One-armed woman "driven" to despair.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by Polyal

OK so you get out of your driveway, reverse, into street.

Into first, then second then third.

Corner coming up, T intersection, get there by maybe coming down to second or just come to stop and slip into first. (oh you indicated as normal before going into second).

Go around corner and cycle through gears.

Which part of that did you need two hands for?

Reversing out of my drive way I need 2 hands
Full lock right, half turn left, full lock right, full lock left. thats before I even get to the street. I may be able to do it 1 handed, but it makes it much easier to use 2.

Anyway I didn't say someone cannot drive with 1 hand. The problem with this is she admits that she steers with her knees while changing gears. Which means she is steering with 0 hands.

Sure under normal driving I could use 1 hand and drive a manual, but throw in a tricky, sudden situation and I can tell you driving with your knees is not going to help.


Cars often drift to one side when you let go of the wheel. I have noticed the road and the speed affects how quickly the car veers.

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by rappie

I know a woman who is about 3' tall with NO arms and drives all over the place in an auto falcon wagon

She seems to do ok

why should anyone have to pay an extra $500 because of a
disability

Wow.. 3' tall with no arms. How does she turn the key in the ignition, indicate, beep the horn, change radio station, pull the sunvisor down, adjust mirrors, open the door.. all the things us people with 2 (or even 1) hands take for granted.

[fmc351]

Not all drink drivers smash or kill people, one could argue they have proven their ability too. Doesnt make it a logical argument in favour of the act.

She can have a licence, an auto one. I dont see the problem apart from the $500 fee to be tested, thats bollocks.

Originally Posted by flappist

...

It was very boring so I used to play games like "drive all the way without touching the brake" ...

Then maybe you should be able to drive without working brakes. Some people have driven unroadworthy vehicles for years, no accidents, I dont think it proves anything the public should be in favour of.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by loftie

The 'one armed lady' already has a drivers license... and there is no law saying you must have 2 arms to drive... (if there is - please post the reference - as flappist has already requested)

Sezzy posted stuff regarding proper control. And amputees etc and the need for modified controls, included in that would be transmission type.

You are unlikely to find legislation that directly address one armed driving, however it will be in the interpretation of the more generalised directives of the legislation on proper control.

The fuss is not the she is driving, most would be happy and even commend her for continuing to live as normal as possible. The fuss is over driving with no hands at times, when an auto would eliminate or minimise that aspect to a much more satisfactory degree.

There are limits whether she likes that or not. It may be distasteful but that doesnt change it.

[2011G6E]

Exactly...the fuss isn't that she's driving, it's that she is stupid enough to be one of these people who have to "prove something" by continuing to drive a manual when any other person would have gone "oh well" and bought an automatic when they lost the arm.

I still want to see a detailed description of how she deals with sudden emergencies, how she changes gear while turning a corner, how she indicates in traffic, and especially how she maintains control on the steering wheel adequately when several things have to be done at once, eg: turning a corner (because in traffic a car suddenly slowing down ahead of you means you can't just leave it in a gear, you have to brake, put the clutch in, gear down, and somehow keep gripping the wheel with your knees...), indicating, and changing down a gear. Or does she bother using the indicators at all in a lot of circumstances?

Just because you can do a thing doesn't mean you should do a thing.
It's just blind luck she hasn't had an accident yet. Sorry lady, but the safety of other road users comes before your "I can do anything and don't you repress me" attitude...

[Ben73]

I agree with th above 2 posts.

I feel she just has this attitude too. She has to prove she is still normal and can do normal things.

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by fmc351

Sezzy posted stuff regarding proper control. And amputees etc and the need for modified controls, included in that would be transmission type.

You are unlikely to find legislation that directly address one armed driving, however it will be in the interpretation of the more generalised directives of the legislation on proper control.

The fuss is not the she is driving, most would be happy and even commend her for continuing to live as normal as possible. The fuss is over driving with no hands at times, when an auto would eliminate or minimise that aspect to a much more satisfactory degree.

There are limits whether she likes that or not. It may be distasteful but that doesnt change it.

She would fall under conditional licencing, however, it's not a guarantee that she would be made to drive an automatic vehicle or a modified vehicle - if a doctor, and the DLA see her as being fit to drive.

She has the medical certificate to prove it, and a licence to prove the DLA agreed it was okay. To my knowledge the DLA is national, not just state based. It seems the WA transport department are saying her medical certificate isn't valid because it's over six months old - which is fair enough, however her condition isn't likely to have changed, she hasn't grown her arm back or lost any more of it.

