your opening post, but crush the car on the second offence.
 That fits in with the 'have it now' lifestyle we live in nowadays, so conversely we should have "lose it now" too... (Im jesting a little on that point, folks). *But I dont see the need to let idiots have 3 chances to wipe out our loved ones or anyone else.*


----------



## Aussiejeff (25 January 2010)

jbocker said:


> Thanks Aussiejeff. I am going to make a few enquiries, I have a son and a couple of girls with lads. Might organise a day out. They are all level headed but you can never learn enough. For most of us who drive, driving is probably the most life threatening thing we do.
> I agree with your opening post, but crush the car on the second offence.
> That fits in with the 'have it now' lifestyle we live in nowadays, so conversely we should have "lose it now" too... (Im jesting a little on that point, folks). *But I dont see the need to let idiots have 3 chances to wipe out our loved ones or anyone else.*




Hey, good luck with the enquiries and "bringing up" juniors! 

Here's a teaser or two..


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 January 2010)

Just slow down a minute all you guys with your laws, classes, etc. etc.

You'll turn Australia in to something like Pommyland where every person is filmed about 60 times a day by all those friggin CTV cameras, and people ignore stupid speed limits and spend 16 hours a day on the slops beating each other up..

The people attending these classes you propose and training will by and large come from functional families.

Many of the prangs are by unfortunates with dysfunctional backgrounds, drug problems. 

gg


----------



## Aussiejeff (25 January 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> *Just slow down a minute all you guys with your laws, classes, etc. etc.*
> 
> You'll turn Australia in to something like Pommyland where every person is filmed about 60 times a day by all those friggin CTV cameras, and people ignore stupid speed limits and spend 16 hours a day on the slops beating each other up..
> 
> ...




LOL

Are you suggesting then gg that all that advanced theory schooling and training that say, private pilots HAVE to go through to be given the privilege of flying is really a waste of time? Maybe pilot licences then should be handed out with the same gay abandon that driver licences are? Hmm.

We all know that since the dawn of time younguns have got themselves into fatal situations that no laws or rules will ever stop. But then again, totally lawless societies have their own peculiar sets of problems!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> LOL
> 
> Are you suggesting then gg that all that advanced theory schooling and training that say, private pilots HAVE to go through to be given the privilege of flying is really a waste of time? Maybe pilot licences then should be handed out with the same gay abandon that driver licences are? Hmm.
> 
> We all know that since the dawn of time younguns have got themselves into fatal situations that no laws or rules will ever stop. But then again, totally lawless societies have their own peculiar sets of problems!




There is absolutely no evidence that advanced driver training decreases crashes, mortality or injury amongst drivers.

The idea that it does is a myth propagated by driving schools, trainers, insurance companies and the police.

Have a look at this study.

http://www.cdta.com.au/training_does_not_prevent_crash.php



> Training Doesn’t Prevent Crashes
> 
> It might seem like an incredible & illogical statement, but it’s true, traditional driver training does not prevent crashes. At the Our Approach page of this web site we discussed the difference between training & education. Certainly, a driver must have a basic amount knowledge & skill to operate the vehicle & pass a license test. These basic requirements are relatively easy to achieve, and most people who are able to graduate become a licensed driver without too much trouble.
> 
> ...




If you can find a study that proves otherwise please post it.

gg


----------



## GumbyLearner (25 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Hey, good luck with the enquiries and "bringing up" juniors!
> 
> Here's a teaser or two..




Great pics AJ.


----------



## jbocker (26 January 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Just slow down a minute all you guys with your laws, classes, etc. etc.
> 
> You'll turn Australia in to something like Pommyland where every person is filmed about 60 times a day by all those friggin CTV cameras, and people ignore stupid speed limits and spend 16 hours a day on the slops beating each other up..
> 
> ...




You make good points on dysfunctional/ functional families GG. Oh dear. Still like the idea of crushing the car. Should we add the driver or let them continue to do it themselves.


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 January 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> There is absolutely no evidence that advanced driver training decreases crashes, mortality or injury amongst drivers.
> 
> The idea that it does is a myth propagated by driving schools, trainers, insurance companies and the police.
> 
> ...





