R Plates ...ARE YOU KIDDING ME !?!?!

Forums › Off topic › R Plates ...ARE YOU KIDDING ME !?!?!

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

1925 posts

Uber Geek

#633698 31-May-2012 21:10

L plates are weird. I see a lot of Mums and Dads driving the family car around with the L plates still on. Hell, I know a few of them.

I wonder if the argument of treating drivers differently based on the plate they have visible is therefore moot?

I don't treat drivers differently on their plate. I treat them differently based on their driving.

Talkiet

4792 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#633708 31-May-2012 21:23

Disrespective: L plates are weird. I see a lot of Mums and Dads driving the family car around with the L plates still on. Hell, I know a few of them.

I wonder if the argument of treating drivers differently based on the plate they have visible is therefore moot?

I don't treat drivers differently on their plate. I treat them differently based on their driving.

Sometimes I don't have the luxury of following a car around for a while to ascertain what the driver is like. IN that case I'll take my cues from eslewhere...

How clean is the car? are there any dents in it? Are the windows clean? is the driver sitting tall in the car? is the tailpipe belching smoke? Has the person stopped over a stop line? Are they creeping forward at the lights? Are they centered in their lane? Can I hear Duf-Duf music from the car? Are there teenagers in the car yahooing about? Is it lowered or otherwise obviously modified? Is it a rotary? And... Is there an L plate in the back window?

All of these (and many more) contribute to a first impression and I'd consider myself a fool to not take all the information I can into account. The L plates (and R Plate - although I haven't seen any official statement of them yet) are just some more info.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

qwerty7

434 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#633715 31-May-2012 21:34

Hobchild: I have to agree with the OP on this one, I personally pay absolutely no attention to an 'L' plate due to the fact that EVERY other road user is a potential hazard.

And while I'm on the topic I have personally never understood the 'no passengers' rule. How do passengers make a person a worse driver. Now a lot of you are probably going to say that they can be a distraction, yet that same person can carry a dog in their car if they wish.

Distraction, peer pressure and also if you stuff up you only hurt yourself. Makes sense to me.

If a car is driving slow or stalling at the lights / taking their time an L plate is a good idea as it explains to me why they are going slow and I actually give them time.. because we were all there once.

Restricted plates seem pointless to me in terms of driver experience. Yes other people may have more experience but THAT DOES NOT MAKE THEM BETTER DRIVERS we live in a world where people read the news paper on the motorway @ 100 km/h.

The whole idea behind it is to get people off their full? i think if they introduce it there will be a decent amount of non compliance. There has got to be a better way.. and does it matter if people stay on their restricted and don't get their full?

miamiheatfan

259 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#633717 31-May-2012 21:38

qwerty7:
Hobchild: I have to agree with the OP on this one, I personally pay absolutely no attention to an 'L' plate due to the fact that EVERY other road user is a potential hazard.

And while I'm on the topic I have personally never understood the 'no passengers' rule. How do passengers make a person a worse driver. Now a lot of you are probably going to say that they can be a distraction, yet that same person can carry a dog in their car if they wish.

Distraction, peer pressure and also if you stuff up you only hurt yourself. Makes sense to me.

If a car is driving slow or stalling at the lights / taking their time an L plate is a good idea as it explains to me why they are going slow and I actually give them time.. because we were all there once.

Restricted plates seem pointless to me in terms of driver experience. Yes other people may have more experience but THAT DOES NOT MAKE THEM BETTER DRIVERS we live in a world where people read the news paper on the motorway @ 100 km/h.

The whole idea behind it is to get people off their full? i think if they introduce it there will be a decent amount of non compliance. There has got to be a better way.. and does it matter if people stay on their restricted and don't get their full?

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#633722 31-May-2012 22:01

Hobchild: I have to agree with the OP on this one, I personally pay absolutely no attention to an 'L' plate due to the fact that EVERY other road user is a potential hazard.

And while I'm on the topic I have personally never understood the 'no passengers' rule. How do passengers make a person a worse driver. Now a lot of you are probably going to say that they can be a distraction, yet that same person can carry a dog in their car if they wish.

It's illegal to have a dog unrestrained in your vehicle. Restricted license holders are USUALLY young people with young, less responsible friends and family, etc, who ARE a distraction. This is proven and beyond dispute.

You should pay extra attention to L plated drivers as they are inexperienced and usually more unpredictable. You would I expect pay more attention to specific types of hazards than others, this is no different.

The people arguing against, are the same people who would argue against an increase in the drinking age. Despite the absolute PROVEN FACT it's a good idea, people don't like having their "rights" impinged.

miamiheatfan

259 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#633737 31-May-2012 22:19

networkn:
Hobchild: I have to agree with the OP on this one, I personally pay absolutely no attention to an 'L' plate due to the fact that EVERY other road user is a potential hazard.

