Twice as Many P platers died this year than last - Power Restrictions

[bessxg]

Perhaps the purpose power restrictions is to get rid of the petrolhead mentality in young people. If they don't have a car to brag about that can beat rx, the thought won't exist that they have to prove a point?

I can hardly see everyone racing around their excels.

I understand the actual statistics of the situation i'm describing is minimal, but maybe it's our Aussie culture thats responsible for the road toll in p platers, and that's the idea behind the power restrictions.

[colossus]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

Fact: Power restriction will do absolutely nothing to minimise the road toll!
A stock 84 Corolla can still do 110kph in an 80 zone the same as a XR6T, except @ 110kph only one car has ABS and airbags.

Road authorities need to have a serous look at it and stop looking for a quick fix.

I'm not saying its the only fix but it is still a good start - Yes both cars can do 110, but:

- which one can get there in less than 6 seconds?
- Which one would a teenager continually want to hit the accelerator to hear the engine, boost, feel the power?
- which one will oversteer into a tree when boost arrives in the hands of someone inexperienced?
ect.

I know which one I would be tempted to drive fast in if I was 17, it aint the Corolla.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

I know what you're saying but you're assuming these kinds of drivers will obey those laws... usually they don't or wont!
How often do you hear about young unlicenced drivers running into poles, or a car load of teenagers crashing and half aren't wearing seat belts!
No power law, driver training or driver curfew will stop that.

Its behavioural and attitude..

Hmm, well if it becomes illegal and you can lose your licence for it, then they might listen. I have heaps of mates, form various background and fiscal positions and none of them drink drive for example because your stuffed if you do. Maybe thats different, as they have brains.

What about that recent crash with 6 people in a 300ZX, chick on her P's.

Its easy to sit here and say it mightn make a difference, but what if it does? And the only reason we didn't try was because we thought it would do nothing. Even if it saves a couple of lives its worth it.

Yeap it is the behavourial attitutde thats the problem, but id rather a irresponsible person in an excel than a skyline.

Its a really hard topic to discuss, as I guess everyone has different experiences and belieifs, but at the end of the day alot of people are dying for no good reason. Your always going to have accidents, or they wouldn't be called that in the first place, its about attempting to minimise them that matters.

[[Tonko]]

Originally Posted by bessxg

What does everyone think about graphic ad campaigns? Do you reckon they have much of an effect? What about on the effect on the"non-hoons"? Is it fair for them?

the graphic ad compains havent made me quit smoking, how would they stop people driving like idiots?

[Sapper]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

Fact: Power restriction will do absolutely nothing to minimise the road toll!
A stock 84 Corolla can still do 110kph in an 80 zone the same as a XR6T, except @ 110kph only one car has ABS and airbags.

Road authorities need to have a serous look at it and stop looking for a quick fix.

Like my STOCK 2005 Corolla Ascent (when i had it) had an official top speed of 190km and in real world it could do it (cause that's where 5th gear hits the limiter). I'd dare not take it there but the way she pulls at....

[Sapper]

Oh, any pick up a copy of the latest motor mag. As much as they're biased journo's...they were able to point out that Austria has just had a 25% drop in young driver serious injuries and fatalities. What was the crucial difference? No, its not graphic ad campaigns. Its the introduction of mandatory driver training courses run by (wait for it...) Alex Wurz, the F1 test driver. The state goverments over here will love that one!

[MITCHAY]

Young drivers hold 15 per cent of licences but are involved in 36 per cent of road fatalities.

Notice it says "involved" not "cause" of road fatalities. Yes they might be dead but they may not have even caused the accident.

Being involved in an accident is a simple as someone running in to you. If a P plater is at the lights and an old fart runs into them, did they cause the accident? Hell they weren't even moving! Just driving responsibility yourself doesn't not guarentee some moron won't run into you.

I own a turbo, yes it's fast, but it's also got better brakes, better suspension, dual airbags, ABS, AWD, EBD. The only thing my other car had was the ABS(I think) and I tell you what I'd feel safer in.

Yes these features were designed for the higher speed of the car, but if you're doing the speed limit like you should be, you're surely going to be better off than the other guy driving a POS.

Anyways I'm off my Ps in a month or so, and can eventually stop being looked down upon by "older" people who a lot of the time drive worse than a lot of P platers!

[alstar5]

Being 16 and 9 months I am not for the age increase to 18 to get your P's. I have already booked my driving test for the 13th November!!!

