|
On November 15 2011 20:41 zakmaa wrote: Possible, but if there were two people, one drunk and one sober and one had to blow the test - why would you make the sober one blow the test then make the drunk one drive? That's so unreasonable. Possibility: Cause the sober guy doesn't have a license.
|
The thread title gave me expecations that some party had gone madmax on us and decided to start recruiting road warriors. I was severely dissapointed.
That said, statistics are on Bratli's side. A significant majority of all car-related accidents are caused by young men under 25. At the same time, doing what she's argumenting for would be punishing everyone, including those who actually drive properly. It'd be like shooting a sparrow with a cannon - lots of collateral damage. Plus it'd also harm the transportational needs of anyone who uses their car for commuting to work / school.
Now optimally, we'd be able to completely negate the need for cars for commuting through public transportation such as trains and shuttles, but realistically, Norway's far too spread out and far too lightly populated to make that in any way economically viable (as has been done in Japan, where there's a far smaller private car usage culture). Since the car is so essential to any peripheral settlements, limiting it like this is not really an option.
I do agree that all cars should have breathalyzer-locks though. Of course it can easilly be circumvented by having your sober kid brother blowing the lock for you, but at least it'd be more of a hassle, and thus be somewhat preventive.
|
the 18 - 24 specific thing is bullshit. alc and speed locks are a good idea. almost all the cases when I heard someone my age died it was due to car accidents.
|
On November 15 2011 23:11 plated.rawr wrote: I do agree that all cars should have breathalyzer-locks though. Of course it can easilly be circumvented by having your sober kid brother blowing the lock for you, but at least it'd be more of a hassle, and thus be somewhat preventive.
I just read up on this a bit, and have come to the conclusion that, while it would be nice to have a technology that prevents drunk people from driving automatically, it simply does not exist so far. Especially breath analyzers have far to many problems to be mandatory in cars. One of them being that they are pretty inaccurate per se since they don't only detect alcohol, but also other substances with some similar chemic characteristic. For example, apparently you have a pretty high chance to get a positive test result after painting a room. They are pretty reliant on being used in the right way, and apparently you can manipulate the result by a pretty large margin when using the right or wrong breathing techniques.
|
There seems to be several deviances in the article from the original interview.
Most notably it's never mentioned that the restrictions would apply to males only. There is also no mention of how long the restrictions would last, only that they would apply immediatly after the driving license is aquired and would be lifted gradually as driving skills improves. From what I understand any restrictions would be based on how long someone had owned their driving license, not their age or their gender.
VG is a typical tabloid and OP completely fell for their screaming headlines and omition of key information.
|
On November 15 2011 23:35 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 23:11 plated.rawr wrote: I do agree that all cars should have breathalyzer-locks though. Of course it can easilly be circumvented by having your sober kid brother blowing the lock for you, but at least it'd be more of a hassle, and thus be somewhat preventive. I just read up on this a bit, and have come to the conclusion that, while it would be nice to have a technology that prevents drunk people from driving automatically, it simply does not exist so far. Especially breath analyzers have far to many problems to be mandatory in cars. One of them being that they are pretty inaccurate per se since they don't only detect alcohol, but also other substances with some similar chemic characteristic. For example, apparently you have a pretty high chance to get a positive test result after painting a room. They are pretty reliant on being used in the right way, and apparently you can manipulate the result by a pretty large margin when using the right or wrong breathing techniques.
Yeah in theory it's a good idea but as you say there's to many issues with the technology today for us to remove the human out of the testing procedure.
|
Well, the original interview still contains the ludicrous restrictions that they may not have passengers or drive during nighttime. I predict that these will just increase the accident rate since people will have driven less and not developed good habits for nighttime driving during the probationary period.
|
So I must start drinking AFTER I start my car? That's INSANE.
|
On November 15 2011 18:46 Kickboxer wrote: Women don't drive recklessly. It's a statistical fact. While they do create chaos in traffic by being indecisive and slow, they practically never "race" like your average asshole kid (who most of the time can't even drive) and are also radically less prone to driving drunk. Not sure why everything is considered discrimination these days. This is pretty much the most disgusting thing I've read in a long time.
You just explicitly generalized that all men drive more recklessly than all women.
You just explicitly stated that all women drive slow and are indecisive.
You just generalized an average kid (presumed young male driver) to be an asshole who can't drive.
Good job.
PS: You should probably check the word discrimination in the dictionary, would probably answer your last question.
|
i don't think it's THAT stupid. maybe cause i know to many crazy idiots when it comes to driving, and i used to be one myself.
|
|
The Scandinavian countries have always led the way in terms of female rights, it's only natural that they eventually give females all the rights and reduce men to subservient positions. Basically making women goddesses and men the followers
|
On November 15 2011 18:32 hypercube wrote: The 3rd point is reasonable and should be mandatory for everyone, not just 18-24 year old males. Why should you be allowed to use your car in a way that's against the law and demonstratably increases your chances of killing someone?
i can agree with the alkohol lock ...
but as a german there is no such thing like a general limit on how fast i can drive. There are only speed limits for certain roads or parts of it. (ofc there are speed limits on most roads except parts of the highways)
|
I find it painful that people don't oppose this kind of legislation out of sheer principle. You know, personal freedom and that stuff.
|
On November 16 2011 00:56 Morphling_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 18:46 Kickboxer wrote: Women don't drive recklessly. It's a statistical fact. While they do create chaos in traffic by being indecisive and slow, they practically never "race" like your average asshole kid (who most of the time can't even drive) and are also radically less prone to driving drunk. Not sure why everything is considered discrimination these days. This is pretty much the most disgusting thing I've read in a long time. You just explicitly generalized that all men drive more recklessly than all women. You just explicitly stated that all women drive slow and are indecisive. You just generalized an average kid (presumed young male driver) to be an asshole who can't drive. Good job. PS: You should probably check the word discrimination in the dictionary, would probably answer your last question.
