On 29-3-2009 23:37, clipka wrote:
> andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> The Dutch is also very intensive. I think less than 40% get it on their
>> first exam. It is preceded by a theoretical part that has even a bit
>> more failures. It took me about 2 years and 4 tries to get my license.
> 
> Why then, at weekends, are the German motorways crowded with Dutch people who
> still cannot drive? :P

Because we would like to go by bike but they were stolen by the Germans 
in the war.

> (sorry, just jumping on an old stereotype ;))

ditto. ;)


If it were true *) a more reasonable answer would be that we are not 
familiar with driving on motorways without traffic jams every 5 minutes.

*) I have seen Germans driving here, so I am not immediately convinced.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 17:37:22 EDT, "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>But I bet it's just one drive round the local supermarket car park. In a car
>with automatic transmission.

When I passed my UK driving test (1st time) about 30 years ago. I'd had two
driving lessons, went through a red traffic light and parked with four wheels on
the pavement (sidewalk). Go figure!
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 29 Mar 2009 14:37:37 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>
>Point.  But even sleeping separately while driving can cause automobile 
>accidents. :-)
>

Very True :-)

>>>Well, I'd say that *some* people are really bad at judging low-risk
>>>activities.  But why penalize the rest of us for it?
>>>
>> Because everyone thinks that they are the exception.
>
>80% of drivers think they're above average.  What scares me about that 
>statistic is that 20% think they're below average and they're still on 
>the roads.
>

Average? 
Besides that not being above average does not mean being below average. And even
if you think that you are below average that does not mean that you should not
be allowed to drive or 50% of drivers would loose their licences. Then 50% of
the remainder would be below the new average u.s.w.

>> "tend to get off the phone" Does that mean that sometimes you don't?
>
>Depends on the route I'm driving and how busy the road is.  I usually get 
>to the city after rush hour is over, so the surface streets are not all 
>that busy.  I also use a headset, both hands on the wheel at all times.
>

Better than using a handset, I admit, but your concentration is still not 100%
on the road IMO.

>> Have you ever heard anyone saying "I drive better after a couple of
>> drinks"?
>
>I have, and I think it's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard - 
>and I generally will tell people who say that exactly that.
>

Me too.

>That said, a good friend of mine (who lost his license as a result of the 
>incident) ended up with a shattered ankle after a head-on collision.  He 
>was over the legal limit, and the other driver died in the accident.  But 
>being the freak he is, it was 100% the other guy's fault - the other car 
>was over the centre line on a long curve and there's no way my friend 
>could've avoided hitting him.
>
>The constables on the scene - as well as the dead driver's family - felt 
>badly for him because his license was suspended.
>

I suppose that you had to be there.

>The guess is that the main reason he didn't die in the accident was 
>because he was relaxed as a result of the alcohol.  If he hadn't had a 
>few pints ahead of time, his injuries would probably have been more 
>severe or he might've died.

From my understanding of the way alcohol relaxes you he must have been blotto
then. That does not add up. If he was so relaxed then he would not have been
able to react swiftly and correctly. I presume that he was wearing a seatbelt
and in a safe car to escape serious injury.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

> If it were true *) a more reasonable answer would be that we are not 
> familiar with driving on motorways without traffic jams every 5 minutes.

Or with motorways where people are regularly wanting to go 160 km/hr or 
faster, and are not afraid to show you they want to :-)

Actually the biggest difference I noticed between UK and German motorways 
are that here in Germany most drivers are really thinking about the other 
cars on the road rather than just themselves.  For example, if they see you 
are behind and have come up quite quickly, they will move over into even a 
small gap just to let you pass, this would NEVER happen in the UK, in fact 
the opposite happens, people deliberately don't move even into massive gaps 
if they notice you are daring to go faster than 70 mph.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:16:17 +0200, andrel wrote:

> Question to check how your link with reality is: a Dutchman going to the
> States for a couple of years or an American coming here. One has to do
> an exam to convert to a valid local license: which one?

Very likely you have to take the US exam.

In the US, the MN state driver's license test is (was) one of the most 
difficult in the country, supposed to be good for everywhere.  Well, not 
Utah, I had to take the Utah written exam (but not the behind-the-wheel 
exam).

