I agree with all bar the performance/V8s but what can you say, the rest are alright in my books.

Perhaps a bit of a summary of what the laws are, so we know what we're commenting on?

I new I forgot something! The ony that got heat in another forum is 100 hours cert training, your parents are included in certified training. I guess they are relying on parents to be honest which they have no hope for.


* lowering the minimum learner age to 16 and extending the licence period to 12 months
* gaining 100 hours of certified supervised on-road driving experience for learners under 25s
* restricting all mobile phone use, including hands-free, blue-tooth accessories, and loud-speaker functions, for learner and P1 provisional licence holders under 25
* restricting mobile loud-speaker functions for supervisors and passengers of learner and P1 provisional licence holders under 25 while under instruction
* motorbike learners will be required to hold a car provisional licence for 12 months prior to gaining a motorbike learner licence
* introduction of a two-phased P1 and P2 provisional licence system
* compulsory L plates (a black L on a yellow background) and P plates (a red plate for P1 and green plate for P2)
* peer passenger restrictions (only carrying one passenger aged under 21) from 11pm to 5am for P1 under 25
* high-powered vehicle restrictions for provisional drivers under 25
* after 12 months on P1, licence holders must pass a hazard perception test to progress to P2
* late night driving and other restrictions for disqualified and suspended young drivers

http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/qt/LTASinf...provisional.pdf

http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/qt/LTASinf...eet_learner.pdf

Sounds like a pile of $hit.

Car license for one year before being able to gain a motorcycle one? There are hundreds of people who got their bike license first. I wish I had done it much earlier, as with proper tuition it not only taught me to ride safely, it improved my driving skills no end.

Bloody pen pushers, thank god in WA we are 10 years behind all that crap.

I didn't even read that one, add that one to the list.

But I can see where they are coming from. It seems every week in my local area another teenager dies on a motorbike but I don't get how making us have our car license for a year would help????

I think the car license first means you have a good understanding of how traffic works.
In Vic, getting your motorbike L's just do a riding test and a written test and off you go - then you have to ride in traffic for 3 months to get your P's.

I think learning about how traffic works before you get on the road is important.

bullsh!t....does that mean im supposed to go and get a friggen P plate now?!?!?!?!?

meh got my p's already and all my younger mates will to so dosnt really affect me at all. the peer passenger thing. i see what there trying to do, but it means you cant even go to the movies and that with your friends and see like an 8ish movie. you cant have your mate drop you into the city to go clubbing. or pick you up. or even be a designated driver.

the phone loundspeaker thing is abit of crap. i can understand with L plates but bit over the top for P's

no no enzo. it only applys for people getting there licence after july 2007

Laws arnt applicable to anyone on their P's already

MooingChicken: Have you ever been DD for a bunch of drunk guys. It is super distracting. When I am DD my rule is shut up or get out. Half of the time I have to pull over for 1/2 hr till they shut the hell up. Anway, those rules are only for the first year of Ps anyway. Once your past your first year the only rules applicable are the power and modified car ones.

yer. pretty much every second week if not more often im DD. and i find there more distracting if there not drunk. because there constantly going oi lets do this lets go do this. were as when there drunk they just talk about crap and sit back for the ride.

but yer as i said the laws wont affect me or any mates so im not 2 fussed. just saying that some i think are a little harsh.

with the power thing. i do agree with it. but your still going to get the hoons in there crap boxes doing stupid crap, atleast with most hotted up cars the car was built to handle alot better then other cars. ive got to mates who's first cars were both done up turbo skylines. one would do speed runs which would be 120 in a 60 zone thinking he was the maddest guy and drift and stuff, (who yes has lost his licence) my other mate who has more power, has all his points, and dosnt do hardly anything breaking the law.

but the fact is most cars you can easly get sideways drifting especally in the wet, and speeding. so the hoons will continue to do it no matter what car they are in.

o good.....thanks for clearing that up

Personally, if you think driving for a year before getting a motorbike licence is a bad idea, then you've either never ridden a motorbike, or you've forgotten what your very first time on the road, even in a car, was truly like.
A young, nervous, inexperienced driver (ie, not trafic aware)...add the complexity and fatal consquences of a mistake on a motorbike...i personally think its a DAMN GOOD IDEA.

