Driving Test
Posted by: matthewr on 22 October 2004
This forum is of course never afraid to tackle the Big Questions, be that Iraq, dishwasher choice or driving. So, to provide a little more of a scientific basis, here are some simple surveys about your views on the latter.
#1 Attitudes to Driving
Below are some statements about driving. For each one, indicate how much you agree or disagree by writing down the appropriate number using the following scale:
1 - Strongly Agree
2 - Agree
3 - Neither agree or disagree
4 - Disagree
5 - Strongly Disagree
So, for example, if you strongly agree, write down 1.
"Decreasing the speed limit on motorways is a good idea"
"Even at night time on quiet roads it is important to keep within the speed limit"
"Drivers who cause accidents by reckless driving should be banned from driving for life"
"People should drive slower than the limit when it's raining"
"Cars should never overtake on the inside lane even if a slow driver is blocking the outside lane"
"Penalties for speeding should be more severe"
"In towns where there are a lot of pedestrians, the speed limit should be 20mph"
Add up the total of the numbers you have written down, and post this total. The individual answers are not required, just the total.
#2 Driving Speed
With this test, write down the number corresponding to the answer that applies to your during your normal everyday driving, from the following scale:
1 - Never or very infrequently
2 - Quite infrequently
3 - Infrequently
4 - Frequently
5 - Always
How often do you exceed the 70mph limit during a motorway journey?
How often do you exceed the limit in built up areas?
How often do you drive fast?
Again, add up the total of your answers and post this number. The individual responses are not important.
So you should have 2 numbers -- I'll give you some time to post your answers and then tell you waht it all means. Please try to avoid discussion of the tests and answers until we have some answers and I have posted the follow up.
Matthew
#1 Attitudes to Driving
Below are some statements about driving. For each one, indicate how much you agree or disagree by writing down the appropriate number using the following scale:
1 - Strongly Agree
2 - Agree
3 - Neither agree or disagree
4 - Disagree
5 - Strongly Disagree
So, for example, if you strongly agree, write down 1.
"Decreasing the speed limit on motorways is a good idea"
"Even at night time on quiet roads it is important to keep within the speed limit"
"Drivers who cause accidents by reckless driving should be banned from driving for life"
"People should drive slower than the limit when it's raining"
"Cars should never overtake on the inside lane even if a slow driver is blocking the outside lane"
"Penalties for speeding should be more severe"
"In towns where there are a lot of pedestrians, the speed limit should be 20mph"
Add up the total of the numbers you have written down, and post this total. The individual answers are not required, just the total.
#2 Driving Speed
With this test, write down the number corresponding to the answer that applies to your during your normal everyday driving, from the following scale:
1 - Never or very infrequently
2 - Quite infrequently
3 - Infrequently
4 - Frequently
5 - Always
How often do you exceed the 70mph limit during a motorway journey?
How often do you exceed the limit in built up areas?
How often do you drive fast?
Again, add up the total of your answers and post this number. The individual responses are not important.
So you should have 2 numbers -- I'll give you some time to post your answers and then tell you waht it all means. Please try to avoid discussion of the tests and answers until we have some answers and I have posted the follow up.
Matthew
I do have a tiny suspicion that some of those who scored 7 or under on the second group of questions, may either be guilty of self-delusion, or are not paying sufficient attention to their speedometers 
Steven,
Just as a mater of interest[ to me at least] but how on earth do you manage to score such a low rate when in another thread you state the following
Then shouldn't they be cautioned for driving without due care and attention. "
Cautioned in the first instance.
Fined and given 6 penalty points thereafter.
Regards,
Steve
Last week I was driving along the M6 toll at 2.30 am at about 95 mph in the inside lane.
Behind me there was a Landrover Freelander hogging the middle lane doing the same speed. Each time I had to move into the middle lane to overtake a truck or slower moving car he was there right behind me. I felt smug because I knew the police would almost certainly pick him off first.
I guess in his view I was the total fool for bothering with mirrors, indicators and use of the steering wheel on a nearly empty motorway.