Passenger Curfews (1 passenger after 11pm) sounds like a good idea to me, if any restrictions have to be brought in at all. At the end of the day though, we are always going to have idiots and hoons on the road, the majority of these will be young, it really is unfortunatly just a fact of life. Increasing limits and putting restrictions on cars is only going to help so much. I guess if it saves 1 life, then it's worth it.

[Miss_XR6]

if the same amount or more p platers are dying each year even with the new restrictions it shows its got nothing to do with the cars p platers are driving in my opinion we should offer driving skills courses through high school im sure alot of parents would agree with that idea.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

I know what you're saying but you're assuming these kinds of drivers will obey those laws... usually they don't or wont!
How often do you hear about young unlicenced drivers running into poles, or a car load of teenagers crashing and half aren't wearing seat belts!
No power law, driver training or driver curfew will stop that.

Its behavioural and attitude..

I agree with you 4Vman. In fact I would go so far as to suggest that the driver training program take into account the students IQ and attitude to driving. If these are not up to scratch, they dont pass the driving/license test. If our problems are caused by drivers, young or old, with the wrong attitude, weed them out and close the door until they can prove that their attitude has improved. I know this sounds very "right wing" but we dealing with people's live's here...... These are the people that our wives and kids are sharing the roads with.

[merlin]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Notice it says "involved" not "cause" of road fatalities. Yes they might be dead but they may not have even caused the accident.

Your in absolute denial if you think young drivers are not more at risk of having an accident than older drivers, its a fact there is no arguing around it.

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Being involved in an accident is a simple as someone running in to you. If a P plater is at the lights and an old fart runs into them, did they cause the accident? Hell they weren't even moving! Just driving responsibility yourself doesn't not guarentee some moron won't run into you.

Just because you were technically not at fault does not matter when you are dead. Many accidents are caused by the not-at-fault drivers general poor driving attitude and total lack of road craft and lane positioning.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Notice it says "involved" not "cause" of road fatalities. Yes they might be dead but they may not have even caused the accident.

Being involved in an accident is a simple as someone running in to you. If a P plater is at the lights and an old fart runs into them, did they cause the accident? Hell they weren't even moving! Just driving responsibility yourself doesn't not guarentee some moron won't run into you.

I own a turbo, yes it's fast, but it's also got better brakes, better suspension, dual airbags, ABS, AWD, EBD. The only thing my other car had was the ABS(I think) and I tell you what I'd feel safer in.

Yes these features were designed for the higher speed of the car, but if you're doing the speed limit like you should be, you're surely going to be better off than the other guy driving a POS.

Anyways I'm off my Ps in a month or so, and can eventually stop being looked down upon by "older" people who a lot of the time drive worse than a lot of P platers!

So what are you saying? young drivers are more likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time??
Doesnt the fact that they're more likely to be INVOLVED mean enough?
A P plater who lane switches and jams their brakes on will cause a tail-ender that ultimately he won't be responsible for becase someone hit him, but if it was filmed it would be obvious he casued the accident.

No point being in the right but dead....

You're displaying the classic stereotypical "denial mentality" of the demographic that statistically is a majour issue.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Notice it says "involved" not "cause" of road fatalities. Yes they might be dead but they may not have even caused the accident.

Being involved in an accident is a simple as someone running in to you. If a P plater is at the lights and an old fart runs into them, did they cause the accident? Hell they weren't even moving! Just driving responsibility yourself doesn't not guarentee some moron won't run into you.

I own a turbo, yes it's fast, but it's also got better brakes, better suspension, dual airbags, ABS, AWD, EBD. The only thing my other car had was the ABS(I think) and I tell you what I'd feel safer in.

Yes these features were designed for the higher speed of the car, but if you're doing the speed limit like you should be, you're surely going to be better off than the other guy driving a POS.

Anyways I'm off my Ps in a month or so, and can eventually stop being looked down upon by "older" people who a lot of the time drive worse than a lot of P platers!

I was actually waiting on your response. As with anything, there are exceptions to the rule.

This whole discussion, to me, is like the gun debate. As we all know, people kill people, not guns, but the gov took away the guns and now look, there hasn't been an issue since Port Arthur.

So, take away the ability to harm someone (p plater in hipo car), and theorictally then fatalities should fall. Certinately isn't going to hurt in trying it.

