Warning To All Queensland P Platers

[Silver_R34_GT-T]

yeah, i agree with you totally on the "more" training, but i dont think taking away our right to drive what we want is a solution... its taking away the cars that arent even safe to stand next to. and stupid young driver ie my brother, who someone walked away with a license.

[hrd-hr30]

we dont earn the right to own powerful cars, We should have the right to. it called freedom.... It is our money, and should be allowed to spend it how we wish..

or your parent's money, as the case may be...

if i find the jerk who cost my parents 1300 bucks to fix my cars paint (after they coined the entire left side and boot)

[Keegs]

Pfftt

Edited August 15, 2006 by 33NIZ

[Keegs]

This law is bullsh*t....they wont even get around to talking about it for ages and when they do it will be forever until something gets changed and when it does it wont affect anyone with a license anyway, nor will it probably affect the road toll. Its election time in September, maybe they want something to get all the older ppl on board with their "plan to fix road tolls" who knows, who cares. The thing i find interesting is apparently now if your over 25 and on your l's you can have a BAC of 0.05% WTF!!! BUT IF YOUR 24 LIKE WOW, THATS HUGE DIFFERENCE and as a result....you CANNOT drink at all, you CANNOT talk on a mobile, you MUST complete the logbook and you MUST have your l's for 12 months. Is it just me or is being 25 not all THAT different to being 24? Maybe the government just really doesnt care about the experience side, its solely based on age...or solely based on the age of the majority of ppl that actually give a sh*t as to who's voted in. IMO all ages on their l's should have the same restrictions...if your on your l's your learning, regardless of age. MAYBE you could have a set of rules for the 16yo's but even still. THIS LAW IS A JOKE and I think its a cheap publicity stunt. The most they'll even bother to get through is the p plate on the car rule, rest assured, look how long it took to get the l plate in, theyve been talking about it for years. Maybe they should be more concerned with training ppl to drive better, than making it harder for ppl to drive at all..maybe they should be more concerned with getting the rust buckets off the road than defecting imports. They say that speed kills, high peformance doesnt equal speed...ppl speed, not cars. I would rather speed in a well kept peformance car than a heap of crap unsafe to drive over 60km/h..but thats just me.

Meh like i said, it only affects drivers without a license at all atm, so who cares.

Matt

[mad082]

the rule that had me worried was the high performance cars for provisional drivers under 25. when i read it in the paper i missed the provisional drivers bit. i was a bit pissed off cause i turn 25 next august so i thought i was going to have to park the car in the garage for 6 weeks.

some of the laws make sense, some are stupid, some make sense in 1 way, but are stupid in another.

the main one that i agree with, but disagree with at the same time is the curfew one

peer passenger restrictions (only carrying one passenger aged under 21) from 11pm to 5am for P1 under 25

that is a good idea in the sense that they aren't going to be carrying a carload of mates around and doing stupid things. the bad point is that if 5 sensible kids go out clubbing, 3 of them have to stay sober to drive home, (or just make 4 trips) whereas before only 1 of them had to be designated driver and they only had to make 1 trip.

also the motorbike licence thing is pretty stupid. this won't stop people getting killed on motorbikes, as most accidents involving motorbikes are caused by someone (usually elderly) in a car pulling out in front of them.

they should be cracking down on elderly drivers too. my mates dad was killed on a motorbike when an old fart pulled out in front of him. there was the old guy that lost control of his car on a straight bit of road and plowed into a child care center. i have had a few old ladies pull out of shopping centers not look to see if there was any traffic coming when pulling out and i've had to hit the skids. and when i was at school there was an old duck that ran a stop sign and hit a bus. i was sitting at the fence and she came up to the intersection at about 20kmh, didn't even touch the brakes, didn't look for traffic (didn't notice the bus approaching), and just kept on driving into the bus. luckily no-one was hurt.

[HOT_R33]

Ok, how is a learner driver under the age of 25 any different from a learner driver over 25??

An in-experienced driver is an in-experienced driver no matter how old they are!

Everyone knows, if a kid is going to speed and break the law, they are going to do it in any type of vehicle!

The only thing this legislation is going to do is punish people like us who love skylines (or similar types of vehicles), play by the rules and subsiquently, pay higher insurance premiums becuase of mindless idiots speeding, crashing and killing themselves in these cars all the time.