The no mobile devices idea is f***ing brilliant also. You see too many kids driving around SMS'ing because they think its legal, or using a hands free and again, adding another "distraction" to contend with.

The majority of people FRESHLY onto their p's, driving without supervision, shouldnt be carrying 4 passengers anyway, or talking on phones anyway, they should be concentrating on and learning the road.

Personally, i love the fact they are adding a "hazard perception" component as well. Too many people *think* that because they can control a car, they are safe.

Reality check, my 11 year old brother can drive manual. That doesnt mean he'd live 30 seconds on a main road.

You've got to remember, the majority of young p platers are not particularly sensible by "experienced drivers" standards, or good drivers, or confident on the road. And before you flame me, i've only held my full licence a year, and believe me, i've spent a lot of time driving around with a lot of different p-platers.

I know i have good hazard perception, i'm continually pointing out impendending events (like some muppet opening a parked car door without looking) to friends when we're driving, and i still know that i get caught out constantly. I dont think a brand new, fresh faced driver needs to contend with four screaming mates at 1am, and/or a hands free set. Consider now a kid can get their p's at 17. Thats damn young.

Consider also, you can still buy a skyline etc on this system at the age of..what....19? 19.5? Thats not particularly old. In fact, you can probably afford it more then.

i recon sms'ing is worse then talking on a phone because for one you lost 1 hand, the same as holding the phone to your head. but also because u actully have to look away from the road to see what you are typing. which you dont have to do with talking.

every person is diffrent with there skill level. some people are quite good when they first start driving. and some you know are just going to crash and lose there licence in the first 2 weeks (ive got mates who fit into both). and not really from doing stupid stuff jsut being bad drivers pretty much.

and a big thing is maturity. you will find all the little rebels will be the ones who speed/drink drive ect ect. at 17 3/4 of the people are mature enough. (from my experiance) the other 1/4 arnt. but 16 to get your L's. i think that should be bumped back to 16 1/2. even if that means they have to bump the supervised hours down abit to even like 70-80 hours. and lets face it everyone is going to just write anything down to make up the required hours anyway.

edit: 16 -16 1/2 most people dont have a concept of reality. alot of people are still in there rebelious stage. were all that matter is proving to your friend how cool you are. and dont listen to a word there parents say, or what cops say

Your right, I've never ridden a motorbike other than my pocket bike.

Add to that list a Defensive Driving Course incorporating Skid Pan use. Then you could send them out with some confidence. When both my kids are old enough that's exactly what I will be putting them thru' without argument, whether it's compulsory or not.

woot

Think that passenger law for p platers is pretty stupid. Instead of 2 cars for example with 5 people in them, your gonna have 5 cars with two ppl in each, outcome: more young p platers driving, whats worse? 2 cars with 5 ppl in them, or 5 cars with 2 ppl in them.... I dont find at all that im distracted when ive got a car load of people, everyone might be talking and whatever, but you just block that out and concentrate on driving. I think "mooingchicken" brought out the main point of maturity, most 17 y.o's are mature, if you've got a car load of immature idiots doing stupid things whilst your driving then yes its going to distract the driver, but if its a car load of "mature" 17 y.o's who are just talking abit to each other and not doing anything to distract you, why shouldnt you be aloud to carry more then one passenger, its just going to making more young people drive more cars for no reason.



