BF2S Forums Driving Age in the UK to become 18

Oooh. One year. Most people don't even get their cars until they've left sixth form/college anyway.

Turquoise wrote:

I wish the drinking age was 18 here.

You say that like the fact that it isn't somehow stops people. I wish the penalties for drug crimes and such like this were harsher.

Still, there's a movement going through in my state to raise the age to 18 here, yet it doesn't seem like it will happen soon, if ever. The majority of people still suck at driving at any age, though.

Last edited by DesertFox- (2007-12-28 15:10:29)

I hate that Gwyneth woman. Wish she'd give it a rest.


When is the birth date that will be excluded? Like Jan 1st 1991 or something? Then anyone born after that can drive.

gay tbh, doesnt stop me driving

Turquoise wrote:

You simply cannot keep substances of high demand from the people.  The government is here to protect us from each other, not from ourselves.

If I want to smoke a blunt, the government should mind its own damn business.

I agree with you.  While I don't smoke marijuana, nor would I if it were legal, it really shouldn't be illegal.  But where does that belief break down?  Should all substances be legal?  Should narcotics no longer be controlled?  Heroine?  Cocaine?

That's the problem with that argument.

Turquoise wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I wish the drinking age was 18 here.

You say that like the fact that it isn't somehow stops people. I wish the penalties for drug crimes and such like this were harsher.

Uh...  that sounds rather fascist.  You do realize Prohibition didn't work, which is most of the reason why the War on Drugs doesn't work.

You simply cannot keep substances of high demand from the people.  The government is here to protect us from each other, not from ourselves.

If I want to smoke a blunt, the government should mind its own damn business.

I'm aware of how facist it is.

Prohibition is part of my logic why I despise drugs like alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and whatever else people use. Even though it was against the law and provides no beneficial effects on the body from a medicinal standpoint, there was still demand. Drugs have society by the nutsack, and the message is now that alcohol is okay. It's expanding to a state of indifference towards drug use. People don't care enough to get rid of the scourges on society right now. Alcohol is probably the most commonly abused drug today; people drink several at a single sitting without even thinking.
Unless you're on a drug like opium, where you want to find a nook away from others, you're likely going to be out with people. If you want to use drugs do so, but guarantee me that you're not going to be able to harm anyone else via driving or even being out near people. That's where the government has to protect us from each other.

I've had a unique upbringing in that I was raised in a household without alcohol. My dad has an intolerance to wheat so he can't have beer or other alcohol made from grains, and my mom rarely drank. I always get so upset when I go on Facebook and see tagged pics of my friends where they're drunk as loons and still underage. I'm hoping that somehow they learn their lesson about moderation, but moreso that they society acknowledges this as wrong via giving them an arrest and seeing how that helps. I plan never to drink alcohol in my life, but with college starting soon, it may be harder than I imagine. My philosophy towards drugs is: there's no logical reason to use them recreationally.

My mind was racing while making that like it always does so it may seem incoherent and jumpy

On topic though:
The UK folk drive on the left.

Last edited by DesertFox- (2007-12-28 15:33:42)

DesertFox- wrote:

Unless you're on a drug like opium, where you want to find a nook away from others, you're likely going to be out with people. If you want to use drugs do so, but guarantee me that you're not going to be able to harm anyone else via driving or even being out near people. That's where the government has to protect us from each other.

That is why public intoxication is illegal.  The government does protect us from each other in that respect.

Bell wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Before this gets derailed much further, let me just say that I agree with you to an extent, DesertFox, but the social nature of alcohol is best demonstrated in countries like Germany.

America is not as good at holding its liquor because it does not immerse its people in alcohol with a family atmosphere.  We treat it as a taboo until we turn 21.  This is not a healthy way to live.

Familiarity with a substance in a guided tolerant environment is sure to minimize abuse of that substance in later life.

Totally agree with that, while I was growing up, when I had a friend over, they where almost amazed at the idea we where offered alchol (not exactly strong mind u), and it was asked with no more hesitation than asking if you want coke or pepsi.  My familiararity is what I put down to my views on alchol.  YOU ARE LEGAL TO DRINK!  And?  Good way I think.