In my view he was a twat - and the reason why we have speed limits.
I was driving my own car not the taxi.
Regards,
Steve.
Etc. Etc. these statments just don't seem to logically add up to render a score of 7 3, you didn't peek at the answers first did you
oldie.
Just as a mater of interest[ to me at least] but how on earth do you manage to score such a low rate when in another thread you state the following
Then shouldn't they be cautioned for driving without due care and attention. "
Cautioned in the first instance.
Fined and given 6 penalty points thereafter.
Regards,
Steve
Last week I was driving along the M6 toll at 2.30 am at about 95 mph in the inside lane.
Behind me there was a Landrover Freelander hogging the middle lane doing the same speed. Each time I had to move into the middle lane to overtake a truck or slower moving car he was there right behind me. I felt smug because I knew the police would almost certainly pick him off first.
I guess in his view I was the total fool for bothering with mirrors, indicators and use of the steering wheel on a nearly empty motorway.
In my view he was a twat - and the reason why we have speed limits.
I was driving my own car not the taxi.
Regards,
Steve.
Etc. Etc. these statments just don't seem to logically add up to render a score of 7 3, you didn't peek at the answers first did you
oldie.
The drivers with higher scores on this test probably cover greater distances and as such they are more at risk of having an accident.
The more miles you drive per year the greater your risk of having an accident, irrespective of the speed you travel at in relation to posted speed limits and/or other traffic.
Those "leisure" drivers who drive very slowly, and well below posted limis are three times less likely to have an accident because they do less than a third of the average mileage.
Like terrorists you don't need very many of them to cause maximum chaos.
I do have a tiny suspicion that some of those who scored 7 or under on the second group of questions, may either be guilty of self-delusion, or are not paying sufficient attention to their speedometers
Or they are simply lying.
Thank you Steven for confirming my suspicions that the the Police Federation are actually a bunch of Marxist-Lenninist, Fifth Columnists.
Who currently pays the Police Federation?
I wasn't thinking Marxist-Lenninist so much as our island-bound Neo Socialism.
It is no coincidence that there is a strong correlation between having a left-wing socio-economic perspective and being against the notion of private transport so people can come and go where and when, and as they see fit, and as quickly as it is safe to do so.
Manipulating statistics in order to suggest a link between speed and accidents will serve only to create an argument for the limiting the progress of individuals using their own transport.
Also, the Police Federation will naturally support a more authoritarian and controlling approach to governing this country in the same way that turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas.
Regards,
Steve.
[This message was edited by Steven Toy on Fri 22 October 2004 at 17:52.]
The more miles you drive per year the greater your risk of having an accident, irrespective of the speed you travel at in relation to posted speed limits and/or other traffic.
Those "leisure" drivers who drive very slowly, and well below posted limis are three times less likely to have an accident because they do less than a third of the average mileage.
Like terrorists you don't need very many of them to cause maximum chaos.
I do have a tiny suspicion that some of those who scored 7 or under on the second group of questions, may either be guilty of self-delusion, or are not paying sufficient attention to their speedometers
Or they are simply lying.
Thank you Steven for confirming my suspicions that the the Police Federation are actually a bunch of Marxist-Lenninist, Fifth Columnists.
Who currently pays the Police Federation?
I wasn't thinking Marxist-Lenninist so much as our island-bound Neo Socialism.
It is no coincidence that there is a strong correlation between having a left-wing socio-economic perspective and being against the notion of private transport so people can come and go where and when, and as they see fit, and as quickly as it is safe to do so.
Manipulating statistics in order to suggest a link between speed and accidents will serve only to create an argument for the limiting the progress of individuals using their own transport.
Also, the Police Federation will naturally support a more authoritarian and controlling approach to governing this country in the same way that turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas.
Regards,
Steve.
[This message was edited by Steven Toy on Fri 22 October 2004 at 17:52.]
quote:
but how on earth do you manage to score such a low rate when in another thread you state the following
Regards,
Steve.