Just my thoughts on that passenger restriction law

x2 matty, if theres 5 cars, each with 2 18yr old guys in em, whats the natural thing to do??? have a race!!!!!! its stupid

as an 18 year old who has been driving for around a year i can see where these laws are comming from, and i say lets have them only because
- it doesnt effect me

on the other side of the coin i think the old people need to be looked at too....some of them....dont get me started

and the people driving high powered/modded cars....i think if you already own one you should be able to keep it...from what i heard about modding your car the bloke on the news was saying something about power to weight

I dont know all the guys you meet but out of every 17 yr old I've met (Most of my old schools new grade 12s) I'd say about 5% is mature...

5%? Generous!

Once again, this is the paper pushing tossers trying to use regulation rather than effective training.

Liquidity, I don't know what testing is like over east, but here bike vs. car license is very different. A bike license tests both your ability to brake rapidly and your awareness of the roads around you. When I sat my test, I was passed only after a discussion with the examiner, explaining the dangers of riding, and the need to ensure you check around your at all times, including each side street as you pass. He stressed these points so strongly, I thought I must have only just scraped through. My on paper results? 1 point off perfect. One light controlled intersection, I looked for oncoming traffic later than I should have. This test to me was easily ten times more thorough than the joke I sat through for my car license.


I learnt more from 5 hours with my bike instructor than I have in nearly 5 years on the road now (and I average about 1000k's a week in the last 4 years). He taught things about road awareness and defensive driving that no car driver teaches. They tell you all about perfect parking etc becuase that is what our retarded system tests!

The problem is not power, passengers or distractions. It is a system that does not make our young drivers aware of the dangers these provide, and therefore make decisions themselves. I know what can happen in the blink of an eye. I know that a minor mistake, that may have no consequence at 60kph can kill you at 100kph. I know that it's scary how long it can take to wash off those last few kph. But P platers don't. They are not taught about the limits, they are taught to drive like scarred little rabbits, easing on the accelerator and brake pedals. Then we give them a plastic card, they are let loose with the ability to put foot to the floor, for the first time in an uncontrolled environment with all its dangers and distractions. If they are lucky like most of us, they learn. The rest appear on the front page of the sunday paper as the latest result of 'idiotic driving'.

Idiotic driving? A system that thinks speed camera's are more worth while than driver training. A system that test's your ability to drive at 1kph in between 2 white lines, but not your ability to control a car in any form of emergency system. A system that thinks an on screen hazard perception test has any relevence to a real life situation. But wait, we can relax now. They have limits on passengers.

dont get me started on speed cameras, ahaha.

[quote name='Midol' date='Aug 13 2006, 11:03 PM' post='698795'] I dont know all the guys you meet but out of every 17 yr old I've met (Most of my old schools new grade 12s) I'd say about 5% is mature...

Id have to disagree, i dont know about the 17y.o's in QLD, but down here in sydney you dont see every p-plater driving like a hooligan, or doing immature things... Not to say p-platers drive like their grandmas ... but that doesnt mean all p platers are immature, espically not 95%. There are many who do drive like clowns, who have no idea, but not 95%. And btw, ive seen many full licensed drivers who a just as immature as any p plater ive ever seen. I agree experience is a factor, but still.



But i will stress i dont know what the roads are like in QLD... Maybe theres not much driver education up there, but theres a fair bit down here stressing about dangers of speeding, drink driving, etc etc.

X2 "the[K]id", the government should make young people more aware of the dangers of driving rather than put all these bs laws in. Its a must in my opinion, im lucky to have an older brother and cousins to preach how stupid speeding is as well as other things, but many young people dont have anyone their age to tell them the dangers, so they just go out and drive unaware of what can happen from been a nut, even though their parents might say dont speed, but many of us would agree when your young dont always listen to what your parents say because you think their just been over protective.

They taught us the dangers of driving and my driving teacher trained me by putting my foot down. I was taught all of that. I was also taught to accelerate as fast as possible (safely and within reason) to get to the speed limit yet no one else does.