The very week the passed these laws in Sydney, 2 P platers killed themselves racing in a couple of family sized cars on the Princess Highway in NSW. Not turbo charged, not supercharged, not V8's, No NOS, stock as a rock and it didn't mean a thing!!

[hobbsy]

you need 100 hours of clocked time from a proferssional teacher...

gts-t 4 life, i told ya it wont change for us.. The government has be proposing this shit for years

100 hours of time from a driving instructor will cost well over $3000..

it means you need a logbook detailing time spent in the car wit your 'rents or whatever.. have the same rules in NSW and its easy to just bullshit it.

and if you dont think it will change think again.. QLD has the least P plater restrictions of any state in aus, and is the only state that hasnt brought out serious new young driver regulations in the last few years.. and as we all know the beattie govt likes to copy the big boys in NSW and VIC.

Edited August 15, 2006 by hobbsy

[gts-t 4 life]

BETTIE IS A F##KING WANKER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mud]

Everyone wants to know how a learner over 25 is different to a learner under 25.

I'll fill you all in about the over 25 year old who is just getting his L's

He is not in a hurry to get anywhere,

He has only just got is L's cause he's decided it's time to.

He didn't rush out as soon as he turned 16.5 so he could get behind the wheel.

He has had experience with drugs and alcohol.

He has probably had a scare or two with a friend behind the wheel.

He can probably afford to go and have lots of driving lessons.

He won't have pimple faced twats in the back seat eggin him on to cut fully hectic skids at Milton once he gets his P's

He is probably gay and lives with his parents still if hasn't got his L's or P's by now.

[predator]

He is probably gay and lives with his parents still if hasn't got his L's or P's by now.

or is if he's still living at home anyhow

[Keegs]

If you read the RTA website it does state for all of the things EXCEPT the High performance regulation that it wont apply to people who have obtained their license prior to 1st july 2007. My guess is that this statement "From July 1 2007, All provisional drivers under the age of 25 must adhere to vehicle power restrictions" means that anyone on P's wont be driving anything V8, Turbo or "high performance".....Check it out.....

http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/qt/LTASinf...provisional.pdf

Matt

Edited August 16, 2006 by 33NIZ

[Sambo33gtst]

** This is just my personal opinion so don't flame me without justification **

Laws are brought in for a reason, and 9 times out of 10 it is a legitimate reason. The reason in question in this case, driver road tolls for under 25 year olds.

To put it simply, there are too many inexperienced young drivers on the road with cars far too powerful for their driving experience. Taking away the ability to drive the high powered cars theoretically means less deaths.

I think the ruling is a great idea, all we hear every day is another group of teens have died in a tragic car accident, most leading from speeding or drink driving. The youth of australia have not shown good enough reactions in their driving from the countless govt ad campaigns and thus the laws being imposed.

I know that when i passed my Driving Test, i learnt more in the first 3 months of driving on my own in the 6 months of being a learner. I was not at all ready for what i was too experience, not one iota. Extending the Learners period to 12 months is great. Power restrictions is a great idea.

All in all it seems to work on paper, and has worked in other countries and states of australia respectively. Queensland should be no different.

[Keegs]

** This is just my personal opinion so don't flame me without justification **

Laws are brought in for a reason, and 9 times out of 10 it is a legitimate reason. The reason in question in this case, driver road tolls for under 25 year olds.

To put it simply, there are too many inexperienced young drivers on the road with cars far too powerful for their driving experience. Taking away the ability to drive the high powered cars theoretically means less deaths.

I think the ruling is a great idea, all we hear every day is another group of teens have died in a tragic car accident, most leading from speeding or drink driving. The youth of australia have not shown good enough reactions in their driving from the countless govt ad campaigns and thus the laws being imposed.

I know that when i passed my Driving Test, i learnt more in the first 3 months of driving on my own in the 6 months of being a learner. I was not at all ready for what i was too experience, not one iota. Extending the Learners period to 12 months is great. Power restrictions is a great idea.

All in all it seems to work on paper, and has worked in other countries and states of australia respectively. Queensland should be no different.

In many ways I agree with you. However, there arent actually any stats or figures that prove these measures have worked in any part of Australia, QLD Transport even highlight this in their forum section of pros and cons for this legislation. In theory it might sound good but so do many things. I dont mind the whole power restriction, more training and longer l's period but some of the other laws are just going to make it harder for ppl. Not to mention mean more ppl breaking the law and being caught and subsequently not being able to drive. The thing still remains that if ppl want to do stupid things, they will, we cant stop that. Be it in a powerful car or not will probably make little difference, in some cases it may be worse (say if ppl buy a car with less safety features than that of say a skyline with abs and airbags) What I think the goverment should be trying to implement is more intense training and more promotion of driving safer cars, fast or not. These days you can make many cars go fast, using countless measures, sure taking v8's and turbos away will make it harder but people will get more cunning and modify in different ways.