[MITCHAY]

Lol some people just like to make life harder for themselves. Can't say I'd give her a manual licence but then again there are plenty with 2 arms that can't drive for **** either. Unbelievable

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by Sezzy

She would fall under conditional licencing, however, it's not a guarantee that she would be made to drive an automatic vehicle or a modified vehicle - if a doctor, and the DLA see her as being fit to drive.

She has the medical certificate to prove it, and a licence to prove the DLA agreed it was okay. To my knowledge the DLA is national, not just state based. It seems the WA transport department are saying her medical certificate isn't valid because it's over six months old - which is fair enough, however her condition isn't likely to have changed, she hasn't grown her arm back or lost any more of it.

She has a medical certificate to prove she has no medical condition that would stop her driving a car, not a medical certificate that says she can drive a manual with one arm. ie: it will state she isnt going to have a heart attack, or epileptic fit while behind the wheel. There is no mobility loss to the other arm, or other such impairments. It in no way reflects an ability to drive a manual with one arm. In fact her new WA medical cert states she has no medical condition to prevent her driving, but clearly states that in no way reflects her ability to actually drive, let alone drive one armed, let alone in a manual.

They say her Qld medical certificate is from interstate, and out of date. And who are the DLA? And what role do they play in issuing a drivers licence?


Think about the process you go through if at the very time you are changing gears, something occurs requiring you to jump on the skids (Kid runs out of a driveway/shop/behind a parked car). You would hopefully have one hand on the wheel, one hand on the stick, one foot on the clutch and the other idle as its come of the accelerator ready to go back down. Her idle leg will be holding the steering wheel. Her reflex would be to stomp the foot down (I'll assume on the brake), and that would happen with no hand on the wheel. Even if only briefly, that is nowhere near safe. However in an auto, there would be no such issue. She would simply be controlling the car with one arm and could utilise say ABS. (not sure if what she is driving has ABS anyway).

That is no guarantee she wont hit a kid, but laws arent about guarantees, they are about minimising risks, and as far as Im concerned and auto licence would do that, while trying to facilitate and not unnecessarily penalise her for a disability.

[MAGPIE]

Crikey I see dozens of one armed drivers every day

They are all driving with one arm and the other arm is....

shaving their face or
putting on their make up or
holding a coffee or energy drink or
forcing a burger in their gob or
changing music on the radio/cd/ipod or
whacking the kids/missus/dog or
flicking the bird to another driver who honked at them for not indicating or giving way

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

Crikey I see dozens of one armed drivers every day

They are all driving with one arm and the other arm is....

shaving their face or
putting on their make up or
holding a coffee or energy drink or
forcing a burger in their gob or
changing music on the radio/cd/ipod or
whacking the kids/missus/dog or
flicking the bird to another driver who honked at them for not indicating or giving way

You forgot talking on phone...
lighting up a ciggie...
holding onto a map or book...

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

You forgot talking on phone...
lighting up a ciggie...
holding onto a map or book...

Or how many are in autos?

Not saying the acts listed are good either way, simply keeping them the same as the issue.


Driving at all, v driving an auto.

[Jim Goose]

I see quite a few trying to change gears or fumble for steering wheel (or both at the same time) while holding something in one hand... very noticeable when your at an intersection.
If you time it right and blast the horn you get to see them toss their burger up in the air....

[PimpMyHubcap]

I gotta say that it is good to see a 2 sided opinion-based debate (not many facts here) which has not degenerated into name calling or abuse(well there were 2)

If you guys would like to see a totally biased and offensive forum which is where I got the link from then http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum....cfm?t=1707599 but you need to sign up to access that area. Highly entertaining with a hint of violence.

[ToCo]

Originally Posted by flappist

You have an actual reference for that?

Here is a somewhat of a reference from a quick google search...

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/__data/as...11_Part_D1.pdf

"NOTE: One hand or the other MUST have a firm grip of the steering wheel at ALL TIMES when the vehicle is in motion - otherwise your vehicle is not under safe and proper control."
Now I am guessing that you could not pass a test if the car is not under safe and proper control...
Page 77

[2011G6E]

So...does that mean the fine I almost got (it was a long talk with Mr Plod...) for riding my motorbike with no hands on the bars shouldn't have even got to the "roadside chat" stage?