[merlin]

Straight from the horses mouth - www.rta.nsw.gov.au

People under 26 comprise only 15% of driver licences
but are involved in 36% of road fatalities.
During the five-year period 1999 to 2003, fatal crashes
involving drivers* aged under 26 resulted in 1017 fatalities.
There were 973 drivers and riders aged under 26 years
involved in these crashes. Of these, 760 (78%) were
identified as the controller of the vehicle primarily
responsible for the crash. In contrast, only 60% of drivers
aged over 25 years involved in fatal crashes over the
same period were identified as the key vehicle controller.
A 17-year-old driver with a P1 licence is about four times
more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than a driver
aged 26 or older.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by merlin

Straight from the horses mouth - www.rta.nsw.gov.au

People under 26 comprise only 15% of driver licences
but are involved in 36% of road fatalities.
During the five-year period 1999 to 2003, fatal crashes
involving drivers* aged under 26 resulted in 1017 fatalities.
There were 973 drivers and riders aged under 26 years
involved in these crashes. Of these, 760 (78%) were
identified as the controller of the vehicle primarily
responsible for the crash. In contrast, only 60% of drivers
aged over 25 years involved in fatal crashes over the
same period were identified as the key vehicle controller.
A 17-year-old driver with a P1 licence is about four times
more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than a driver
aged 26 or older.

Thankyou, POINT PROVEN!!!!!

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

ARGUEMENT SETTLED.

Discussion 4v, discussion....lol
:Reverend:

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

So what are you saying? young drivers are more likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time??
Doesnt the fact that they're more likely to be INVOLVED mean enough?

What I'm saying is that INVOLVED doesn't neccesarily mean CAUSED which a lot of people hype it up to be. Yes involved is bad enough but you can't always avoid it.

I bet you if I had an accident in my car and was run into a fully licenced driver, because I'm a P plater I would be branded through the media as the cause of the accident. There would be pictures of my car, and calls to ban perfomance cars following it!

The media can twist things whatever way they want.

***EDIT saw merlins post. There you go those are facts!***

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

What I'm saying is that INVOLVED doesn't neccesarily mean CAUSED which a lot of people hype it up to be. Yes involved is bad enough but you can't always avoid it.

I bet you if I had an accident in my car and was run into a fully licenced driver, because I'm a P plater I would be branded through the media as the cause of the accident. There would be pictures of my car, and calls to ban perfomance cars following it!

The media can twist things whatever way they want.

***EDIT saw merlins post. There you go those are facts!***

LOL, im glad you read Merlins post... do you have a different opinion now?

People under 26 comprise only 15% of driver licences
but are involved in 36% of road fatalities

Frightening isnt it, i didnt realise it was that high.

Maybe statistics need to be rammed down people throats more?

[MITCHAY]

Could we go further and probe into what vehicle they were driving? I'm just curious.

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

LOL, im glad you read Merlins post... do you have a different opinion now?

Maybe statistics need to be rammed down people throats more?

I'm not a stupid person. I was just simply pointing out that the statement in the paper could be misleading as I took it. I know facts are facts.

[drcook]

being at an age now (25) where ive built up a bit of experience in driving, but can still remember how i drove and my attitiude towards driving when a p-plater, i shake my head at the memories.

driving too fast (although, at 25, im still guilty of this), not concentrating, reckless driving (not driving to the conditions), showing off, more showing off, laid back it-wont-happen-to-me attitiude, and general ingnorance to the rules and to why the rules are there.

if, back then, the law makers told me instead of my commodore (which i tried to drive as fast as possible), i could only drive a hyundai excel, i would try to drive it as fast as possible.

if they sent me on an advanced driving course, id have so much fun sliding the car around a skid pan (ignoring, most probably, the instructors commands) as soon as i returned to road, id be trying to replicate said fun sliding around, this time around the general public.

i would consider supporting, if implemented with common sense (not likely, seeing as a government would be doing the implementing), these measures:

1. no passengers for p-platers after 9pm (approx).
2. a curfew on p-platers after 12pm (approx.) - to allow for some coming home from late-night work.
3. driver training for all learners, but make it a compulsory part of the testing scheme which they must pass before becoming provisionals.
4. more intense testing for learner & provisional licence applicants.
5. very graphic videos shown in high school (complusory) of the dangers and aftermath of crashing.
6. increase the costs overall of the licencing system (getting your licence needs to be an investment and a privelage, not a right)
7. reduce the points a L or P driver has on their licence. (one infringement point deducted, second infringement licence gone)
8. vehicle restrictions based on power to weight.
only exemptions should be if:
a. the p-plater was driving another persons car with the owner of that car in the passengers seat or
b. to cars with a 5 star safety rating (still with a power to weight restriction, just set a bit higher) to encourage not just purchases of safe vehicles, but also encourage car makers to start producing 5 star safety rated cars to the budget of first car buyers (that should stop the daiwoo... sorry, holden death machines).

