6 ms·

Too many people don’t actually know the rules of the road or have understanding of even basic driving etiquette. They don’t understand that you shouldn’t tailga

Too many people don’t actually know the rules of the road or have understanding of even basic driving etiquette. They don’t understand that you shouldn’t tailgate people. They don’t understand that accidents aren’t accidents, they are all caused by someone’s negligence. People just don’t understand how dangerous driving is. I think that this driving ignorance is the root problem, the cause of causes. Need to make driving tests much harder.

jayd16 5y ago
Accidents are from complacency not ability to pass a test.
- mdorazio 5y ago
  I would argue complacency + selfishness + a small amount of ignorance. Some people really do not know that you shouldn’t get in the left lane unless you plan to pass a vehicle or want to drive faster than your current lane. A lot of people know you shouldn’t tailgate or cut people off or smash the accelerator just so you can smash the brakes 10 seconds later when you get to the red light or stopped traffic that was clearly visible, but don’t give a shit because when they’re in control of a car they feel entitled to drive however the hell they want.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Depends on the type of test (book, practical, etc). If someone is complacent, then they likely were complacent when preparing for the test (didn't study, no drivers Ed course, etc). A reasonable test can weed out those complacent people who don't care to know or follow the law/instructions.
  - jayd16 5y ago
    The simple counter example is how many people phone and drive when they were able to abstain during the test.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      But is that complacency born out of ignorance in at least some cases? More thorough testing could help in those cases.
kirykl 5y ago
As for the danger part, I think some type of VR based visceral experience of an actual accident should be required. Most people think it’s just a pillowy experience solved by the airbag from auto commercials
- mikepurvis 5y ago
  I don't think anyone thinks a car crash is no biggie. They just don't think it'll happen to them. Or they give themselves a pass to send that quick text at a red light because they're usually so safe and it really is important, and nothing happened the last time they did it, etc etc. Maybe scaring people would help them out of this mindset but I really doubt it.
reincarnate0x14 5y ago
Not to single you out, but so many responses are trying to offer some single factor that is suddenly making this worse when most of them are long term trends that should apply to other places this isn't happening. So while driver's education probably should look a lot more like civilian pilot licensing with required x hours of instruction time, that by itself isn't going to have noticeable effects for years as the median age driver cohort benefitting from that becomes larger. It'll take years to tease out what is going on here, but if nothing else the take-away is to be careful out there, and it's not just anecdata that it's more dangerous.
- sidewndr46 5y ago
  > driver's education probably should look a lot more like civilian pilot licensing with required x hours of instruction time To get my driver's license in Alabama I was required to do this at the time. But it was self-attested, there was no independent verification of driving experience.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Yep and the "instructor" is usually just a parent, who may also be lacking in some areas.
- mikepurvis 5y ago
  > ... as the median age driver cohort benefitting from that becomes larger There's already a lot of benefits "in the pipeline" that take decades to fully manifest. For example, Ontario introduced the current graduated licensing scheme in 1994 [0], but that means there are still millions of increasingly older drivers on the road who were never required to pass the G2 and G tests that anyone under 40 has. Overall, it's just absurd that driver's licenses don't require a retest every 5-10 years, but that kind of change would obviously a much harder sell to the public than giving them a pass to blame the reckless youth with one hand, and a pull-up-the-ladder type fix to the problem with the other. [0] https://www.guelphmercury.com/news-story/4762414-ontario-s-20-year-graduated-licensing-system-has-saved-lives-but-experts-say-more-can-be-done/ https://www.guelphmercury.com/news-story/4762414-ontario-s-2...
hemloc_io 5y ago
I think people know the rules of the road, but driving is a social activity with it's own norms like any other. That's why drivers from different parts of the country drive differently. (I'd also argue if you want to fix this you need to make police enforce traffic stuff only instead of using it as a pretext for other kinds of enforcement.) If we want to make driving tests much harder then we need to not make driving required for day to day life. I'd argue that there are true "accidents", they're just not all collisions. In our laws we have even have different levels of fault, accident -> negligence -> recklessness -> premeditation, and criminal vs civil. You're right thou all of humans don't adequately understand + calculate risk.
- melony 5y ago
  It is curious that traffic-specific law enforcement is rare outside of the major cities.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    It's very common on many highways. For example, police watch I-95 in VA like a hawk, and mostly outside the big cities.
    - vollmond 5y ago
      Right, but they're general police (eg, they also handle non-traffic enforcement such as drugs), right? I believe GP's point was not about "specific enforcement of traffic laws by police" but "law enforcement agencies who are specifically charged with traffic".
      - giantg2 5y ago
        True, they are full law enforcement but assigned traffic duty. "law enforcement agencies who are specifically charged with traffic" Are there really any that are? I didn't think that was common, even in cities. In fact, many cities are issuing guidance to not enforce basic traffic violations to prevent pretextual stops.