Sounds fricking dangerous doesn't it...why the hell would you ride with no hands on the bars!! You idiot!!!

I was on a long stretch of straight highway, one hand on the bars, one resting on my knee giving the hand a stretch (they cramp up after an hour or so after a crash many years back), and briefly took my right hand off the throttle while the throttle lock was on, and adjusted the mirror slightly, then put the hand back on the bars. A motorbike is basically two big gyroscopes and wants to stay upright once it's moving.

Anyway, Plod was coming the other way, saw this, pulled me over, and luckily only gave me a stern lecture.
How is this different to Mrs Don't-Oppress-Me up there in that article? despite all the crap about "good on her" and "stop picking on her", does anyone hoestly think it's a good idea she drive around holding the wheel with her knees (because you won't be ale to "steer" as such in any real way) while trying to operate the indicators and change gears?

Driving a car is no different. It's not that long ago you would be fined for having an arm sticking out the window.
Walk up to a cop and ask him what he would think of you driving along steering with your knees...

Face reality lady, think about other road users, realise it's a bloody miracle you haven't had an accident by now, and buy an automatic.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

I still want to see a detailed description of how she deals with sudden emergencies, how she changes gear while turning a corner, how she indicates in traffic, and especially how she maintains control on the steering wheel adequately when several things have to be done at once, eg: turning a corner (because in traffic a car suddenly slowing down ahead of you means you can't just leave it in a gear, you have to brake, put the clutch in, gear down, and somehow keep gripping the wheel with your knees...), indicating, and changing down a gear. Or does she bother using the indicators at all in a lot of circumstances?

...

Is any of that relevant if she passed the test? No-one has to prove to any authority that they can deal with sudden emergencies. If you check current licence requirements and the testing, most of this is not tested. She obviously has some level of car control, but you assume that because she does not do things the way you do it, then it is wrong. Maybe she leaves a big gap between herself and the car in front. Maybe she assumes all other drivers are idiots and gives them plenty of room to prove it. But that does not matter. There is clearly something wrong where you or I could change states for licence without having to incur financial hardship (which includes having to buy a new car), but because some desk jockey wants to make life difficult, they single her out.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

If you time it right and blast the horn you get to see them toss their burger up in the air....

GOLD!
Should make its way into the quote of the day thread

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Sezzy

How many of you put your knee under the steering wheel to open a drink with both hands whilst driving? Same theory applies...just dressed differently...

Or drove an old Mack with a joey box that required both arms to change gears.

One on the main Gearstick and one arm through the steering wheel on the second box.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Is any of that relevant if she passed the test? No-one has to prove to any authority that they can deal with sudden emergencies. If you check current licence requirements and the testing, most of this is not tested. She obviously has some level of car control, but you assume that because she does not do things the way you do it, then it is wrong. Maybe she leaves a big gap between herself and the car in front. Maybe she assumes all other drivers are idiots and gives them plenty of room to prove it. But that does not matter. There is clearly something wrong where you or I could change states for licence without having to incur financial hardship (which includes having to buy a new car), but because some desk jockey wants to make life difficult, they single her out.

No idea what its like now, but my bike 'L' test was a lot of evasive stuff. It was done off street and for example there was a narrow lane marked (maybe 1 1/2 feet wide), which you had to stay in, and a set of lights at the end which would for example light up either the left or right light, and you had to go in that direction, with little warning and remain in control, and remain within the narrow lane and stop.

Build a modified car in NSW that meets NSW legal requirements and try register it interstate, not so easy. Id doubt the cost of changing it to meet the relevant states requirements is met by the taxpayer. I seem to recall some states allowed V8 LC Toranas, while Qld does not. Try registering a previously reg'd V8 Torana in Qld. Or similar.

Actually there are several examples of what you state doesnt happen. It does.

Its hardly a matter of a pencil pusher WANTING to make life difficult, they are just doing their job. You have no idea if they liked that particular decision they felt they had to make, maybe they did, maybe they didnt. Whats legal or not in Qld, has no bearing on what is legal in WA.

She cant leave a gap between herself and say the kid that runs out from a parked car for example. To do so, she would have to be parked at all times. She is obviously fine in some situations, I doubt many here havent ever steered along a relatively straight stretch of road with the knees, that doenst make it safe, nor does it address ALL potential situations.