So what were your scores, Matthew? [And why hasn't anyone asked? I'd hazard something like 20:7]
Maybe it's because I didn't start driving until well over 40 and therefore learning wasn't perhaps suffused with testosterone overflow seepage like it was for some of you early adopters, but I do get the feeling that for most, your driving skills [and others' perception of same] seem to be at the very core of your beings.
It's weird, and strikes me anew every time something driving related comes up. Not a dig by any means - I just feel a bit left out
As a driver, I don't think I'm especially good - defensive on the whole, but I do keep up to the speed limit and I neverget wound up by others - but then again parking's not my best thing, and I do have occasional mental blanks at roundabouts. [best not gone into]
However, when confronted by a fish logo on the car in front I have the same prejudices as everyone else.
throb [17:7]
Maybe it's because I didn't start driving until well over 40 and therefore learning wasn't perhaps suffused with testosterone overflow seepage like it was for some of you early adopters, but I do get the feeling that for most, your driving skills [and others' perception of same] seem to be at the very core of your beings.
It's weird, and strikes me anew every time something driving related comes up. Not a dig by any means - I just feel a bit left out
As a driver, I don't think I'm especially good - defensive on the whole, but I do keep up to the speed limit and I neverget wound up by others - but then again parking's not my best thing, and I do have occasional mental blanks at roundabouts. [best not gone into]
However, when confronted by a fish logo on the car in front I have the same prejudices as everyone else.
throb [17:7]
Quite.
After a mere 4,150-odd posts, do you think anyone's ever understood him?
JonR
After a mere 4,150-odd posts, do you think anyone's ever understood him?
JonR
quote:"As the art mistress said to the gardener!"
Yep Alex, my thighs still ache and it's gone midnight !
quote:
The manual read by all those police drivers who mow down pedestrians and kill those they are in "hot pursuit" of with impunity - how can one argue
Nigel, nice to see you are in full posession of the facts - not. Please justify your statement above? Mind you, I'll bet every advanced police driver has done what you suggest...
andy c!
quote:
Is the provision of public transport to the detriment of the promotion of private transport? Really? Not everyone can afford a car. Not everyone would want a car. Not everyone could drive a car (blind people? are they failures?).
The provision of public transport is not to the detriment of promotion of private transport.
What I said was:
quote:
Promoting public transport is often about demonising private transport.
Promotion and provision are not the same.
In the absence of any real provision of public transport, government transport policy relies entirely on demonising private transport in an attempt to bring about phase shift to public transport - whether the latter is actually available, cheap enough, feasible to use and efficient - or not.
An example is a two-lane dual carriageway that is a main arterial route into the centre of Birmingham (A38 from Lichfield). It now has a bus lane in each direction leaving just one lane for other motor vehicles. Were the bus lanes put in to improve the quality of the bus service or to make commuting more unpleasant for car users?
I'll give you a clue: the buses are also delayed by the resulting congestion caused by allowing only a single lane in each direction for other motor vehicles travelling in and out of a city with a population of over 2 million.
There is no underground railway network in Birmingham, and there should be.
In Stuttgart, Germany (a city with less than a quarter of the population of Brum) there is a tram/underground network with no fewer than 17 lines. The main arterial routes in and out of the city are typically four lanes wide in each direction, one of which is a bus lane.
A bus lane alonside three lanes for other vehicles is there to meet the demands of public and private transport users alike.
Why can't we have that here?
Why are our politicians complete wankers?
Why do most people who live here fail to see that they are complete wankers.
The solutions to our problems often lie beyond our foggy shores but hardly anyone ever bothers to look.
The answer is to invest* in improving the roads and public transport.
Once (if ever) we have transport policies in place that will improve mobility for everyone, the "speed kills" dogma will become redundant.
Regards,
Steve.
* It costs money I know, but an improved infrastructure will more than pay for itself in the end.
[This message was edited by Steven Toy on Sun 24 October 2004 at 6:08.]