From that very article gg - 



> People do learn on driver training courses. *Generally speaking, driving skills do improve, so to does knowledge.* Sadly however, the likelihood of crashing after training does not improve. If you are serious about road safety, you cannot ignore the evidence. The challenge is to identify opportunities for change.
> 
> *Although the research doesn’t inspire confidence in the driver training process, it doesn’t say training can’t work. Simply that previous attempts, particularly those aimed at enhancing driver skill, haven’t worked*. The exciting thing about research is that it helps objectively determine where we, as trainers, have failed. This knowledge helps us identify opportunities for the future.
> 
> There is a significant body of evidence that suggests that driver training makes people think more optimistically about their personal chances of crashing. If a person believes that they will be better off than other drivers, they may put less effort into staying safe. This notion of “driver optimism” helps explain why some drivers actually crash more after training, or why other positive effects are negated.




The main thrust of that website & articles is that skill based training alone won't change driving attitudes. I agree. IMO driver psychology also needs a damn good going over to supplement skill training alone for any appreciable effect to ensue. Many of those studies were in the 1980's-1990's. Car design and crash rates have come right down since then, so I'll have to see what up to date studies might be around regarding any "holistic" driver training approaches.

Thx for the link.

aj


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 January 2010)

Here's a link to Murcott's Driver Training website FAQ's that contains some interesting observations. 

http://www.murcotts.com.au/murcotts/home/aboutus/faqs.sok


aj


----------



## MACCA350 (26 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> Here's a link to Murcott's Driver Training website FAQ's that contains some interesting observations.
> 
> http://www.murcotts.com.au/murcotts/home/aboutus/faqs.sok
> 
> ...



I find it amusing that throughout that spiel they didn't once answer the question "Does Driver Training Work?" with a simple, concise and definitive YES. 


..........but then maybe I'm just cynical

cheers


----------



## Mr J (27 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:


> From that very article gg -
> 
> 
> 
> The main thrust of that website & articles is that skill based training alone won't change driving attitudes. I agree. IMO driver psychology also needs a damn good going over to supplement skill training alone for any appreciable effect to ensuej




It's partly psychological (people tend to become overly territorial), but it's mostly a lack of awareness and caution. They play a far greater role in safety on the roads than what advanced driver training would teach. How many accidents are caused by someone exceeding their skill, as opposed to running reds, not checking blindspots, unsafe stopping, tailgating, dangerous turns etc? Most accidents aren't due to driver skill, but driver error (although exceeding skill would also be an error ).


----------



## Aussiejeff (27 January 2010)

Mr J said:


> It's partly psychological (people tend to become overly territorial), but it's mostly *a lack of awareness and caution*. They play a far greater role in safety on the roads than what advanced driver training would teach.




Well, I would argue that to have a "lack of awareness and caution" when driving IS a state of mind issue! Wouldn't you think a soldier who has a tendency to wander onto battlefields with "a lack of awareness and caution" had some sort of psychological flaw requiring urgent attention? Driving on the roads is no different. It IS a battlefield out there and not enough people register that as a fact.  



Mr J said:


> How many accidents are caused by someone exceeding their skill, as opposed to running reds, not checking blindspots, unsafe stopping, tailgating, dangerous turns etc? Most accidents aren't due to driver skill, but driver error (although exceeding skill would also be an error ).




Again, if someone has a predeliction for unsafe practices such as all those you mention (unsafe stopping, tailgating, running reds etc, etc) I would suggest they have a serious psychological flaw that needs to be urgently addressed! The trouble is, no-one wants to admit that psychological profiles might just have some bearing on all of this idiot behaviour. It's just too non-PC!

Honestly, why can't a more holistic approach to driver licencing be trialled, where not only pre-licencing psychological assessment (to identify those who are initially incapable of handling stressful traffic situations) and subsequent "pre-P's" driver stress & behavioural training is part of the education system but driver skill training is also incorporated as learners progress in their attitude & behavioural training? 

