[Kinds Of Pain Meds]

you obviously dont do much driving.

say for example you do a lot of web browsing instead. if you started getting charged for downloading too fast and had to take tests to make sure you were suitable to use the internet otherwise youd have to pay more a month and get a criminal record then i think youd moan.

crap like this is just taking advantage of the fact lots of people have to drive.

drivers,smokers and alcoholics are the biggest revenue generators for the government.


also if you retake your test does that mean you have to have that 2 year probationary period where you get an auto ban like the new drivers do ?

[Xewksghy]

That's the most stupid analogy I've ever read. When did anyone ever get killed or injured from someone browsing the web? [rolleyes]

but that doesnt make a difference to me does it, thats the point. it pissesme off just as much. im not going to say "ah yes fair enough i might run people over so i should have to pay for the fact that might happen".... come on.

[FBtquXT8]

drivers,smokers and alcoholics are the biggest revenue generators for the government.


also if you retake your test does that mean you have to have that 2 year probationary period where you get an auto ban like the new drivers do ?

I'd have far less a problem with it if they said "hey we am milking you for what we can" than being blatent hypercrits. Its the way they go about it that pisses me off prtending they care about safety, actually they probably do, 1 person dead is less tax for them.

We are just a number with a £ symbol before it.

[Xewksghy]

Give me one good reason why it shouldn't apply to everyone. But then it would affect you and all the other moaners in this thread, and woe betide anyone who tries to put any restrictions on your driving. [rolleyes]

because those people...

a) drive for a living
b) move around valuable things
c) move around dangerous things
d) move around huge numbers of people
e) drive hugh milages and spend a lot of time in a vehicle

[Kinds Of Pain Meds]

because those people...

a) drive for a living
b) move around valuable things
c) move around dangerous things
d) move around huge numbers of people
e) drive hugh milages and spend a lot of time in a vehicle

and possibly with the exception of the testers and instructors, they are the worst drivers[yes]

[gMUVgw71]

To be honest, I'm all for it.... I've always thought that once you hit 65 you should need a restest every 5 years or so. It's obvious that as you get older, your reactions, eyesite etc decrease making you a less able driver.

Certain people, like my grandfather, are responsible enough to recognise that after his mini-stroke he felt he did not have the reaction times to safely use his vehicle in heavy traffic or difficult driving conditions anymore, so no longer takes any long trips or driving at night, just goes the 5 mins to the shops to pick up groceries in daylight... anything further than that he will pay for a cab or ask someone for a lift.

The number of times I've almost been run off the road by people who clearly have no idea of what they are doing behind the wheel. Not giving way, pulling out at the wrong time onto roundabouts etc and while it is people of all ages who are responsible the majority of run-ins that I have tend to be from the older generation.

I see no problem in having a retest every 10 years to assess that everyone is a capable driver. I know many younger people personally that as soon as they passed their test, all their driving skills went out the window because "I passed now init, i can do wot I like" And to be honest we all fall into bad habbits as we drive for longer.

[somozasayre]

I've got a better solution... ban people over the age of 60 from driving.

The biggest dangers for me on the road are:
Old people.
Women.
Women on cell phones.
Women on cell phones with coffee.
Women on cell phones with coffee and makeup.
Women on cell phones with coffee, makeup, a cigarette, and driving a stick. I used to have a co-worker that did this.. steered with her knees, no idea how she shifted.
Men driving anything with more than 4 cylinders. Actually... include all 4-cylinder imports too.

I'd love to see a serious crack down on idiots on the road. Every single day that I'm on the road someone at some point does something stupid. The other day my wife got so pissed that she actually used the N word when referring to a black man.

AND BAN THOSE COFFEE CAN MUFFLERS. Ever damned morning the neighbor's kid wakes me up with his overly loud muffler. His car is a piece of junk too. Its a freaking spray painted geo metro. I swear I'm going to get up at 5 A.M. tomorrow, park in front of their house, put in my bone crusher CD, and crank it up.

[Xewksghy]

i admit old women in particular just dont have the awareness. i almost t-boned one last year and she enver even noticed me even though my engine was almost on her lap. basicaly they pull out and just dont luck.

[Gvadelunar]

because those people...

a) drive for a living
b) move around valuable things
c) move around dangerous things
d) move around huge numbers of people
e) drive hugh milages and spend a lot of time in a vehicle

All you've given me is a list of reason why it should apply to professional drivers and not why it shouldn't apply to non-professional drivers. Most non-professional drivers spend a lot of time in their cars too. Surely making sure ALL drivers are fit to drive periodically can only be a good thing?

[Tilmbeinymn]

I'm alright with it as long as it doesn't cost much and they change to test to be more up to date.

[mussmicky]

drivers,smokers and alcoholics are the biggest revenue generators for the government.

Other than making up the statement in your head, where did you get such a "fact" from? It is quite obvious that income tax, national insurance and corporation taxes make the revenue generated from fuel, tobacco, beer, spirits and wine duties look like peanuts. Before the housing market slump, stamp duties alone raised more revenue than tobacco and alcohol duties.

As a general aside, for those people in favour of the retesting idea, how much would people be comfortable in paying for each retest? For myself, I'd be okay with up to £50 for 10 year retest - saving £5 a year to keep my licence isn't a big deal for me.