No one cares. Most teenagers don't give a crap what they are taught or what they hear. I'll put $50 saying these laws work.

theres no substitute for experience.



get L platers on the road for longer and teach em how to drive. even if u have to start @ 14 and finish @ 18.



btw skill does not equal experience.



when i wrote off my car i could have very easily have driven around the kanagroo. i didn't. why? because i couldn't see wat was around the blind corner. experience saved me from going around the kangaroo and head first into another car, where skill would've saved me from hitting the roo but driving into a car.



and im only 20.

Scorp: They addressed experience. Lowered age to 16 and raised P's to 17 and you need 100 hours of logged experience. Now, I know alot of parents are going to lie and just sign it but 100hrs of paid teaching would cost $4500 (via my teacher).

no they haven't really adressed it.



the new laws in queensland are no different to those that have been in place in NSW for quite some time.



perhaps a longer period on ur L's??



there is a fair amount of research proving driver training isn't the answer. rally car drivers are the most likely drivers to be involved in an accident (per capita) than any other group of ppl (some american research).



i know from my situation i did stupid things wen i first got onto my p's. by the time i was on my p's i could drive practically anything, bikes, tractors even a quad axel low loader carrying a 30ton excavator.



the reason why i ran into a kangaroo was because i was over confident but because i had 9 yrs of driving experience i didn't get into a situation where i could kill myself.



how do we address the problem of overconfidence? it isn't education. everyone knows that if u do something silly u could end up killing someone. but we still do silly things.



do we just toss em in the deep and let em go?

They have tried, they can't change it too much in one leap - everyone will be screaming at them. They have added another 6 months on your Ls... Doesn't matter if it has always been 1yr in NSW it wasn't in QLD. It is a change.

You also can't claim research has been done showing training isnt the answer and not back it up. If you say research has been done/studies have been done you should reference them. If I have the choice of driving into a ditch or into an animal I'll choose the ditch - I don't care if my life is at risk I just can't purposely drive my car into an animal... If others are in the car I'd probably go straight through the Roo as I wouldn't want to risk their health/lives.

Can't get rid of over confidence, I was confident, not over confident but confident on the road. I've never even done a burn out on the road!

go watch the video we watched in yr 10. driver i think its called?? its not the one where they interview that kid that killed his friend. that may also be driver. i cant remember.



well, overconfidence is the key to stopping many incidents involving p platers.



just like fatigue is the key to stopping fatalities on country roads.



and speed is the reason why so many ppl die in accidents in the city.



in victoria it is 2 yrs on L plates. so really, restriciting the use of powerful cars isn't really going to achieve anything is it? its just gonna make some pen pushers look good to the sheep who jump to conclusions without actually thinking, why do these accidents actually happen?



oh, and next time u cite an experience u had. we want corroborating evidence aswell.

Experience doesn't need a reference It is primary source

2yrs is far to long unless they lower the learners age.

yup, 16 yrs to 18 yrs.



well actually, i used experience to back up what i said. i said had learned that someone else had used there experience to measure fatalities and the group they fall in.



its the same as anecdotal evidence when i used the 'statisitcs' without referencing. theres no way u can tell i wasn't making it up, nor is there any way i can tell that u made ur exeperience up.



but then, why would u lie? i trust u enough to take ur word for it and its fool me if im wrong.



now that im thinking of it. why dont we have younger ppl learning how to drive? make the only requirements that they can physically reach the pedals and look over the wheel? honestly, the maturity between a 16 yo and a 14 yo isn't really that much different when u look @ it. dont u think u often mature alot when u first start driving?



have L plates for 4 years? thats probably the best way to kill over confidence maybe?

Ohhh... I see, you live in Vic I didn't see that!