I'm with you on this...
I have been driving since 17, I have never had an accident. I know many men who could say the same, I know many men who couldn't. I know many women who have had accidents, infact of all the people I know there are two girls who between them have caused more road accidents than the rest of us put together.
1 in 5 accidents are caused by men, but male drivers also outnumber women drivers and male drivers spend more time behind the wheel on average than women do especially at the ages of 18-25. Men like to drive, they drive their gf's and mates around, the only time I ever let my gf drive is when I'm either not sober or too tired, most men who can drive are like me... they like to be the one doing the driving.
Yes young men tend to be more accident prone in a car but many more good and safe young male drivers exist than unsafe ones. You can't punish me for someone else's crimes.
|
On November 15 2011 19:53 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 19:49 Sfydjklm wrote:On November 15 2011 18:39 Egyptian_Head wrote:On November 15 2011 18:32 hypercube wrote: The 3rd point is reasonable and should be mandatory for everyone, not just 18-24 year old males. Why should you be allowed to use your car in a way that's against the law and demonstratably increases your chances of killing someone? Only illegal on public roads I believe. You can drunk drive all you like if you are on private property as far as I am aware. Might be a country by country thing. You can speed on race tracks which you pay t do a lap on and it is perfectly legal. In general I agree those should be there but there are situations where you can do that stuff and it is completely legal, which means there would need to be a way to turn them off easily which would defeat the entire point. in japan the speed limiter turns on and off based on ur gps location. They've shown cars like this on Top Gear that have a speed limiter and when your gps senses that you're at a race track it turns off. I think one of the first vehicles equipped with it was the Nissan GTR which on the street is substantially detuned. On the flip side just because you have the power/top speed doesn't mean you have to use it, there's simply some vehicles younger people should not own and most places have a track (strip or circuit) and open lapping days close enough to go there if you want to use it for what it was built for. I dread the day vehicles like mine and others in its class are cheap enough for a 17/18 year old to purchase used (already close) because there's nothing to stop them from bottoming it out/racing short of common sense. There's also no way to detune it on the fly short of flashing the ECM with a lesser tune which most parents wouldn't have a clue how to do and it's inconvenient to continually reflash the vehicle in the first place .
Do I think the approach the OP posted is over the top, yes, most definitely. Some good points, but too extreme. As for the male versus female debate, it's not so much a sex thing more-so that overly defensive drivers piss people off and cause more accidents with their indecisive/timid approach behind the wheel. I'm not saying drive like a dipshit, but checking your blindspot 45 times, hammering on the brakes for no reason, etc causes problems on highways and in the city.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 15 2011 18:51 zakmaa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 18:46 Kickboxer wrote: Women don't drive recklessly. It's a statistical fact. While they do create chaos in traffic by being indecisive and slow, they practically never "race" like your average asshole kid (who most of the time can't even drive) and are also radically less prone to driving drunk. Not sure why everything is considered discrimination these days. This. I think that you are taking it out of line OP and being much too defensive. It's not that women are trying to overthrow men or something, she is legitimately trying to reduce the amounts of collisions in your country and for that you should be for it. If those restrictions were imposed upon men in Norway then I can guarantee you that the collision rate would plummet as those are the very people that cause the most collisions in the world. Such a bad way to argue - you could apply the same to rape... "Most rapes are committed by men, therefore this law that punishes ALL men should be acceptable"......
Its just not a good idea -_-
|
On November 15 2011 18:24 Elegy wrote: hell I'd be down with alcohol locks (breathalyzer I'm assuming) on all cars as standard features, but yeah this is pretty ridiculous and over the top.
crazy people are crazy people and politicians are no exception!
I wouldn't....
Those things take FOREVER to start your car. Absolutely forever. I had to borrow my friend's car who had one installed, ridiculous pain in the ass, not to mention that you have to constantly blow into it sporadically at different periods or else your car will auto shut down on you.
|
On November 16 2011 00:56 Morphling_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 18:46 Kickboxer wrote: Women don't drive recklessly. It's a statistical fact. While they do create chaos in traffic by being indecisive and slow, they practically never "race" like your average asshole kid (who most of the time can't even drive) and are also radically less prone to driving drunk. Not sure why everything is considered discrimination these days. This is pretty much the most disgusting thing I've read in a long time. You just explicitly generalized that all men drive more recklessly than all women. You just explicitly stated that all women drive slow and are indecisive. You just generalized an average kid (presumed young male driver) to be an asshole who can't drive. Good job. PS: You should probably check the word discrimination in the dictionary, would probably answer your last question.
You forgot to mention that slow and indecisive driving can represent a hazard.
|
I once read a study that said an 18 year old man with 1.0 blood alcohol content had reflexes similar to that of an 80 year old. They concluded that 18 year olds should not be allowed to drive after drinking, but failed to conclude that 80 years should not be allowed to drive at all.
|
|
|
|