Most of the reports I have seen on skill based training alone show that within 3 years of completing a single short course of advanced driver training, most young drivers who attend are no better in crashes or offences than non-attendees. Well, with no follow-up training or re-assessment in subsequent years as these youngsters mature psychologically, I am totally unsurprised by those findings. Once more I'll return to the private pilot scenario. You have to have periodic skills and health re-assessments to continue holding a licence. But, for motorists, that sort of monitoring only kicks in when you have turned  into an Olde Fart! For eg here is the NSW regs:



> For all licence holders, annual medical reviews are required from 75 years of age. This is to ensure that older drivers are medically fit and are able to drive competently and safely.
> 
> For car drivers and motocycle riders, from the age of 85 a number of licence options exist. Older drivers and riders can opt to have a modified licence or to undertake an assessment every two years from the age of 85 (ie 85, 87, 91 etc) to hold an unrestricted licence.
> 
> Heavy vehicle drivers in licence classes LR, MR, HR and HC will need to undertake annual driving assessments from 80 years of age.




Good grief. No wonder so many truckies are wiping themselves and others out. They are the road equivalent of air cargo pilots and essentially don't have mandatory periodic testing or assessment during their working lives until they reach 80 years of age? 

Could you imagine our airline system where pilots never got re-assessed after the initial issue of their licence until THEY reached 75-85 years of age?? 

Surely if they are so concerned about the road toll for the under 25's, authorities could require similar "stricter" conditions be applied on younger drivers AFTER they get their "P's", up to the age of say, 26 - perhaps a requirement to complete a sanctioned refresher course in road rules/driver behaviour/driver skills every two years as well as pass a basic medical? Then perhaps relax the assessments to every 5 years after that for all drivers up to age 75? 

Nah. Too hard. May as well let the "Wild West" mentality rule.

Care for a donut or two?


----------



## jbocker (27 January 2010)

Well I am appreciating the level of discussion on this thread, well done to to all contributors. A lot of merit is what people have said.

Aussiejeff, looked up the site supplied, thanks, and can see that it is expensive to hire the track. Considering GGs comments, "dysfunctional" families may struggle to organise or pay for such lessons, particularly on an ongoing basis. So your comments on assessments early in a drivers learning and ongoing tests are good points. These would be better organised being govt funded, some of which could be rechannelled from existing funding, giving real education rather than advertising, from fines that are collected etc.

From here, after letting this discussion run a few more days, I am off to chat to a couple of Pollies, armed with this site/thread.


----------



## Aussiejeff (27 January 2010)

jbocker said:


> From here, after letting this discussion run a few more days, I am off to chat to a couple of Pollies, *armed with this site/thread.*




Don't forget to pack your brickbat... 

Good luck!

aj


----------



## Boggo (27 January 2010)

The concept of just handing out licences for life with minimum initial and no recurrent testing or training just does not work... simple.

Yesterday in SA...

_January 26, 2010 11:40pm

FOUR people have been killed on the state's roads, including three young men from Mt Compass who died in a horror crash near the town last night.

The Australia Day deaths put SA on track for the worst road toll in a decade.

*At 8.45pm  three male youths from Mt Compass - 17, 18 and 18 - were killed *and a fourth, 17, from Hope Forest, sustained minor injuries when their car ploughed into a tree on Wood Cone Rd, about 600m from Victor Harbor Rd, just south of Mount Compass.

Three hours earlier, a woman, 50, from Murray Bridge, suffered serious head injuries in a car rollover on the Old Princes Hwy, near Monarto.

She was airlifted to the Royal Adelaide Hospital but died a short time later.

The death toll for the year now stands at 19 and includes the death on Monday of a motorcyclist, 46, in Summertown.

If the start to 2010 continues, with 19 deaths per month for the rest of the year, the road toll will climb to 228._


----------



## 1q2w3e4r (27 January 2010)

AAMI offer free driver training if you or a family member hold a policy with them.  They must think there is something to it then eh?


----------



## MACCA350 (27 January 2010)

jbocker said:


> I am off to chat to a couple of Pollies, armed with this site/thread.



