- Th crash didn't cost a life, just a mere .... £260,000!

Better driving needs to be an obligation, and that starts at the beginning.

In short I just don't see why we have to have motorists, and advanced motorists... why are we not all at the trained level of the advanced motorists?

1y ago
496

Having been a driver for 28 years now, and having seen many things happen on the roads... and done many things on the roads I have tried as hard as possible to improve my driving as much as i humanly can. I have taken skid pan training, cold weather training, motorway driving and of course the Institute of Advanced Motoring training and I now have a serious question.... why is the competence level of the "standard" driving test so low? why are we not all "advanced motorists"?nd having seen many things happen on the roads... and done many things on the roads I have tried as hard as possible to improve my driving as much as i humanly can. I have taken skid pan training, cold weather training, motorway driving and of course the Institute of Advanced Motoring training and I now have a serious question.... why is the competence level of the "standard" driving test so low? why are we not all "advanced motorists"?

To me it is an obvious common sense that the standard road driving test is little more than a starting place, and that it is incumbent on the driver to advance themselves and their skills, not least to avoid killing people on the roads. Yet insurance companies will ALL tell you that the period when a driver is MOST likely to have an accident, is within the first 5 years after passing their driving test. Now of course, there is an element of experience that makes a driver less likely to have an accident, but it has been proven many times that a good substitute for experience is good training and that some of the inexperience (never all) can be mitigated by good quality and more extensive training.

Various studies over the past 30 years have all concluded that younger and more inexperienced drivers are between 5 and 35 times more likely to have a road traffic accident (RTA), conclusively proving that inexperience and less training (be it through less formal or through less time at the university of hard knocks) does increase the likelihood of an RTA. An associated question is: Surely, we should be valuing human life more than we are? In setting the bar so low the government seems to have disregarded one of the fundamental requirements of its own existence, to protect the human life it presides over, but that's another story... The fact is that having a standard driving test where the standard required to pass is costing more lives than is really necessary makes no sense, especially when we have a system in place that can and does reduce road traffic accidents, yet in Britain, the powers that be seem to not want to use it... it's the institute of advanced motorists! You know the people, they were once described by one Mr Clarkson as the "ten to two gang". Now, i will run my colours up the flagpole, I have done the course that the IAM runs and frankly it did improve my driving, yes... I am one of the "ten to two gang".... Right, formalities concluded, I think it's time somebody stated the screamingly obvious.... but that is what this article is all about.

The Advanced Driving course provided by the Institute is described as being able to:

Increase your confidence and on the road knowledge by becoming an Advanced Driver – and be recognised for your skills.

Improved skills and knowledge

DVSA Quality Assured

Possible cheaper insurance

Boost your confidence

Greater awareness of other road users

Increased anticipation of hazards

Opportunities to make better progress in your journey

You will get all that benefit for a sum total of £149.00 and thereafter stand less chance of having a road traffic accident. So why on earth do we not train new drivers to this level as well??? Yes I know it will mean that the driving test is more arduous and would take longer to achieve the end result, but so it should, the entire idea that a driving test should be a quick and easy thing reflects a degree of nonchalance, that simply shouldn't be behind the wheel of a car!

To my way of thinking, we should adopt a very Japanese principle when it comes to driving, that of constant striving to be the best we can be, and maybe there should be a system in place where drivers who do take this principle to heart are rewarded for their commitment to not just self improvement but also their willingness to .... not kill people!!! Surely that wouldn't be so difficult to instigate? No, it really wouldn't because of course the IAM already states that participants of the course would be recognised for their efforts , and that this course may lead to cheaper insurance, why not carry those benefits forward to a nationally more advanced driving test that would supersede the clearly deficient effort that we have now.

Saving lives...... how hard can it be???

To me it is an obvious common sense that the standard road driving test is little more than a starting place, and that it is incumbent on the driver to advance themselves and their skills, not least to avoid killing people on the roads. Yet insurance companies will ALL tell you that the period when a driver is MOST likely to have an accident, is within the first 5 years after passing their driving test. Now of course, there is an element of experience that makes a driver less likely to have an accident, but it has been proven many times that a good substitute for experience is good training and that some of the inexperience (never all) can be mitigated by good quality and more extensive training.

Various studies over the past 30 years have all concluded that younger and more inexperienced drivers are between 5 and 35 times more likely to have a road traffic accident (RTA), conclusively proving that inexperience and less training (be it through less formal or through less time at the university of hard knocks) does increase the likelihood of an RTA. An associated question is: Surely we should be valuing human life more than we are? In setting the bar so low the government seems to have disregarded one of the fundamental requirements of its own existence, to protect the human life it presides over, but that's another story... The fact is that having a standard driving test where the standard required to pass is costing more lives than is really necessary makes no sense, especially when we have a system in place that can and does reduce road traffic accidents, yet in Britain, the powers that be seem to not want to use it... it's the institute of advanced motorists! You know the people, they were once described by one Mr Clarkson as the "ten to two gang". Now, i will run my colours up the flagpole, I have done the course that the IAM runs and frankly it did improve my driving, yes... I am one of the "ten to two gang".... Right, formalities concluded, I think it's time somebody stated the screamingly obvious.... but that is what this article is all about.

The Advanced Driving course provided by the Institute is described as being able to:

Increase your confidence and on the road knowledge by becoming an Advanced Driver – and be recognised for your skills.

Improved skills and knowledge

DVSA Quality Assured

Possible cheaper insurance

Boost your confidence

Greater awareness of other road users

Increased anticipation of hazards

Opportunities to make better progress in your journey

You will get all that benefit for a sum total of £149.00 and thereafter stand less chance of having a road traffic accident. So why on earth do we not train new drivers to this level as well??? Yes I know it will mean that the driving test is more arduous and would take longer to achieve the end result, but so it should, the entire idea that a driving test should be a quick and easy thing reflects a degree of nonchalance, that simply shouldn't be behind the wheel of a car!

To my way of thinking, we should adopt a very Japanese principle when it comes to driving, that of constant striving to be the best we can be, and maybe there should be a system in place where drivers who do take this principle to heart are rewarded for their commitment to not just self improvement but also their willingness to .... not kill people!!! Surely that wouldn't be so difficult to instigate? No, it really wouldn't, because of course the IAM already states that participants of the course would be recognised for their efforts , and that this course may lead to cheaper insurance, why not carry those benefits forward to a nationally more advanced driving test that would supersede the clearly deficient effort that we have now. Why, oh why are we not using this higher standard of driving education.... as standard???

Saving lives...... how hard can it be???

Join In

Comments (14)

  • Did you just copy and paste this article. There is a lot of repetition. Bit like the 10 to 2 hand movement.

      1 year ago
    • While I try not to be insulted by your question, and ignorance, I would point out that if you can find this piece of wringing anywhere else that is, verbatim, the same.... and tell me where it is then and only then would I concede to...

      Read more
        1 year ago
    • Correction the entire article is repeated, still it’s not hard to discern that.

        1 year ago
  • Unfortunately, for every one of us who see driving as an art, and a skill to be constantly practiced, and an automobile as a tool of that craft, and an instrument of our discipline, there are 99 who see driving as a right, and the car as an appliance.

      1 year ago
    • I have to agree but the basic premise is one that people should be forced to be better drivers and to realise that a car can, in fact, be a weapon.

        1 year ago
    • I don’t disagree, but...good luck with that. It’s not gonna happen.

        1 year ago
14