Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

VIC Call for Even Longer Ps

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by DenholmReynholm, May 21, 2013.

  1. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-...licences-to-cut-road-toll/4702454?section=vic

    Only in Vic would this idea have a shred of credibility. I wasn't aware that p plates had magical properties which kept you safe on the road.

    Just days after qld laid out some sensible changes too.

    As a side not I've close friends in Vic, one is 21 and still can't go for their opens until next year. This means they cannot hire a car anywhere in the world, and riders could be on LAMS for 7/8 years if this is made law.

  2. I cringe at the thought.
  3. I believe they are talking about how the zero BAC period would be continued longer than is now given they referred to drunk driving as being a big factor.

    I am confused by this comment. What do you mean by "opens" and why can't your friend go for them until next year?

    Also, I was able to hire a car on my Ps, but had to pay a significant surcharge per day. It was not based on my licence type though but my age. And "anywhere in the world" is a bit of an exaggeration. A lot of places don't care if you have the cash.

    Anyway, I am glad I got done with Ps seven years ago, it's so restrictive now. Has there been any stats to back up whether or not the restrictions have helped road safety at all?
  4. Typical bureaucratic TOTAL fcukING FAILURE....

    bureaucratic thinking..... 20-25yo over-represented in the stats.....lets go after them.....

    instead of looking for the root cause...ie the abysmal standards of vehicle operator education / training.

    Mental midgets....FFS

    rant over
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. Yeah, anywhere may have been an exaggeration, by opens I mean full licence, they said its to do with time spent since getting red ps, impossible to upgrade until next year.

    The BAC argument holds no credibility, if someone has a BAC of 0.10 then they are over the limit and would be regardless of what the limit is. The only people "saved" by reducing the legal BAC are those killed with a content of 0.04, I.e. those who follow the rules.
  6. Yes I was wondering of what the actual BAC was for the deaths too. I think it could possibly help somewhat as if you know you cannot drink at all, then more might not have any alcohol. But if you know you can be up to 0.05, you might drink a little too much.

    As someone else said though licencing requirements aren't very high so addressing that might have more impact.
  7. Seems to be mainly about the push for zero BA, not so much vehicle limits, although they would no doubt want as many restrictions as they can possibly get. They always do.
  8. I wonder how I survived all these years without ever having gone through the P plate stage.
  9. It was pleasing to hear the NSW Top Traffic cop say something to the effect of, better to train divers in their responsibilities than impose this sort of restriction.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. ^ I like, would you have a link to his comment mick?
  11. A young girl who works for me, is having trouble getting ready to sit her P's test because she has problems reverse parking. Considering a fair portion of new cars can do this on their own, and i think in 25 years I have had to use this skill only a handful of times, yet have to instigate an emergency stop half a dozen times a year due to the blind and stupid still being on the roads. When they teach drivers defensive drive techniques and make actually driving skills the focus instead of how to park the bloody thing, then they might reduce those damn statistics.

    Personally, make the BAC zero across the board. Commercial drivers and restricted drivers have to have zero. Make it zero for everyone, but allow the pubs and clubs to provide their own transport for their patrons.
  12. It was on Sunrise this morning, I only caught part of it.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. #13 ibast, May 21, 2013
    Last edited: May 21, 2013
    "Bruce Corban, from Monash University's Accident Research Centre, says extending probationary periods would save lives.

    "I would imagine that we'd be looking for something in the order of 30 to 40 fewer deaths each year and probably ten to 20 serious injuries," he said."

    Apparently imagination has replaced science these days. I believe in unicorns.

    Jebus Farking Chriist

    Cracking down on P-platers is popular politics and nothing more. It's an easy target and doesn't have to be based on reality, because everybody knows those young hoodlems are just trouble.
  14. It worries me that the way they state the statistics they make it sound like there is absolute carnage on the roads, when in fact there is only a relatively small number of deaths per year and even fewer related to alcohol.

    As for making the BAC Zero, I think that's a bit unrealistic. I think the limit is fine where it is. However, the punishments for causing an incident when you are over the limit should be massively increased to include minimum gaol terms where they have caused serious injury or the death of another person.
  15. Didn't one of our morons say something along the lines of increased training will lead to hoon behaviour. I could be completely wrong but for some reason I think it was that genius Lay.
  16. it's ridiculous.

    the justification for it is to reduce drink driving. great. but that doesn't mean P's need to be extended, and certainly not by age!... considering that the studies ive seen indicate drink driving is more of a problem with 30+ ages...

    don't extend the P's... just extend the alcohol component...

    there's other factors that will be affected by keeping people on P's, whether it's vehicle restrictions, or less demerit points, or higher insurance and interstate/international beurocracy due to not having a "full" license... all to target a group who arent the worst offenders for the crime.

    I applaud the idea of reducing drink drivers on the roads, and it's a lot easier to start by not letting new drivers get behind the wheel after a couple of drinks and get into bad habits... but lets at least call it what it is... social engineering ... aknowledge that's what it's about, own up, and phase out the 0.05 limit if thats what you're trying to do... not say it's about P's and then when enough of the population have gotten used to the idea just extend it on the sly.

    I AM concerned though that this may be another Melbourne centric policy... it's certainly easier to plan your nights transport... and the next day if you have a big-ish one... if you live somewhere with appropriate public transport. If you work on a farm, have a big night and get done on your way to work the next day with a sub 0.05 reading when you THOUGHT you were being responsible it's a pretty crap situation.... this happened to my sister when she was on her P's (sucked in lol) but working on a farm, with no public transport, she thought she would have been fine and blew 0.01 at 11am the next day.... and lost her license.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Hill is claiming 40% of casualties in the 19-25 group are alcohol related. If that were true it would be significant and concerning. But, RACV and others are questioning that figure and where he got it from. He hasn't got a high level of credibility on figures and neither do VP as a whole.

    Good point IMO. 0.00% is a ridiculous and unfair standard. Your stomach can produce enough alcohol all by itself to cause you to lose your license without consuming any alcoholic beverage. A fair and effective result could be achieved with a level of 0.02%. That's low enough to force young drinkers to plan ahead without capturing accidental victims.

    MUARC is now (ABC news interview) claiming responsibility for this idea and openly declaring that the overall goal is to reduce the number of vehicles on the road and get reductions through mitigating exposure. They are also talking about extending to to older drivers, progressively.
  18. And being in PROPER control of the vehicle in all directions and speeds
    ( including walking pace ) is not a desirable element of a licence test ??
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1

  19. How's that credibility going there, Bruce? Or did you just pull that one out of your arse?