And while I'm on the topic I have personally never understood the 'no passengers' rule. How do passengers make a person a worse driver. Now a lot of you are probably going to say that they can be a distraction, yet that same person can carry a dog in their car if they wish.

It's illegal to have a dog unrestrained in your vehicle. Restricted license holders are USUALLY young people with young, less responsible friends and family, etc, who ARE a distraction. This is proven and beyond dispute.

You should pay extra attention to L plated drivers as they are inexperienced and usually more unpredictable. You would I expect pay more attention to specific types of hazards than others, this is no different.

The people arguing against, are the same people who would argue against an increase in the drinking age. Despite the absolute PROVEN FACT it's a good idea, people don't like having their "rights" impinged.

and you my friend, is another example of "big talk - no facts" kind of people.

I've got a restricted license and my parents are in their 50s , my sister is in her late 20s , all have been driving more than 10 years.
And hold it , my friends all have full time jobs, have licenses , never been fined, crashed , or had tickets. Some have R and some F.
STRIKE ONE, YOU"RE DEAD WRONG.

#2 , NO , the drinking age should actually be 21. And the NZ govt is doing the right thing and is moving in the right direction in increasing it, the same with license age.
So NO, we're not the same people.
STRIKE TWO, YOU"RE DEAD WRONG AGAIN.

Ignorant, uneducated, insulting kiwi. People like YOU are the ones that puts our country to shame. Pre-judging everyone and assuming s*** about people.

Shame on you mate.

CADMAX

274 posts

Ultimate Geek

#633743 31-May-2012 22:33

plas:
CADMAX:
davidcole:
plas: I've had my restricted for 8-9 years, never had a crash, never been pulled over and had 1 speed camera ticket. Might go get my full if they decide I need dicky R plates.

Sounds like you're the perfect reason why there should be R plates. You mean to tell me in 9 years you've never driven with a passenger?

+1

I would put money on that fact that you would have driven with some one in the car and that person not having a full class 1!
And i would be willing to put a bet on that you have driven after your 10 pm curfew!

I don't often have a passenger, but if I do I make sure they are covered by the supervisor provision and the same again for driving after 10pm on the very rare occasion it happens.

How is getting my full tomorrow going to change my driving ability? Its not like I have repeatedly failed the test.

Passing your full test will not make you a better driver, if you fail then it will bring you up to speed with where you need to do work.

For all the 1337 drives out there on there R, you are not as good as you think you are till you pass your full.

Ok here is a question: If you had a Doc that was still at med school and had not past his final test yet and he was about to cut you open (even tho he has been doing it for 3 years), would you taken him or would you take the one that has been doing the job for 2 years but had all his paper work done?

R v Full class 1. I would take the doc with all the paper work done.. you?

In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

P1n3apqlExpr3ss

853 posts

Ultimate Geek

#633745 31-May-2012 22:38

Full test is easy as anything now, I know several people that have done it recently, one of them didn't even go into an over 60 kph area. It doesn't prove anything except that you can drive who you like when you like; legally.

miamiheatfan

259 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#633747 31-May-2012 22:40

CADMAX:
plas:
CADMAX:
davidcole:
plas: I've had my restricted for 8-9 years, never had a crash, never been pulled over and had 1 speed camera ticket. Might go get my full if they decide I need dicky R plates.

Sounds like you're the perfect reason why there should be R plates. You mean to tell me in 9 years you've never driven with a passenger?

+1

I would put money on that fact that you would have driven with some one in the car and that person not having a full class 1!
And i would be willing to put a bet on that you have driven after your 10 pm curfew!

I don't often have a passenger, but if I do I make sure they are covered by the supervisor provision and the same again for driving after 10pm on the very rare occasion it happens.

How is getting my full tomorrow going to change my driving ability? Its not like I have repeatedly failed the test.

Passing your full test will not make you a better driver, if you fail then it will bring you up to speed with where you need to do work.

For all the 1337 drives out there on there R, you are not as good as you think you are till you pass your full.

Ok here is a question: If you had a Doc that was still at med school and had not past his final test yet and he was about to cut you open (even tho he has been doing it for 3 years), would you taken him or would you take the one that has been doing the job for 2 years but had all his paper work done?

R v Full class 1. I would take the doc with all the paper work done.. you?

i would take the med student Doc provided He hasn't breached any medical laws and has not has his learners medical license taken away for some reasons.
Less cocky than the doctor that thinks he's all that.