the mentality of young drivers need to be changed. right now they think

"its my god-given right to have a licence and that bad things dont happen to me because i have a licence which means im a great driver, and beacuse of that i should be able to drive any car i want in any way i want, so there"

that needs to change to:

"i have just spent alot of time and money to get my licence, i am privilaged to hold this licence, and i can loose it very easily, which means i will have to go through all the cost and time again, so im going to be careful."

end rant.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Could we go further and probe into what vehicle they were driving? I'm just curious.

Does it really mater what they were driving? Someone can kill themselves in any vehicle, its a behavioural issue.

Now id like to know if the reduction in risk by 26 years old is because of 8 years of driving experience or 8 years of maturing...

[ADSXR8]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Could we go further and probe into what vehicle they were driving? I'm just curious.

I am too, but I think its pretty self explanatory. Hence why government has implemented the restictions.

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Does it really mater what they were driving? Someone can kill themselves in any vehicle, its a behavioural issue.

Now id like to know if the reduction in risk by 26 years old is because of 8 years of driving experience or 8 years of maturing...

Yeah I know, this is more in relation to the vehicle bans/restrictions.

I'd just like to know seeing as though this ban was supposed to stop people dying and seems it hasn't. Would be informative to know what it's effectiveness has been so they could concentrate effort elsewhere.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Yeah I know, this is more in relation to the vehicle bans/restrictions.

I'd just like to know seeing as though this ban was supposed to stop people dying and seems it hasn't. Would be nice to know what it's effectiveness has been so they could concentrate effort elsewhere.

MITCHAY - Just curious of your opinion (and others on there P's). I haven't been off them for that long, two years.

Do you think that the assumption that, in general as thats what laws have to be made to, P platers in Hi-Po cars are a greater risk to themselves and others then non Hi-Po cars?

[Pieoter]

As a P-Plater myself that would instantly be labeled as a hoon and I do find that many of my friends are dangerous and poor drivers. One in particular used to scare me every time I sat in his car. Others just speed but don't go over the top with stupidity and I actually feel safe with them.

The newspapers always make clever use of the english language to give an give a perception that is different from fact and even lie to get their point across.

[4.9 EF Futura]

Originally Posted by Tonko351

the graphic ad compains havent made me quit smoking, how would they stop people driving like idiots?

They're too graphic. It's straight out of a marketing text book as well - go too far with the graphic images and people switch off. Unless its in the context of a driver intervention program where you are basically forced to see graphic road toll images.

They'd be much more effective using the power of suggestion (in a smoking conext example, the one where the guy is in hospital missing all sorts of stuff from his daughter's childhood) than they would by using outright gore.

[BAFalconXT]

They can find stats to prove anything. I had a leaflet sent to me with a chart showing that as a percentage of licence holders, women had a much higher percent of driver fatalities. Have these stats ever been widely publicised? NO! They should look at the number of hours spent on the road, and compare that with these road deaths, young people drive around alot more than oldies, and much more time driving around at night. Whether you are old or young, people only learn by their own mistakes, not having their hands held!

The whole topic is about social cohesion, if no one sees crime, it does not exist... And what crime and accidents/deaths do we mostly see, it is traffic related! Although we see dangerous and reckless driving more often than other crime, it is not a serious! The more energy everyone puts into this 'bullshit' the less everyone focuses on robberies, breakins, car theft, assaults, rapes, fraud etc etc.........

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by Polyal

MITCHAY - Just curious of your opinion (and others on there P's). I haven't been off them for that long, two years.

Do you think that the assumption that, in general as thats what laws have to be made to, P platers in Hi-Po cars are a greater risk to themselves and others then non Hi-Po cars?

I agree that's the assumption in general, although I don't believe it to be true. Hence until I see statistics proving that assumption as fact, I will disagree with it. Just my personal stance. Personally I worry about people driving unroadworthy cars more and that goes for any age.

[Pieoter]

DRCook I don't agree with the passenger limit (This would only put more P-platers onto the road and stop people from having and Designated Drivers on nights out). Cerfuw I don't like as I come home from work at 1am.

The 5Star safety car is a good idea but a 5star car is MORE of a hazard on the road unless all other cars have the same safety level. Becuase they are so stiff they will munch anything weaker than them.