While your at it you can let them know that we see through their excuse for the change from 10% to 3km tolerance for speed traps. If they truly wanted to lower the speed of drivers to save lives they would have simply drop the limits(ie from 110km to 100km). Instead what they did was to lower the tolerance to a level that is below the accuracy of most vehicles odometer tolerance, not to mention within the usual variations in cruise control fluctuations over undulating roads. The effect of this is that more time is spent looking at the odometer and hence less time watching the road.

If they had have simply dropped the speed limit and kept the tolerance level at 10% the net effect would be a real reduction in speed with a realistic tolerance level with people spending more time(than currently) watching the road...........but to their detriment there would be no real increase in revenue due to ridiculously low tolerance levels.

I'm not saying I'd like to see a further reduction in speed limits, I believe such a move would not have the effect of lowering the number of deaths and serious injury on the roads. 

Simply put the change does not stop those who constantly exceed the speed limit by 20,30,40+km who endanger others and cause the most serious injury and loss of life..........all it does is increase revenue at the expense of those who who may be over by between 3km and 10%, which virtually every good driver does due to undulating roads, accelerator control fluctuations and even while using cruise control.

We're not idiots, we see straight through their decision. They had two options to reduce marginal speeding, they chose the option that would net them higher revenue.

cheers


----------



## Aussiejeff (27 January 2010)

More V. interesting up-to-date stuff from the boffins....

http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/

I particularly noted this VERY enlightening graph.... just look at the ENORMOUS leap in crashes from the moment young'uns are released from the responsible care of a mentor/instructor onto the open road with their "P" plates. Doesn't that speak volumes that something is seriously wrong with the licencing system? The graph is from the Monash research article titled "Vehicle safety and young drivers Stages 2 and 3: Analysis of young driver crash types and vehicle choice optimisation".


----------



## Mr J (27 January 2010)

Aussiejeff said:
			
		

> Well, I would argue that to have a "lack of awareness and caution" when driving IS a state of mind issue!




You're right, place someone on a motorbike and chances are they will become far more aware of their surroundings . And yes, a biker knows it's a battlefield - any ride survived is a victory.



> onestly, why can't a more holistic approach to driver licencing be trialled




$$$$$, as well as admitting problems that people may not want out in the open. Who wants to be told they're an unsafe driver? Most people are.

If we really want to improve road skill, make everyone ride a motorbike or scooter for a couple of years. Of course the road toll will rise, so despite the significant increase in skill it would be labelled a disaster .



> just look at the ENORMOUS leap in crashes from the moment young'uns are released from the responsible care of a mentor/instructor onto the open road with their "P" plates. *Doesn't that speak volumes that something is seriously wrong with the licencing system?*




No. All it suggests is that new drivers, when unsupervised, are more likely to crash, and that should be expected. I don't see any problem with the licencing system, just the training. Most here got their licences under more favourable conditions than those under the current system.


----------



## Aussiejeff (27 January 2010)

Just popped this in to remind us of how "bad" things really are compared to the past....

The rate of reduction of fatalities has diminished over the past few years, which I think is why the authorities are getting a bit more vocal in the media. I wonder how many "horse & cart" fatalities were recorded in that horrendous 1926 Per 10,000 Registered Vehicles figure (approx. 24 compared to today less than 2)?


----------



## Mr J (27 January 2010)

Might be because everyone is watching their speedo instead of the road :.


----------



## jbocker (27 January 2010)

Daughter is coming off her Ls in about a week. There has been on 25 hours supervised driving requirement which is now required in WA after passing the road test. I think it has been a good thing. She now has to some computer test (apologies for lack of detail) and then she is free to drive.

But I will show her that graph Aussiejeff and talk about her with her other siblings who did have bingles in their first years (thankfully minor). I did take those bingles as blessings in disguise because it scared the crappola out of both of them.

Agree with you Macca (and others making the same comment) that nit picking the  1-5 km over the limit in general road conditions only makes us cynical of the purpose,  agree with it in 40km school zones though.


