To think yes actually it IS time to legislate to stop teenage drivers driving a car full of their mates around at night?

[northernlurker]

Very distressing story on BBC here. If you don't want to click - it's 5 teens killed last night in the same car. Two girls, three boys. I have a child the same age as some of them and it's just so sad. I've always thought that you couldn't legislate for this but something has to be done. There was a triple fatal crash on the same bit of road also involving teens a few years ago and it happens again and again. The first funeral I ever went to was a girl in the year above me at school. There were 4 in that car. Two killed, one badly injured and one slightly hurt.
If teenage drivers were limited to no more than two passengers under the age of 21 would it help?

I think most people who took a test every 10 years would fail, you would need driving lessons before hand as well.

I don't think anyone who has been driving for years drive to the driving test standard, not because they are dangerous, just because the lessons mostly teach you how to pass your test. I only passed a year ago and not confident I would pass the test again, although I am a safe driver.

I doubt very much many people here who could pass the first time now. especially if they took the test years ago and don't know how strict it actually is now.

I suggest that we wait until we know the facts before judging who was to blame, or rushing to the assumption that the young people must have been at fault.

It sounds from the news as though the police feel that a driver in a completely different car may have been responsible.

Are the people who are calling for black boxes to be mandatory, assuming that all new drivers have their own cars?

That's not going to be the case in our house, nor in many, going by my experience.
I'm not going to tie myself to being unable to drive after a certain time, and whatever other restrictions it puts on you, because I've added one of my dc onto my insurance.

A black box doesn't stop you from driving at certain times, etc. But it is linked to your insurance and your premiums change according to how you drive - the data is uploaded and analysed.

According to Money Supermarket website:

So what are the drawbacks?

Although black box insurance seems like a much fairer system, it's not without its drawbacks. One is that you could have the cost of the 'black box' and its installation added to the cost of your cover. However, it is unlikely that this will outweigh the potential savings.

Another drawback is that, if you cover a lot of miles, say during a lengthy commute to work and back, you may not see any savings at all - and may even end up paying more than if you had taken out a traditional policy.

In addition, if it turns out that you are not as safe and considerate a driver as you first thought, you may also end up paying more for your cover. However, the way the system works means that you would at least have a chance to put this right.

And while it may seem a little unsettling to have your every move tracked via satellite, this can have its advantages. For instance, it can pinpoint blame if you are involved in a collision or can even trace your vehicle if it is stolen.

SelfconfessedSpoonyFucker

However, it would appear that most statistics and research disagrees with you. Hence why it is far more expensive to insure yourself on a more powerful car. It is a greater risk, therefore it costs more to insure. And for some cars it is almost impossible to become insured on these types of cars.

Once they've passed their test they should have as many rights as anybody else. If they made people who had held a licence do a retest at least half of them would fail., getting a driving licence in this country is far from easy

Add to this any restriction would have to be linked to how many years they'd held a licence to be consistent then mature learners would also come under it.

Some of the black boxes are linked to insurance for young people where they can't drive at night.
Obviously they won't 'stop' you but it will invalidate your insurance / cost you more.
Hence the poor lad who lost his life

That's what I thought Damnautocorrect

I'm not opposed to restrictions on new/young drivers but I'm yet to see a good solution that 'fits'.

Wrt this case though, didn't the five in the car together meet up with the 21-yr-old driver earlier in the evening? It is odd, not sure what happened. So very tragic.

If statistically it's more young people in accidents and they should have restrictions, should you then go through other groups and see who causes the most accidents, for example if it were men (just an example) should we then make all men do all these extra things or have extra restrictions? It makes no sense. Nearly every accident around here in the past few years I have heard about that ended with a fatality it was men at fault.

I don't personally agree with the restrictions, but that's essentially the same theory surely.

To clarify, I'm not saying anything against men. Just that if you're going down the statistics route you'd have to punish everyone else too by that logic

Hence why it is far more expensive to insure yourself on a more powerful car

Not necessarily. It comes down to the risk profile of the driver/car combo. You'd be surprised.

