South Australia to put curfew on P-platers

[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

[Ducati888]

Bloody stupid. Really stupid. Incredibly stupid. Typical band-aid solutions - take away people's rights. In fact I doubt they even have the legal ability to do it.

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.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Ducati888

Bloody stupid. Really stupid. Incredibly stupid. Typical band-aid solutions - take away people's rights. In fact I doubt they even have the legal ability to do it.

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.

Yes they do have the legal ability, they could even add restrictions to your license that you can only drive pink VL commodores on Thursdays and have to wear a helmet.

That being said, is it actually a good idea?

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.

On the other hand the driving skill is not the primary source of the problem. 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.

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.

So no, it is just a bandaid that will allow some bureaucrat to move a piece of paper from pile A to pile B, a minister to make a speech and a tool by which SAPOL can remove P platers from the road regardless of whether or not they actually catch them playing up.

[K93George]

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.

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.

What rights and entitlements do "they" feel they should have like everybody else? I fit into this generation you speak of but I fail to see what rights others have that I don't. A right to drive a V8 TT? That isn't a right! Sure a select few complain that they can't drive a V8 or insurance is too high and they have more restrictions than full licensed drivers but close to all people in the age bracket your referring to that I know have a care factor of 0.

I see absolutely no relation to credit and solving the problem of young inexperienced drivers wrapping themselves around a pole. They wrap themselves around a pole because they are just that, inexperienced. Close to all people in the age bracket I know make mistakes or create dangerous situations because they either don't fully understand the risks of their actions; having almost bold tyres and putting off the purchase of new ones to save some money. Or they are merely inexperienced. They haven't taken this particular bend before in the rain, they take it at the speed limit believing its all good, after all its under the speed limit.

Obviously we have the Learner system to help young drivers gain experience, but as mentioned, if the supervising driver has a limited understanding of the risks involved, what hope does the young driver who already has little to no understanding got?

What people have to understand is, in this age group the individuals are going to have this sense of invincibility, it is just brain development. Do I have a solution to the road toll for young drivers? No, I believe its value is grossly exaggerated, sure deaths are terrible but why not tackle the main leading cause of death for young people in Australia, suicide? Perhaps because the media and public value certain causes of death more then others. Is a death on our road greater then one from obesity, cancer or poverty, perhaps its easier to tackle.

[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!

[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 !!)

[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

[FGII-XR6]

Originally Posted by Ducati888

Bloody stupid. Really stupid. Incredibly stupid. Typical band-aid solutions - take away people's rights. In fact I doubt they even have the legal ability to do it.

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.

P platers driving late at night with a car full of mates are known to be a high risk of accident due to peer pressure they go out cruising and start showing off thinking they are good drivers when they are still learning their driving skills, something goes wrong that an experienced driver may be better equipped to handle and next thing some unfortunate cop has the job of informing 5 parents their son / daughter will not be coming home.

I don't care how many tantrums these kids throw they need to be guided towards gaining skills while staying alive that's worth a bit of inconvenience.

for those crying discrimination , if you have a licence you should be able to drive anytime you want, hear is an alternative solution. raise the licence age to 21 with 4 years of Ls and no night restrictions how would the whinging teens would like that?

[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.

[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.

[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/

[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?

[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

[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

[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.

[Ducati888]

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

I never said you don't have to earn them, nor did I say anything about restrictions. Everyone in Australia has a right to earn all of those qualifications by jumping through the pre-determined hoops necessary. No-one may be excluded from the ability to get them by race, age, social status or whatever else. No-one may be discriminated against.

How does that make these things a privilege? A privilege is given to you by some divine right.

So, as all of those things above are rights, not privileges, why single out a group of drivers that the media loves to put in the spotlight? To appease the "left wing loon who sprouted persecution propaganda", maybe. But mostly to be 'seen to be doing something'. That's easier than actually doing something, and usually cheaper too.

Most of my teachers were nice, by the way, but far from rocket scientists. Pity. I had a right to higher education and I earned it, twice, with a bit of kickstart from them.

[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.

[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.

[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]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/s...-1226605756161

heres a bigger article than the herald sun one

[Tweaq]

I dont see how this will remedy anything except reduce deaths caused between midnight and 5am...

[MercurySilver]

and too bad if youve scored an afternoon shift job (for the extra money) and knock off at midnight
how about making it compulsory to go thru some decent driver education training and not just lessons and a log book?

apparently this will drop the number of young p platers who have died on our roads in sa

[FERG_51]

Originally Posted by MercurySilver

and too bad if youve scored an afternoon shift job (for the extra money) and knock off at midnight
how about making it compulsory to go thru some decent driver education training and not just lessons and a log book?

apparently this will drop the number of young p platers who have died on our roads in sa

Totally agree, compulsory advanced driving course once on P plates.

[Ducati888]

The mantra of modern politics, regardless of your camp, is "be seen to be doing something". You don't actually have to do anything. It usually entails very small changes and lots of media and emotion.

[poppa smurf]

minister O'Brien was on the radio this morning talking about this......dispensation will be given, when applied for, to "P" platers who use their motor vehicle between the hours of 12 am and 5 am as transport to and from their job

[Silver Ghia]

Remembering the minimum age for driving licences in SA will remain at 17, whereas in Vic it is 18, I actually think its a good idea.

These days, once the young drivers get their licences they think they are instant experts but unfortunately can easily get into trouble especially if encouraged by their mates in the back seat, which this legislation is aimed at.

Driving is something you keep learning for years, the time you don't learn any more is either when the driving licence is handed in, or when you die. However most skills are learnt not only while on 'L' plates, but also over the 2-3 years after obtaining the licence.

[EVLKNEVL]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Remembering the minimum age for driving licences in SA will remain at 17, whereas in Vic it is 18, I actually think its a good idea.

These days, once the young drivers get their licences they think they are instant experts but unfortunately can easily get into trouble especially if encouraged by their mates in the back seat, which this legislation is aimed at.

Driving is something you keep learning for years, the time you don't learn any more is either when the driving licence is handed in, or when you die. However most skills are learnt not only while on 'L' plates, but also over the 2-3 years after obtaining the licence.

So how will a curfew change any of that?

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by EVLKNEVL

So how will a curfew change any of that?

It 'eases' them into driving with a licence and gaining valuable experience without the supervision that they had before, rather than suddenly being able to drive in the early morning most likely after a full days school or work, which is when they can easily get into grief.

[Ducati888]

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

We don't live in communist China. Our laws are by exclusion not inclusion, meaning if it's not explicitly forbidden by Federal and State parliament, in that order, then you can do as you wish.

Whether it's legal or not, my thoughts are that particular groups should not be focussed on and excluded in favour of others. In reality, do you think a driver is more likely to take out a family of school children at midnight - 5am or 5am to midnight? Maybe they should be kept off the road during the daylight when everyone else is on the road. The rest of the time they can be wrapped in bubble wrap and kept in a pink padded room, with soft christian rock playing in the background, and given their food in mushed up drink form so that they don't hurt themselves with sharp cutlery, and unable to do any self harm. All the while, ensuring their over protective parents know exactly where they are.

After all, their parents never did anything risky when they were young, did they?