I stand by the opinion that cars aren't the problem. Its the ppl driving them. Having said that, making it harder for the irresponsible ppl to get there hands on fast cars is a good idea. But its going to be very hard to police and probably very annoying for all the ppl who are responsible on the roads. What about v8 utes used to tow boats, or people that like to car pool for school or work, worst of all ppl that currently own one of the cars deemed undrivable for someone on their p's are they expected to sell the car? I just think this could have been thought through a little better. Not to mention voiced a little more publicly and put open to discussion. I didnt even know about this until a couple of weeks ago. And now they have already been approved through government after their "methods of discussion" with the public....I never heard of these discussions (i know they took place, but how many ppl knew?) If things like this are going to be passed and implemented i think more open discussion should be had with both the people trying to fix the problem and the people that will be affected.

Not that it bothers me, i'll be on my opens.

Just my opinion.

Matt

Edited August 16, 2006 by 33NIZ

[Sambo33gtst]

Dude,

Great reply.

If only more people could reply in this kind of fashion!

Yeh what you're saying is totally true. I would have questioned why they extended the L's period another 6 months longer if it meant getting your P's 6 months later...however they have stated it will start at the age of 16 now. So that is one bit of compromise that the government have seemed to have allowed.

You are also right about its not the cars, but the people driving them. It will be much the same as Drink Driving. People will do it, but at least there is something in place to deter others from doing so.

I Guess we will see how it turns out statistic wise. Granted however, we do see each year during the holidays that the road tolls of each state are broadcast on the nighly news....it will be interesting to see once these laws are passed, whether or not we see a decline in those figures

Sam

[predator]

All in all it seems to work on paper, and has worked in other countries and states of australia respectively. Queensland should be no different.

I would disagree with that.. The youth road toll is not any lower in the other states where similar measures have been introduced, many many years ago. VIC say, where I used to live , the road toll is the essentially the same as it was 5 years ago, and they have so many "safety initiatives" it totally restricts your freedom to drive. In fact, it was one of the reasons I left the place.

It's all smoke and mirrors. People have a whinge and cry about it, the pollys eventually do something - but 2 years on, the amount of deaths is statistically the same. But then there is strange silence on it, when it doesn't actually change anything those few years on. Or suddenly the focus goes to something other thing that the latest piece of research says is the "major killer".

So what I am saying is these don't actually effect any final result, and probably will not in this cirumstance here in QLD. All it will serve to do is just make people's lives more difficult. Instead of fast cars, kids just die in slower cars, the end result is the same.

So why do something that is not actually going to save lives? How about QLD leads the way in Australia and tries different measures to reduce the toll. Driver training - not just bullshit "make your parents sit in the car for 100 hours", but training courses, programs, educational material. Make it the focus. See whether it works. But of course that costs lots of money.

While it may be expensive, you only have to realise the amount it costs to hospitalise young people, or scrape them off the roads - and the cost looks less daunting. I would say even passing the costs to get your licence to the end user for this type of training is not a bad thing. It makes the process of getting a licence a difficult one financially, stops morons from getting their license, makes it a challenge, not a right to drive for everybody.

Granted however, we do see each year during the holidays that the road tolls of each state are broadcast on the nighly news

Do some maths next time on this one too. See the "shocking holiday carnage on the roads!!" toll.. Work out the number in a year that die.. divide that number by the days of the holiday period. Compare these days to "any other" time in the year. Add the fact there may be twice as many people out there on the roads at these times, and the period is probably actually around the same, if not safer. Lies, lies and statistics.

[Keegs]

I would disagree with that.. The youth road toll is not any lower in the other states where similar measures have been introduced, many many years ago. VIC say, where I used to live , the road toll is the essentially the same as it was 5 years ago, and they have so many "safety initiatives" it totally restricts your freedom to drive. In fact, it was one of the reasons I left the place.

It's all smoke and mirrors. People have a whinge and cry about it, the pollys eventually do something - but 2 years on, the amount of deaths is statistically the same. But then there is strange silence on it, when it doesn't actually change anything those few years on. Or suddenly the focus goes to something other thing that the latest piece of research says is the "major killer".