Just like you.
To the *insert number here* people out there with your full licenses , that includes YOU , CADMAX. You are not as good as you think you are, not even close. You haven't been tested with the best nature has to offer.

So stop being cocky and a big head.

And people with R licenses in half the case are better drivers than the ones on full , more careful, LESS COCKY ,unlike you.

People like you think you're all that..and thinks the Learners and R drivers think they're all that when they're actually quite disciplined.
Get a dose of reality mate.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek

#633749 31-May-2012 22:44

qwerty7: Distraction, peer pressure and also if you stuff up you only hurt yourself. Makes sense to me.

Nothing about a motor accident only ever hurts you...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/hutt-valley/6805202/Killed-biker-a-clown-with-big-heart

While he was the only one killed, and the bike didn't hit anyone else and no one else got a cut, bruise or even a single mark...

...I wouldn't like to try and argue with the 150+ Police, Ambo, Fire, HOGs, family and friends who turned up a week later and the funeral about people getting hurt.

qwerty7, while I take your point, and I do agree you were right with respect to what you were actually addressing, it really seems to me that many of the posters here, especially the OP, have just missed the point that this whole issue really is just simply about trying to make our roads safer for everyone by trying to make sure drivers do as much education as possible.

The point of the restricted period is hoped that you will do some driving, but also go and do extended driver training.

Oh, and before anyone comes back and wants to have a go about how extra training blar blar blar doesn't always help... ya I know. Andrew had 20 years riding, 12 years as an officer in the NZ Police where he spent a number in the bike unit in Auckland, had done any amount of Police level driver training, finished up his Police time doing heavy vehicle inspection which required him to have even more training than the guy who just gives you a speeding ticket and he still ended up dead.

But that's not the point, the point is the only way we can improve safety is to attempt to drive every new driver to get as much training as we can in stages over a reasonable period of time, not just general experience.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#633750 31-May-2012 22:45

and you my friend, is another example of "big talk - no facts" kind of people.

I've got a restricted license and my parents are in their 50s , my sister is in her late 20s , all have been driving more than 10 years.
And hold it , my friends all have full time jobs, have licenses , never been fined, crashed , or had tickets. Some have R and some F.
STRIKE ONE, YOU"RE DEAD WRONG.

#2 , NO , the drinking age should actually be 21. And the NZ govt is doing the right thing and is moving in the right direction in increasing it, the same with license age.
So NO, we're not the same people.
STRIKE TWO, YOU"RE DEAD WRONG AGAIN.

Ignorant, uneducated, insulting kiwi. People like YOU are the ones that puts our country to shame. Pre-judging everyone and assuming s*** about people.

Shame on you mate.

LOL wow classy reply there sunshine. How about you re-read my post before you cram your other foot in your mouth. Better still, be quiet and let the adults talk.

I would also personally put $50 on the fact that unless you have very few friends, one or more of them WILL have had ticket(s).

Go Re-Read my post, take a deep breath and chill out.

Hobchild

623 posts

Ultimate Geek

#633751 31-May-2012 22:46

networkn:
Hobchild: I have to agree with the OP on this one, I personally pay absolutely no attention to an 'L' plate due to the fact that EVERY other road user is a potential hazard.

And while I'm on the topic I have personally never understood the 'no passengers' rule. How do passengers make a person a worse driver. Now a lot of you are probably going to say that they can be a distraction, yet that same person can carry a dog in their car if they wish.

It's illegal to have a dog unrestrained in your vehicle. Restricted license holders are USUALLY young people with young, less responsible friends and family, etc, who ARE a distraction. This is proven and beyond dispute.

You should pay extra attention to L plated drivers as they are inexperienced and usually more unpredictable. You would I expect pay more attention to specific types of hazards than others, this is no different.

The people arguing against, are the same people who would argue against an increase in the drinking age. Despite the absolute PROVEN FACT it's a good idea, people don't like having their "rights" impinged.

Firstly, where do you get this info regarding unrestrained pets, I have googled like crazy trying to find what you state is illegal.

Secondly, yes they COULD be a distraction but so can a lot of things especially kids which you are allowed to take on your restricted if you are their legal guardian.

Thirdly, if anything I would probably find a learner driver more predictable they tend to stick to the speed limit, they tend to indicate (something that 'veteran' drivers often tend to forget to do) they don't drive too close. etc etc. Yes they COULD do something unpredictable but so could that middle aged person driving the $200,000 Jag, you just don't know so therefore I treat every road user with the same caution as I treat another.

Fourthly, for the record I believe they should raise the age of purchasing alcohol from a bottle store to 20 but leave the age to go to a bar/pub at 18.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#633757 31-May-2012 22:54

Firstly, where do you get this info regarding unrestrained pets, I have googled like crazy trying to find what you state is illegal.

