new drivers stuff rejected..

[Tumble]

actually what I was saying was you don't stay on the ickle car for 2 years... you're only allowed to stay on it for 2 years max.... or you have to do the first bit again... the incentive being to get through both tests as quick as possible

[nichomach]

Fair enough, but I still think it's a bad idea; the purpose of the test is to ensure that you can operate the car safely and correctly. If you can't do that then you shouldn't pass - if you can, then you should be allowed to drive, period. If you don't think the current test does that, then the test needs changing, drivers who pass don't need penalising.

[TiG]

Sorry - GCSE's are there to prove you can pass a test, driving test is there (or at least, should be) to prove you can drive.

Butuz

Please tell me you are kidding?, driving well relies on huge amounts of concentration, awareness, feeling for the conditions.

I passed my driving test first time, however i then didn't drive a car for the next 3 years, yet i was still perfectly entitled to drive, the next time i got in a car i was CRAP at driving. Sure the car went, but i was a danger to myself, to others simply because of lack of practise.

2 years of solid learning to drive was what i needed before i would even considure myself a safe driver. Then look what i did i went and wrecked my lovely new octavia VRS. To be a safe driver you have to be a rare breed of people that are both careful enough to ensure you are safe, but aggressive enough to ensure that other people don't screw you up too.

The road awareness of everything about you all the time constantly, and being aware of an escape route etc is somethign that takes years of experience in my case.

Its like a MOT - the mot merely means you are at the most BASIC road legal level, its the same with the driving test, it merely means you are at the most basic legal level of driving ability IMO.

TiG