So what I am saying is these don't actually effect any final result, and probably will not in this cirumstance here in QLD. All it will serve to do is just make people's lives more difficult. Instead of fast cars, kids just die in slower cars, the end result is the same.

So why do something that is not actually going to save lives? How about QLD leads the way in Australia and tries different measures to reduce the toll. Driver training - not just bullshit "make your parents sit in the car for 100 hours", but training courses, programs, educational material. Make it the focus. See whether it works. But of course that costs lots of money.

While it may be expensive, you only have to realise the amount it costs to hospitalise young people, or scrape them off the roads - and the cost looks less daunting. I would say even passing the costs to get your licence to the end user for this type of training is not a bad thing. It makes the process of getting a licence a difficult one financially, stops morons from getting their license, makes it a challenge, not a right to drive for everybody.

Do some maths next time on this one too. See the "shocking holiday carnage on the roads!!" toll.. Work out the number in a year that die.. divide that number by the days of the holiday period. Compare these days to "any other" time in the year. Add the fact there may be twice as many people out there on the roads at these times, and the period is probably actually around the same, if not safer. Lies, lies and statistics.

My point exactly Gordo! You've hit the nail on the head. To do that would cost too much money in their eyes. Its a lot easier to throw up smoke and mirrors and make it "sound" like they are trying to fix all the problems. Why they expect us to believe their lies is simple. A lot of people will believe it, without thinking about the statistics that show these measures HAVEN'T reduced the road toll in VIC but haven more than likely only increased fines and less people driving due to suspension. I think they are trying believe their own lies most of the time. But the main factor is its a million times easier to legislate a change that doesn't cost anything and restrict what we can do, than it is to actually fix a problem. After these changes we will have just about the toughest road restrictions in Australia, bar the speed restrictions. But what can you expect, its the government.

[impact_blue]

oh thank GOD I decided to get my license sooner rather than later!

[Sambo33gtst]

Yeh you're all right, and all making extremely valid points.

With the holiday road toll extract, i quoted that as it is a highly glorified area each year on the news. Just said it purely for justificational purposes. And you're right, there has been little change in the amount of deaths after new legislation has been passed concerning these rules.

However, comparing states is like comparing apples with oranges...there are too many different variables that can change the certain outcome of a road fatality.

Governments.

Roads.

Climates.

Other Drivers etc etc...

All we have to do is sit and wait it out, see if it will make a difference

I think it will, one less death is a difference, and that means change worth doing.

[phatboi2010]

I feel sorry for all those new L and P platers but things always change and you cant help that. People always find ways to cope, no use thinking on the problem, think about the solution.

hey, apparently years ago you could just go for your bike RE licence and hold it for a year and get your R's but now you have to do Q Ride again to get your R's no matter how long you hold your RE's for. That’s more money and time but people have ways of getting around it like waiting till your on your Opens and going straight for a R's in a 3day Q ride course.

Regarding the power restrictions, if you can’t have many passengers you might as well remove the seats and rest of the creature comforts. Even with restricted power if you lighten your car it would have a similar effect. Its not good for all you skyline boys (packing a lot of weight there) Hehehe

Any one know what they actually propose for the restrictions?

Hehehe lets say its a power restriction to 115Kw you could still have some serious fun with 115kw in a car only 600Kg kerb weight. (I think that’s about how much a Might boy weighs)

[mad082]

Any one know what they actually propose for the restrictions?

Hehehe lets say its a power restriction to 115Kw you could still have some serious fun with 115kw in a car only 600Kg kerb weight. (I think that’s about how much a Might boy weighs)

in victoria its 125kw per ton. it isn't just a power rating, its a power to weight rating.

but as for the q-ride thing, a mate of mine went and did the course. never ridden a bike on the road, but had ridden before, and had his licence by 11am on the first day of the course. it mostly depends on how well you can ride. i have been riding since i was 5, but never ridden on the road..... legally, have my L's (and have since i got my car L's) but been too lazy to go do the q-ride. but when i do i can go straight to my R licence because i have my car opens. thats a loop hole that they need to close.... after i get my licence though.

and on the subject of statistics, the road toll only includes people that die at the scene of the accident, on the way to hospital, or in the first few hours of being in hospital. if you are injured in a crash and ar in a coma for a week then die, you aren't considered to have been killed in an accident so you don't go on the road toll.