Secondly, yes they COULD be a distraction but so can a lot of things especially kids which you are allowed to take on your restricted if you are their legal guardian.

Thirdly, if anything I would probably find a learner driver more predictable they tend to stick to the speed limit, they tend to indicate (something that 'veteran' drivers often tend to forget to do) they don't drive too close. etc etc. Yes they COULD do something unpredictable but so could that middle aged person driving the $200,000 Jag, you just don't know so therefore I treat every road user with the same caution as I treat another.

Fourthly, for the record I believe they should raise the age of purchasing alcohol from a bottle store to 20 but leave the age to go to a bar/pub at 18.

Well I wouldn't recommend taking kids in the car as a restricted driver, but that's not the law.

Learner drivers are simply statistically more likely to do something unpredictable as they have not yet got the experience that being a longer term driver gives you. Also learner drivers are more often either younger people or people from another country who may not yet be used to all the rules. It's why they place significant restrictions on a learner driver (as well they should).

miamiheatfan

259 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#633760 31-May-2012 22:57

networkn:

and you my friend, is another example of "big talk - no facts" kind of people.

I've got a restricted license and my parents are in their 50s , my sister is in her late 20s , all have been driving more than 10 years.
And hold it , my friends all have full time jobs, have licenses , never been fined, crashed , or had tickets. Some have R and some F.
STRIKE ONE, YOU"RE DEAD WRONG.

#2 , NO , the drinking age should actually be 21. And the NZ govt is doing the right thing and is moving in the right direction in increasing it, the same with license age.
So NO, we're not the same people.
STRIKE TWO, YOU"RE DEAD WRONG AGAIN.

Ignorant, uneducated, insulting kiwi. People like YOU are the ones that puts our country to shame. Pre-judging everyone and assuming s*** about people.

Shame on you mate.

LOL wow classy reply there sunshine. How about you re-read my post before you cram your other foot in your mouth. Better still, be quiet and let the adults talk.

I would also personally put $50 on the fact that unless you have very few friends, one or more of them WILL have had ticket(s).

Go Re-Read my post, take a deep breath and chill out.

Oh you're an adult ? calling people names and using lame terms "cram your other foot into your mouth" .. ? adult.

Just as i expected from a typical kiwi bloke like you. Uneducated.

Oh fyi, you consider yourself an adult because you have a full time job ? degree (probable) ? and a license and friends ?
Guess what, so do I.
Or should i be calling you a little kid too because you've got parents , right ? As we all do.
So you should go be quiet, and let the smart educated people talk.

Oh and i'd gladly take your $50 thank you very much , Since i have lots of friends and know them very well and speak to them very often enough to know that none of them have had any of those things.

Hey noob, it's ACTUALLY POSSIBLE to have no fines, crashes and tickets. It's called COMMON SENSE and OBIDING THE FKN LAW.
My lovely parents have been driving for over 3 decades in new zealand , no tickets, no crashes, wasting money on insurance, never claimed.

Go re-read my post, take a deep breath, and chill out.

miamiheatfan

259 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#633762 31-May-2012 23:00

networkn:

Firstly, where do you get this info regarding unrestrained pets, I have googled like crazy trying to find what you state is illegal.

Secondly, yes they COULD be a distraction but so can a lot of things especially kids which you are allowed to take on your restricted if you are their legal guardian.

Thirdly, if anything I would probably find a learner driver more predictable they tend to stick to the speed limit, they tend to indicate (something that 'veteran' drivers often tend to forget to do) they don't drive too close. etc etc. Yes they COULD do something unpredictable but so could that middle aged person driving the $200,000 Jag, you just don't know so therefore I treat every road user with the same caution as I treat another.

Fourthly, for the record I believe they should raise the age of purchasing alcohol from a bottle store to 20 but leave the age to go to a bar/pub at 18.

Well I wouldn't recommend taking kids in the car as a restricted driver, but that's not the law.

Learner drivers are simply statistically more likely to do something unpredictable as they have not yet got the experience that being a longer term driver gives you. Also learner drivers are more often either younger people or people from another country who may not yet be used to all the rules. It's why they place significant restrictions on a learner driver (as well they should).

wrong. again.
Learner drivers are statistically proven to be much more predictable than the seasoned drivers due to the fact that they ARE learning about the NZ road and its rules. and the fact that they most likely have a supervisor next to them.

It's the seasoned drivers who are more predictable. Those who do not use their turn signal at roundabouts thinking "hey nobody here, i'm a veteran driver"

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10