Personally. I don't know if 2yrs is any better than 1, I suppose it would be and since you can only drive on your L's with someone on their fulls maturity wouldn't really matter. I guess its that society would be 'frightened' of 14yr olds driving?

i think some sort of random testing is the answer

people get picked at random to do a practical and theory test to see how they are....that way those people that for whatever reason cannot operate a motor vehicle with some tact will be off the road until they are worthy of a licence

either that or a mandatory test for everyone like every 5 -10 years but then its already hard enough to book a driving test for the newbies....its like a 3 - 4 week wait...imagine if older people had to do it

i dont see why anyone should be complaining....experience is the key....everyone thinks they are 10 foot tall and bulletproff the day they get thier licence (i know i did) but after 6 months or in my case 1 month of solid driving i dont think that a forced induction or high performance motor is needed

the first few years like it or not are to learn about driving

thats right riley. the only way for ppl to be safe on the road is experience. not there skill or knowledge of the rules.

we just have to be able to protect us more when we do finally come to driveing by ourselves.


maybe the community doesn't like the idea of 14 yo's driving. maybe all this talk of anti hooning etc isn't about saving lives but making us feel better about ourselves by pretending we are doing something about the problem?

These anti hooning laws do nothing, and I know countless people who have been victimised because the cops have always wanted them but never been able to but now they bullcrap their way into fining them.

I do heaps more driving than most people. I do about 1,000-5,000km a week, on average about 2,000 though.

Whats so wrong with being on your L's for 4 years, and your P's for another 4? Or 6, or 8.



And I think the Idea behind these laws are to make it harder, not impossible, for young drivers to kill themselves. The power-to-weight ratio thing I whole-heartedly agree with. Why should a P plater be driving a 300kW monster? Its too easy to speed in one. ITS EASY. So lets make it harder. Lets force them to drive an excel. Its harder, but not impossible, to hit 180km/h in those things. ITS EASIER for a young person to justify stupid actions on the road to themselves when their mates are in the car. Lets make it harder. Its not impossible to do, but now its just harder.



Doing a number of k's on the road gives you experience, but what you need is exposure. I could drive at 200km/h every day across the nullabor plain, for an entire year, and it would still not prepare me for an encounter with pedestrians whilst doing 60 through the city. You need to have your best friend killed due to fatigue, you need to lose control at high speed to realise how easy it is, you need to be put in those situations. I have done many many k's of driving in my life, but all of them wrapped up could never prepare me (NEVER!!) for what I had to deal with when those situations came knocking on my door. Advanced driver training courses are the ONLY way to safely put someone in the situations, and allow them to learn how to get out of them. Nothing else.



Until someone realises this, it is at least expected by me for the coffers to do whatever they can to make it harder for a young person to die.

but its not actually achieveing anything matt.



and by the way. if u think u can drive out of most near fatal accidents then ur are inexperienced and think u r bulletproof. why do most fatal accidents happen? its because u r asleep or are over confident or just plain driving to fast. in any case ur f***ed because ur not alert or not expecting something to go wrong.



this is why driver training will never ever be effective.



the only way to prevent fatalities is by preventing the chance of an accident to happen. wat are we tryin to achieve by introducing the new laws?? tryin to eliminate overconfidence. but its really not that an effective way of doing something now is it?



oh and by the way, driving @ 200kmh mightn't actually be speeding across the nullabor. do u know why? its because the only way u r going to die is if u fall asleep basically.



but driving across the mountains @ 60kmh @ night in an 80 zone may still be speeding because the drvier may not be able to control the vehicle in those given circumstances. thats wat speeding is, it has nothing to do with those signs on the side of the road.

My driving in the area I work has taught me far more than the Advanced Driving Training Course I did. The course was good, but I learnt ALOT more from driving on the streets, luckily no one lost their lives (Night time, drunk people, middle of the road... stuff like that).

I just went from my Daewoo Cielo to a Toyota Lexen (3.8l) and the power difference is amazing. I am glad I had the daewoo first even if it was only for 4-5 months.

you cant be taught how to account for dickheads, idiots and people who just cant drive and old people....or have i just repeated myself

in the works of ronnie johns as chopper "if you forget everything you've learnt, close your eyes and give it plenty of f**king horn"

You can't?

I'm getting used to people who can't drive. People who seem to have no idea what indicators are... those ones annoy me.