[Arkadiyas]

As a general aside, for those people in favour of the retesting idea, how much would people be comfortable in paying for each retest? For myself, I'd be okay with up to £50 for 10 year retest - saving £5 a year to keep my licence isn't a big deal for me.

I'd pay the same as whatever the initial practical test fee is at the time - it should essentially be the same test.

I have no problem with the principle at all; we already have to update our licence pictures, so it can all be done at the same time.

[mussmicky]

I'd pay the same as whatever the initial practical test fee is at the time - it should essentially be the same test.

Agreed - I made my £50 remark off the top of my head without checking what the current prices are:

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring...ide/DG_4022530

Theory test is £30 and a weekday practical test is £56.50 - if one assumes that a 10 year retest would be mostly theoretical, with a bit of practical testing, I think my guess of £50 would probably be about right.

[SetSnonejog]

Old people should have to retake the test every few years anyway, god knows how my grandmother still has her licence after the number of dents on her car and her brick wall.

I don't see anything wrong with getting people to brush up on their driving skills every 10 years or so, of course the biggest opposition would be the charge it would no doubt incur. I'm sure that when people hit a certain age, or when they buy a BMW, the part of the brain that operates the indicators just switches off. A test to stimulate the basic rules of the road to get those parts of the brain working again might do wonders for people's blood pressure when out on the road (mine especially).

And I still believe that motorway driving (or at least motorway driving rules) should be a compulsory part of the driving test. The number of times you see some 18yr old in a Ford KA driving down the outside lane of the motorway at 60mph...... you can almost see the look of confusion on their face when you flash them, they are thinking to themselves "What? Go around me! This lane was empty when I got here, its mine now".

[FBtquXT8]

I find it amazing how many sheep are on here and mindlessly follow what there told by the government. Retest is just that, re pass your drivin test, heres a thought, the test is just a test and doesnt relfect real world driving skills needed.

ive always said you learnt o drive after you passed your test. The uk government are doing this for one reason, money. just like the proposed 2000 hours needed learning before you can even take your first test.

[Arkadiyas]

I find it amazing how many sheep are on here and mindlessly follow what there told by the government.

Considering the people who are in favour are intelligent and noticably more articulate than yourself, I'll happily take your sheep comment on board whilst contributing to your benefit payments.

How are those shorts fitting by the way?

[FBtquXT8]

Considering the people who are in favour are intelligent and noticably more articulate than yourself, I'll happily take your sheep comment on board whilst contributing to your benefit payments.

How are those shorts fitting by the way?

Would you like to tell me exactley how much you pay towards the uk social benefit system then.

Spelling and grammer is not an indicator of inteligeance, if you must know im dyslexic.

[Xewksghy]

All you've given me is a list of reason why it should apply to professional drivers and not why it shouldn't apply to non-professional drivers. Most non-professional drivers spend a lot of time in their cars too. Surely making sure ALL drivers are fit to drive periodically can only be a good thing?

what? im saying people who drive for a living should be tested to make sure they can drive.

maybe my employer should make me re sit my a-levels just in case i cant do them anymore. people could die otherwise.

[mussmicky]

I find it amazing how many sheep are on here and mindlessly follow what there told by the government.

Really? Where? Do you mean that if somebody has an opinion that agrees with a suggestion by a sector of the government, that person is mindless and a sheep? Are you saying that one must always disagree with any suggestion from the government to be intelligent or free-thinking? Do you always consider somebody who doesn't agree with your ideals and views to be stupid or subordinative?

Retest is just that, re pass your drivin test, heres a thought, the test is just a test and doesnt relfect real world driving skills needed. Whether the official driving test accurately reflects the driving skills required on the roads of modern Britain is a separate argument though - this one is purely about ascertaining whether people, who last undertook any form of assessment of safe driving and knowledge of driving legislation at least 10 years ago, still meet some level of minimum safety.

Arguing against a restest on the basis that it is just to raise money can be easily countered by considering the cost of handling the additional accidents and incidents caused by people who would otherwise be either a safer driver or not driving at all due to retesting, and therefore less likely to be causing such problems in the first place.

As a higher education lecturer, I am legally required to undergo a minimum of 30 hours per year of training and development, in addition to anything I happen to choose to do as part of my work. Whether or not I happy to do it, the principle itself is sound: it's to prevent my levels of teaching ability and subject knowledge from becoming outdated or stale. Just assuming that because I've been teaching for over 10 years means that I must be competent or even good is useless - I'm sure we've all known or read about cases of poor teachers continuing to work, seemingly without being punished for being so bad. The same is somewhat true of driving: one cannot assume that because a driver has many years of driving experience that their level of driving and knowledge of driving legislation meets a minimum standard.

[Gvadelunar]

what? im saying people who drive for a living should be tested to make sure they can drive.

I asked for reasons a system of re-testing drivers shouldn't apply to non-professional drivers as well as professionals and you answered with that list, which I assumed was your answer to my question (even though it wasn't really an answer).

As far as I can see the only reason people would be against this idea is that they've got something to hide, i.e they don't think they'd pass the test.