beardog 5y ago
I think part of the problem is that even people who don't want to drive or hate driving are all but forced to do it in many areas because of lack of other "affordable" options. More work from home has improved that at least. There would certainly still be ignorant people on the road if driving was entirely voluntary, but maybe there would be less impatient drivers and it would be more tenable to universally require driver's ed/have intense standards.
mikepurvis 5y ago
As a frequent pedestrian/cyclist, I completely agree. We don't let just anyone drive a truck or fly a plane, but somehow piloting a personal automobile is treated with nothing even approaching the seriousness of those other activities. Unfortunately, we also have decades of built environment that strongly assumes most adults can and will drive. We have significant segments of the population for whom their choice of car is tied into their identity and ego. We have an assumption that many jobs can only be driven to, or even require driving on the job. We don't have even the political willpower to take away licenses from obviously unfit seniors, much less able-bodied working adults. People get away with a slap on the wrist for vehicular manslaughter because what's the alternative? Ruining a second life by causing the perpetrator to lose their job? When they already feel terrible about what happened and isn't that punishment enough? I don't really see a way out of this other than what is already happening in a lot of places, which is trying to break overall car dependence so that taking away a license (or making the tests hard enough that way fewer people can get one in the first place) is no longer a death sentence.
- giantg2 5y ago
  We can fly ultralights without a license. Granted those "vehicles" technically aren't airplanes and generally only result in loss of life to one's self. "We don't have even the political willpower to take away licenses from obviously unfit seniors" I believe many states do require a retest after a certain age. "or making the tests hard enough that way fewer people can get one in the first place" Fewer, sure. Way fewer, maybe not. I think most people are capable of safely operating a car. I think there would be a large percentage that would just need to put more effort into learning. The way it is now is that people remain ignorant on the subject because they aren't required to study and learn, because licenses are practically given away. Plus, why waste time learning the law if nobody else follows it either? Tougher licensing isn't (or shouldn't be) primarily about depriving people of licenses, but rather providing forced incentives to learn through testing standards. The standards shouldn't be so high as to prevent most people from driving. If they are then we could change some of the rules or designs to simplify the process, although likely at the expense of rate of flow.
  - 5y ago
immibis 5y ago
Driving tests can't be made harder until driving is made not mandatory in most parts of the country.
dazc 5y ago
I don't think it's ignorance of the rules, I think a lot of drivers consider themselves to have above average driving skills and what you consider dangerous tailgating is your failure to understand that these people have extraordinary reactions and can actually manipulate the laws of physics. I'm not being flippant either, they really do think this.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Certainly people not understanding vehicle dynamics can be an issue. This sort of information should be added to the test - just like for a CDL you need to understand how loads, grades, and gearing works beyond just the laws around them. So the test shouldn't just be about the law. And I'd argue many do not know the law when the test is only 50 questions and there are many more laws/signs/etc than 50.
thatfrenchguy 5y ago
It’s so easy to get a driving license in the US that this should not surprise anyone?
Ralfp 5y ago
I’m living in Poland which is known for notoriously hard driving exam (only one in three candidates pass on first try, you can fail exam at any time if examinator thinks you aren’t aware of cars surroundings). I’ve passed mine on sixth attempt. We are also no. 2 most deadly country to drive in in EU. Harder exams don’t improve road safety. Brutal penalties also don’t improve safety. Looking at my country road safety is propably 1/3 infrastructure (awful road surface, bike lanes sandwiched between regular speed car lanes, 3-lane wide roads that require you to go from one edge lane to other on short distance to get to target) and 2/3 shitty driving culture. Because its very hard and rare to be caught by police for dangerous driving (and there are plenty of yotube videos of police just ignoring dangerous driving or doing it themselves), people here are conditioned to drive in alternative and dangerous way. A saying goes that real drivers ed. starts when you are alone in your own car. And if you are fresh after exam and trying to drive legit, you will also be conditioned to drive shitty because alternative to not exceeding the speed limit yourself is having somebody else speeding drive into back of your car. Running red light (called „late orange”) is also very common, and despite there being cameras on most of crossroads, those are used only to measure traffic and not for ticketing. People force their way in traffic because yielding way to car that wants to change lane is very rare and considered dumb. When people are stopped by police, they dismiss it as bad luck. People only follow the limits when there is automated system in area for ticketing. Because they know there is no way to cheat the system. Top app on Google Play is Janosik (named after polish Robin Hood countrpart) - navigation app that has warnings about speed cameras, police patrol routes and speed controls.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