We have had a lot of high powered cars over the past few years. As a 41yo woman with no points, etc and no my-fault accidents, living in a low risk area - ime insurance on high powered cars are always a fair bit more than on low powered cars. Has been exactly the same for DH too.

DH has to organise and pay for insurance for a few of his younger clients - again, our experience of this has always been that the cheaper insurance is on the lower powered and cheaper cars.

Damnautocorrect There are plenty of insurance companies which doesn't have that restriction though. None of the black box insurances DH has organised for his clients has restricted them from driving at night or driving on any particular roads.

DS2 is insured with Ingenie and has a black box. There are no restrictions wrt when he can drive, and what time he has to be home by. He just has to drive within the speed limits, not accelerate too quickly, brake sharply and take corners smoothly.

TBH I wouldn't care if I had one on my car. I am insured to drive DS2's, and when I do drive it, it really makes you think and take notice of what you are doing. It has made me more aware of my driving in general and I would consider myself a safe driver, I passed at 17, am 43 now, have no points and no accidents where it has been my fault.

If you need a high powered car to get you out of a sticky situation then that's a sign you need to review your driving practice and anticipation skills because the art is not being IN a sticky situation to begin with, not how well you can get out of it.

Should be not brake sharply! If he brakes sharply and suddenly at junctions he won't get the discount!

Agree. Age 17 a female friend of mine drive three of her friends home at 10pm. No alcohol was involved but she was a new driver and didnt understand the junction. Her lack of knowledge killed two of my classmates, destroyed our year and the driver left our sixth form without finishing her a levels. I often wonder about her and hope shes ok now. Yanbu.

I don't know how the stats compare for the age group mentioned, but the UK has some of the safest roads in the world so I'm not sure why we should look to other countries. I've taken tests in the UK and the USA and the standard of driving in the USA is not one I'd be looking to emulate.

I don't agree with further restrictions. I grew up rurally, just about everyone I know started driving at 17, plenty passed their tests on their 17th birthday (farming area). I don't know anybody who had major crashes. You never hear about the sensible ones.

One of the best things my parents ever did was to say that if I was ever in a car and uncomfortable with the way someone was driving I was to get out and they would come and get me, no matter if it was 3am or 30 miles away.

I live in the fens of Norfolk , where our village roads have fifteen foot ditches either side of the road , and the surfaces are very unforgiving . Every year on the same bend we have a minimum of a dozen vehicles in the ditch due to a lack of warning , from skip lorries to motorcyclists . There is no public transport , none at all , so teenagers only option is to drive if they ever want to get anywhere . My DS has just bought his own car , and is due to sit his test in January , and even though I know he's sensible , even though I know his mates are sensible , I have to admit I'm dreading him passing , as my dad did me . At the time I didn't see why , but now , my god I do . I know a lot of my fear is because of what I do , and what I've had to deal with, but I'm not looking forward to it at all . He will have a black box fitted and he'll have to get used to it .

lack of warning? Of what? Do you mean 'going too fast'?

there are three wrecked cars on a road I use every day (fortunately no fatalities). I and plenty of other people use the road without incident. It's limit is 60, but go faster than that or that fast in poor conditions and you'll be in the adjacent fields.

it's not hard really.

No , I mean lack of warning .

It's a national speed limit road , with a bend to the left but no warning that it's there . No chevron marker , no road markings and because it's the fens and dead flat , you can see for miles across the land , creating an optical illusion that the road carries straight on, when in fact it's an almost ninety degree bend . The ditch isn't even visible till you're in it . It's actually used as part of a test drive for advanced police drivers when they're on their course because it's particularly difficult to read .

Lots of people pass their test on only a few hours behind the wheel and have no experience of night driving, driving in rain/snow etc. Maybe only ever driving with instructor. My dcs drove to/from school with me on country lanes and in town - probably at least 1 1/2 hours a day - as learners, and drove in fog, snow, floods and wind. I'm aware it's down to money/opportunity to an extent. I still hate it every day when ds and dd drive to college, especially in the fog.
It was a horrible accident - poor kids, poor families and friends.

I'm curious as to why people think you can't legislate for this, when many countries already do legislate?

I'm curious as to why people think you can't legislate for this, when many countries already do legislate?