Less than 40%, though, doesn't say much until you know the difficulty of 
the questions, too.  10 questions that show you an octagonal sign with 
the word "STOP" on it asking you what the sign is for wouldn't really 
count. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:35:25 +0300, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> (I did drive and get
> more lessons than average driving student, as my father teached me)

I didn't ahead of getting my learner's permit, but similar to you, I had 
both classes and behind-the-wheel lessons (in an automatic) and my dad 
taught me because both of our cars were manual transmissions.  The 
driving school uses automatics because replacing transmissions is 
expensive.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:30:06 +0100, Stephen wrote:

>>80% of drivers think they're above average.  What scares me about that
>>statistic is that 20% think they're below average and they're still on
>>the roads.
>>
> Average?
> Besides that not being above average does not mean being below average.
> And even if you think that you are below average that does not mean that
> you should not be allowed to drive or 50% of drivers would loose their
> licences. Then 50% of the remainder would be below the new average
> u.s.w.

Now you're bringing logic into it - but technically only one person could 
be at the 50% mark. :-)

>>> "tend to get off the phone" Does that mean that sometimes you don't?
>>
>>Depends on the route I'm driving and how busy the road is.  I usually
>>get to the city after rush hour is over, so the surface streets are not
>>all that busy.  I also use a headset, both hands on the wheel at all
>>times.
>>
>>
> Better than using a handset, I admit, but your concentration is still
> not 100% on the road IMO.

Nobody's is at all times anyways.  You've had a crappy day at work, you 
get in the car and you're still thinking about work.  Some guy cuts you 
off doing 85 in a 65 and nearly runs you off the road; most people tend 
to think about what a jack*ss he is for at least 5-10 minutes afterwards.

Like I said, I restrict my attention to the things that are important and 
don't overload my mind.  Rather than seeing the stupid billboard at the 
side of the road, I'm having a conversation.

>>That said, a good friend of mine (who lost his license as a result of
>>the incident) ended up with a shattered ankle after a head-on collision.
>> He was over the legal limit, and the other driver died in the accident.
>> But being the freak he is, it was 100% the other guy's fault - the
>>other car was over the centre line on a long curve and there's no way my
>>friend could've avoided hitting him.
>>
>>The constables on the scene - as well as the dead driver's family - felt
>>badly for him because his license was suspended.
>>
> I suppose that you had to be there.

Very likely.

>>The guess is that the main reason he didn't die in the accident was
>>because he was relaxed as a result of the alcohol.  If he hadn't had a
>>few pints ahead of time, his injuries would probably have been more
>>severe or he might've died.
> 
> From my understanding of the way alcohol relaxes you he must have been
> blotto then. That does not add up. If he was so relaxed then he would
> not have been able to react swiftly and correctly. I presume that he was
> wearing a seatbelt and in a safe car to escape serious injury.

Ford Mondeo, and yeah, seatbelt was on.  But no, having seen how he 
drinks, he is generally pretty relaxed when stone cold sober anyways, so 
it wouldn't have taken a lot.  His account was that he was just over the 
limit.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:20:56 +0200, andrel wrote:

> On 29-3-2009 20:37, Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
>> 80% of drivers think they're above average.  What scares me about that
>> statistic is that 20% think they're below average and they're still on
>> the roads.
> 
> I assume they think that they are below average but still better than
> that 40% of morons that they normally see on the road.

LOL

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:39:29 +0300, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> I still haven't seen any document, which says what those people think is
> an average. Those 20 percent might think they are slower and always
> harassing someone, while they actually are driving safely in theier own
> limits.
> 
> Plain numbers are just plain numbers. That 80/20 -sharing proves nor
> says nothing, 'cause they don't say, which kind of driver (economic,
> safe, fast...) is the best one.

I've heard it said that 78.795% of all statistics are made up. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 22:55:05 +0200, andrel wrote:

> To which my predictable response would be that they can not judge
> either. But that is so predictable that I won't do it. ;)

Well, if you did, I would probably be inclined to point out that not all 
of the parties present may have been drinking. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message