jayd16 5y ago

Accidents are from complacency not ability to pass a test.

mdorazio 5y ago
I would argue complacency + selfishness + a small amount of ignorance. Some people really do not know that you shouldn’t get in the left lane unless you plan to pass a vehicle or want to drive faster than your current lane. A lot of people know you shouldn’t tailgate or cut people off or smash the accelerator just so you can smash the brakes 10 seconds later when you get to the red light or stopped traffic that was clearly visible, but don’t give a shit because when they’re in control of a car they feel entitled to drive however the hell they want.
giantg2 5y ago
Depends on the type of test (book, practical, etc). If someone is complacent, then they likely were complacent when preparing for the test (didn't study, no drivers Ed course, etc). A reasonable test can weed out those complacent people who don't care to know or follow the law/instructions.
- jayd16 5y ago
  The simple counter example is how many people phone and drive when they were able to abstain during the test.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    But is that complacency born out of ignorance in at least some cases? More thorough testing could help in those cases.

kirykl 5y ago

As for the danger part, I think some type of VR based visceral experience of an actual accident should be required. Most people think it’s just a pillowy experience solved by the airbag from auto commercials

mikepurvis 5y ago
I don't think anyone thinks a car crash is no biggie. They just don't think it'll happen to them. Or they give themselves a pass to send that quick text at a red light because they're usually so safe and it really is important, and nothing happened the last time they did it, etc etc. Maybe scaring people would help them out of this mindset but I really doubt it.

reincarnate0x14 5y ago

Not to single you out, but so many responses are trying to offer some single factor that is suddenly making this worse when most of them are long term trends that should apply to other places this isn't happening. So while driver's education probably should look a lot more like civilian pilot licensing with required x hours of instruction time, that by itself isn't going to have noticeable effects for years as the median age driver cohort benefitting from that becomes larger. It'll take years to tease out what is going on here, but if nothing else the take-away is to be careful out there, and it's not just anecdata that it's more dangerous.

sidewndr46 5y ago
> driver's education probably should look a lot more like civilian pilot licensing with required x hours of instruction time To get my driver's license in Alabama I was required to do this at the time. But it was self-attested, there was no independent verification of driving experience.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Yep and the "instructor" is usually just a parent, who may also be lacking in some areas.
mikepurvis 5y ago
> ... as the median age driver cohort benefitting from that becomes larger There's already a lot of benefits "in the pipeline" that take decades to fully manifest. For example, Ontario introduced the current graduated licensing scheme in 1994 [0], but that means there are still millions of increasingly older drivers on the road who were never required to pass the G2 and G tests that anyone under 40 has. Overall, it's just absurd that driver's licenses don't require a retest every 5-10 years, but that kind of change would obviously a much harder sell to the public than giving them a pass to blame the reckless youth with one hand, and a pull-up-the-ladder type fix to the problem with the other. [0] https://www.guelphmercury.com/news-story/4762414-ontario-s-20-year-graduated-licensing-system-has-saved-lives-but-experts-say-more-can-be-done/ https://www.guelphmercury.com/news-story/4762414-ontario-s-2...

hemloc_io 5y ago

I think people know the rules of the road, but driving is a social activity with it's own norms like any other. That's why drivers from different parts of the country drive differently. (I'd also argue if you want to fix this you need to make police enforce traffic stuff only instead of using it as a pretext for other kinds of enforcement.) If we want to make driving tests much harder then we need to not make driving required for day to day life. I'd argue that there are true "accidents", they're just not all collisions. In our laws we have even have different levels of fault, accident -> negligence -> recklessness -> premeditation, and criminal vs civil. You're right thou all of humans don't adequately understand + calculate risk.

