triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Driving tests, etc.

To: Triumph owners list <triumphs@autox.team.net>
Subject: Driving tests, etc.
From: rgs03@health.state.ny.us
Date: Thu, 9 May 96 14:19:51 EDT
Comments: Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
A few more comments for the current thread:

1) Greg Petrolati is absolutely correct. At 16 all kids, especially
boys think they're immortal. The faster refleses and better eyesight
of youth are more than offset by the lack of experience and judgement.
At 16 it's easy to mistake bravado for skill.

2) Jim Snyder has a point. Expecting our government to do anything rational
or effective is unrealistic. Government is by nature, conservative. The
prime motivation of any elected official is not to serve his/her constituents
but to get reelected. Passing a law making it harder to get and keep a
driver's license may make the roads safer but it would not get the senator
reelected. Why do you think they've passed so many silly laws adding  more
and more expensive and largely ineffective safety features to new cars?
(Answer: Cars don't vote.)

We SHOULD have stricter licensing requirements AND periodic retesting of
drivers already licensed, but in these times when the political mantra
everywhere is "budget cuts" a program that increases costs to the public
cofers is doomed. Yes, I know it would save $ in the long run through
lower insurance rates and medical costs but the government doesn't pay
*those* bills - you do. And the government doesn't care about *your*
finances. (Except at election time when they make promises of tax cuts
that they don't intend to actually pass.) What? Me cynical?

3) John Hazelton is also correct in pointing out that an "Unavoidable
accident" may not be unavoidable at all. It is the responsibility of
every driver to operate his vehicle in a way that precludes such accidents.
If there isn't sufficient room to get your car stopped before hitting the
car in front of you, you need to back off a bit and allow more room.
(reality: try that on the NJ Turnpike sometime.) Just the fact of not
being cited by the police is not exoneration. It just means that a) the
cop wasn't sure about fault and b) you were REALLY lucky. If you think you
weren't just lucky consider this. When I was 17 I was sitting at a traffic
light right around the corner from where I lived. My car was stopped. My
neighbor was standing on the corner. The driver of the pickup truck ahead
of me, for no reason I have ever been able to determine, threw his truck
into reverse and backed into me. The Police came and asked some questions
of me and him. (He claimed I ran into him.) My neighbor stood up for me.
The cop listened and then proceeded to write me for excessive speed and
following too close. My insurance company agreed. After all, I was 17 and
the other guy was 45. Obviously I was a speed crazy punk. I had to be; I
was 17. I got charged with the accident and my rates went up for four years.
THAT'S why you're lucky. I wasn't even guilty and I got a ticket! You

***************************************************************
Rik Schlierer                 "Imagination is what allows you
RGS03@HEALTH.STATE.NY.US          to remember things that
NYS DEPT OF HEALTH, ALBANY NY     never happened" (D.T.M.)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>