More so on the actual idea of increasing the age.  I think so.  Young men are the most likely to get into accidents, and lets face it, these things are lethal weapons, not 17 year olds arent capable of driving cars safely, am sure there are exceptions, but the fact is, out of everyone sitting there test, there the ones more likely to get into an accident.  IF this proved to increase the level of driving seen on public roads, that can only be a good thing surely? 

Though, if they want to charge you a fortune for it, think the argument looses all its steam tbh.

Martyn

You could argue that the reason why 17 year olds are most likely to have an accident is because they have just passed their test. If it goes to 18, it will still be the same.

jord wrote:

You could argue that the reason why 17 year olds are most likely to have an accident is because they have just passed their test. If it goes to 18, it will still be the same.

Yep...  Good point.

Proposals in the MPs' report, called Novice Drivers, include:


people learning to drive from the age of 17, but not taking the test until they are 18

drivers completing a set minimum number of lessons with a structured syllabus

extending hazard-perception training using computer simulators to encourage better habits in young drivers-to-be

a zero alcohol limit for all drivers for a year after passing their test

banning drivers from carrying passengers aged between 10 and 20 from 11pm to 5am for a year after passing their test

What is the current arrangement with driving in the UK?


In Australia (New South Wakes at least), we can start learning from 16, but are not able to take the test for our P's (provisional licence) until we are 17. We have to complete a mandatory 50 hours of driving during that time, but it's being/has been increased to 120 hours. We then hold our Red P's for a year. After that is a computer hazard perception test then the Green P's for 2 years (before a full licence).


The proposals cited from the article don't seem that bad in terms of Zero BAC (blood alcohol content). For P's here its 0.00 BAC. It's just a pain for the morning after a party... sometimes we can't drive until midday.

We also have the passenger restrictions from 11pm - the driver and one passenger. This is total bullshit: it destroyed the Designated Driver scheme.

SenorToenails wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

You simply cannot keep substances of high demand from the people.  The government is here to protect us from each other, not from ourselves.

If I want to smoke a blunt, the government should mind its own damn business.

I agree with you.  While I don't smoke marijuana, nor would I if it were legal, it really shouldn't be illegal.  But where does that belief break down?  Should all substances be legal?  Should narcotics no longer be controlled?  Heroine?  Cocaine?

That's the problem with that argument.

Eh... let's just start with legalizing the soft drugs, and then we'll discuss the harder ones.

mcminty wrote:

Proposals in the MPs' report, called Novice Drivers, include:


people learning to drive from the age of 17, but not taking the test until they are 18

drivers completing a set minimum number of lessons with a structured syllabus

extending hazard-perception training using computer simulators to encourage better habits in young drivers-to-be

a zero alcohol limit for all drivers for a year after passing their test

banning drivers from carrying passengers aged between 10 and 20 from 11pm to 5am for a year after passing their test

What is the current arrangement with driving in the UK?


In Australia (New South Wakes at least), we can start learning from 16, but are not able to take the test for our P's (provisional licence) until we are 17. We have to complete a mandatory 50 hours of driving during that time, but it's being/has been increased to 120 hours. We then hold our Red P's for a year. After that is a computer hazard perception test then the Green P's for 2 years (before a full licence).


The proposals cited from the article don't seem that bad in terms of Zero BAC (blood alcohol content). For P's here its 0.00 BAC. It's just a pain for the morning after a party... sometimes we can't drive until midday.

We also have the passenger restrictions from 11pm - the driver and one passenger. This is total bullshit: it destroyed the Designated Driver scheme.

You can get your provisional license at 17, which allows you to drive with someone who has passed their test more than three years earlier and is over 21. You can take your theory test, which I'm told now includes hazard perception, then if you pass that you can book your driving test. Pass your driving test and you have a full license. If you take your test in an automatic you don't get a full license though, only a license to drive automatics.