----------



## Happy (28 January 2010)

To have more money you not necessarily have to get more, you can more wisely spend what you’ve got and that applies to large spender like our Government.


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 May 2011)

Coming soon to a Vic Road near you.... (from 1 Jul)



> *Vic hoon drivers to lose cars for 30 days
> 
> AAP
> 
> ...



http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...-to-lose-cars-for-30-days-20110526-1f5ff.html

Note also ..



> The same impoundment provisions *will now apply to people who overload cars*, following a case where a learner driver was found with nine teenage passengers crammed into his car in Mornington last month.




and most significantly of all,



> Under the legislation introduced to parliament on Wednesday night, *the impoundment and immobilisation laws have also been broadened to apply to incidents such as repeat offences of unlicensed driving, drink driving and drug driving.*




I've gotten sick of hearing about all these repeat drink drive & unlicensed offenders with records as long as their arms. They almost never lost their vehicles long term. Things might change at last..... 

One thing I'm curious about - where are they gonna store the thousands of cars that will pile up through all this? LOL.


----------



## sptrawler (26 May 2011)

With the rate of change at the moment, both enviromentally and financially, I think this will become self resolving.
I love cars and bikes and before my reflexes slowed, it was the faster the better.
I would not be buying a high performance petrol guzzling car, be it a phase3 xy or a hk327, the push is on to remove ourselves from middle east oil dependence.
As America disengages itself from oil reliance, they will be working frantically on how to charge users for filling their electric vehicle.
One would think they will use a weird voltage for recharging, that only government certified distributers can use.LOL.
But no matter what happens electric vehicles will stop hooning, it will probably download overnight to the police department if you have done anything wrong.


----------



## Glen48 (26 May 2011)

Damn I thought this was going to be a post about elected Government, Government  officers and free loaders.

GG no doubt you had a stubbie after the drive or maybe before,  a Darwin stubbie does quench a thirst.
 I knew a fellow who had b8 palcon mit poor on de ploor and his name was Electric Motor a fine driver in NT with a packet of rotmans pilters he got about 1 plagon to 100 k's.

The feds will increase traffic fines to raise income and innocent driver's will be trapped.


----------



## Glen48 (26 May 2011)

http://lewrockwell.com/spl3/black-boxes-for-cars.html

 Bet not many knew they were paying for this on their new car.


----------



## Tightwad (27 May 2011)

We have a similar law here... big press release to show the first crushed car... it was something like an old magna, probably only worth the scrap value.  

I have some cyclist friends who don't hesitate to report hoons who throw missiles etc.  The cops turn up and they are dealt with.. I've heard of a couple of cases where they've taken an interest in their horticultural pursuits.


----------



## Glen48 (27 May 2011)

You can take a horticultural but you can't make her think.


----------



## Ruby (27 May 2011)

Glen48 said:


> The feds will increase traffic fines to raise income and innocent driver's will be trapped.




Glen, if drivers are fined, it is because they have broken a traffic law, therefore they are not innocent.


----------



## Ruby (27 May 2011)

sptrawler said:


> But no matter what happens electric vehicles will stop hooning, it will probably download overnight to the police department if you have done anything wrong.




What a wonderful prospect!


----------



## inq (27 May 2011)

Car cc's under 1200 for P platers, however this is just delaying a problem. Oh and ban rotary's for P Platers naturally. Can't go that hard in a 1.1L Mini!


----------



## Greg (27 May 2011)

I think the new laws are well overdue. Crushing the car after 3 "errors of judgement" might get a few of these idiots off the roads. Having 48 hours without a car has been no deterrent as far as I can see. Increasing the fines is unlikely to deter them, I doubt they pay the fines anyway. My guess is that most of the hoons that lose their licence are probably continuing to drive without a licence anyway.

In most cases, the hoons we hear about, or see on TV have no respect for the law, the road rules or other road users. Taking their cars off them is a start, but keeping them off the roads is another issue.

How about the loser in the news a couple of weeks ago; doing donuts in a police station car park. Gee, I bet his parents are really proud of him. Doorstop.


----------