Its one thing to state she can drive, its another IMO to state she should be able to drive a manual too.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by fmc351

No idea what its like now, but my bike 'L' test was a lot of evasive stuff. It was done off street and for example there was a narrow lane marked (maybe 1 1/2 feet wide), which you had to stay in, and a set of lights at the end which would for example light up either the left or right light, and you had to go in that direction, with little warning and remain in control, and remain within the narrow lane and stop.

Build a modified car in NSW that meets NSW legal requirements and try register it interstate, not so easy. Id doubt the cost of changing it to meet the relevant states requirements is met by the taxpayer. I seem to recall some states allowed V8 LC Toranas, while Qld does not. Try registering a previously reg'd V8 Torana in Qld. Or similar.

Actually there are several examples of what you state doesnt happen. It does.

Its hardly a matter of a pencil pusher WANTING to make life difficult, they are just doing their job. You have no idea if they liked that particular decision they felt they had to make, maybe they did, maybe they didnt. Whats legal or not in Qld, has no bearing on what is legal in WA.

She cant leave a gap between herself and say the kid that runs out from a parked car for example. To do so, she would have to be parked at all times. She is obviously fine in some situations, I doubt many here havent ever steered along a relatively straight stretch of road with the knees, that doenst make it safe, nor does it address ALL potential situations.


Its one thing to state she can drive, its another IMO to state she should be able to drive a manual too.

What you say is true, but to single out someone based ona physical difference starts to raise a whole pile of questions. Do we need to be retesting ALL drivers every ten years to weed out those who got a licence under easier circumstances? Would that actually make any difference to road stats? Do we single out people who have low IQ because they would not react properly to a dangerous situation? Should we have evasive manouvres as a part of the testing criteria? See what I mean?

[Buntz]

Clearly she is very skilled to drive a car across Australia, in a manual car... with one hand!!!!!!!!


Wonder what else she can do with that magical hand.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

Clearly she is very skilled to drive a car across Australia, in a manual car... with one hand!!!!!!!!


Wonder what else she can do with that magical hand.

She probably has calluses...

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

She probably has calluses...

All the better.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by ToCo

Here is a somewhat of a reference from a quick google search...

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/__data/as...11_Part_D1.pdf

"NOTE: One hand or the other MUST have a firm grip of the steering wheel at ALL TIMES when the vehicle is in motion - otherwise your vehicle is not under safe and proper control."
Now I am guessing that you could not pass a test if the car is not under safe and proper control...
Page 77

That is a driving school pamphlet.

It also talks where to put your hands on the wheel and all the other driving school drivel.....

It is a list of things to do to pass a driving test nothing more......

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by flappist

I am still waiting for someone to actually show some legislation stating that one hand MUST remain on the steering wheel at all times.

This is about as close as the RTA gets...in their usual vague way

So, you could steer it with your feet, just so long as you have 'proper control'

Road Rules 2008
Current version for 22 October 2010 to date Part 18Division 1Rule 297

297 Driver to have proper control of a vehicle etc
(1) A driver must not drive a vehicle unless the driver has proper control of the vehicle.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

People just switch your brains on, it's not that hard, the driver must be in control of the vehicle in all times, I doubt that any person who has to totally let go of his/her steering wheel to change gears would be considered to have control of his/her vehicle.

It is not that difficult, it is so basic that no legislation is required to say you need to be able to hold a steering wheel at all times to drive a car.

There is no possible way that she can change gears and maintain 100% control over her vehicle, as she will NOT BE HOLDING THE STEERING WHEEL!!!!! Does that sound like a good idea to anyone here??? To be driving a car and in order to change gears you have to let go of the only thing that points the one tonne missile into the right direction , the thought of this is just insane if you ask me.

And I know that police can fine push bike riders and motor bike riders for not keeping hands on the handle bars....

It does not matter that she already has a manual car, or she been luck for the last X amount of years and had no accidents.

It has nothing to do with discrimination, it is plain old common sense, something not very common any more, they should start calling it rare sense these days

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

All the better.

Always thought you like the touch of a bloke

[TheInterceptor]

Im with XB GS 351 Coupe.

Simple as that.

[MITCHAY]

Must admit I am having a hard time finding an actual law.

They all say 'proper control of a vehicle' or to that effect but does not define that as having at least one hand on the wheel from what I can see although a person with common sense can logically deduce that a steering wheel is used to steer with your hands. So I can see what Flap is getting at there.

Having said that law is ridiculously hard to read for average joe and why lawyers get paid so much.