melony 5y ago
It is curious that traffic-specific law enforcement is rare outside of the major cities.
- giantg2 5y ago
  It's very common on many highways. For example, police watch I-95 in VA like a hawk, and mostly outside the big cities.
  - vollmond 5y ago
    Right, but they're general police (eg, they also handle non-traffic enforcement such as drugs), right? I believe GP's point was not about "specific enforcement of traffic laws by police" but "law enforcement agencies who are specifically charged with traffic".
    - giantg2 5y ago
      True, they are full law enforcement but assigned traffic duty. "law enforcement agencies who are specifically charged with traffic" Are there really any that are? I didn't think that was common, even in cities. In fact, many cities are issuing guidance to not enforce basic traffic violations to prevent pretextual stops.

beardog 5y ago

I think part of the problem is that even people who don't want to drive or hate driving are all but forced to do it in many areas because of lack of other "affordable" options. More work from home has improved that at least. There would certainly still be ignorant people on the road if driving was entirely voluntary, but maybe there would be less impatient drivers and it would be more tenable to universally require driver's ed/have intense standards.

mikepurvis 5y ago

As a frequent pedestrian/cyclist, I completely agree. We don't let just anyone drive a truck or fly a plane, but somehow piloting a personal automobile is treated with nothing even approaching the seriousness of those other activities. Unfortunately, we also have decades of built environment that strongly assumes most adults can and will drive. We have significant segments of the population for whom their choice of car is tied into their identity and ego. We have an assumption that many jobs can only be driven to, or even require driving on the job. We don't have even the political willpower to take away licenses from obviously unfit seniors, much less able-bodied working adults. People get away with a slap on the wrist for vehicular manslaughter because what's the alternative? Ruining a second life by causing the perpetrator to lose their job? When they already feel terrible about what happened and isn't that punishment enough? I don't really see a way out of this other than what is already happening in a lot of places, which is trying to break overall car dependence so that taking away a license (or making the tests hard enough that way fewer people can get one in the first place) is no longer a death sentence.

giantg2 5y ago
We can fly ultralights without a license. Granted those "vehicles" technically aren't airplanes and generally only result in loss of life to one's self. "We don't have even the political willpower to take away licenses from obviously unfit seniors" I believe many states do require a retest after a certain age. "or making the tests hard enough that way fewer people can get one in the first place" Fewer, sure. Way fewer, maybe not. I think most people are capable of safely operating a car. I think there would be a large percentage that would just need to put more effort into learning. The way it is now is that people remain ignorant on the subject because they aren't required to study and learn, because licenses are practically given away. Plus, why waste time learning the law if nobody else follows it either? Tougher licensing isn't (or shouldn't be) primarily about depriving people of licenses, but rather providing forced incentives to learn through testing standards. The standards shouldn't be so high as to prevent most people from driving. If they are then we could change some of the rules or designs to simplify the process, although likely at the expense of rate of flow.
- 5y ago

immibis 5y ago

Driving tests can't be made harder until driving is made not mandatory in most parts of the country.

dazc 5y ago

I don't think it's ignorance of the rules, I think a lot of drivers consider themselves to have above average driving skills and what you consider dangerous tailgating is your failure to understand that these people have extraordinary reactions and can actually manipulate the laws of physics. I'm not being flippant either, they really do think this.

giantg2 5y ago
Certainly people not understanding vehicle dynamics can be an issue. This sort of information should be added to the test - just like for a CDL you need to understand how loads, grades, and gearing works beyond just the laws around them. So the test shouldn't just be about the law. And I'd argue many do not know the law when the test is only 50 questions and there are many more laws/signs/etc than 50.

thatfrenchguy 5y ago

It’s so easy to get a driving license in the US that this should not surprise anyone?

Ralfp 5y ago

I’m living in Poland which is known for notoriously hard driving exam (only one in three candidates pass on first try, you can fail exam at any time if examinator thinks you aren’t aware of cars surroundings). I’ve passed mine on sixth attempt. We are also no. 2 most deadly country to drive in in EU. Harder exams don’t improve road safety. Brutal penalties also don’t improve safety. Looking at my country road safety is propably 1/3 infrastructure (awful road surface, bike lanes sandwiched between regular speed car lanes, 3-lane wide roads that require you to go from one edge lane to other on short distance to get to target) and 2/3 shitty driving culture. Because its very hard and rare to be caught by police for dangerous driving (and there are plenty of yotube videos of police just ignoring dangerous driving or doing it themselves), people here are conditioned to drive in alternative and dangerous way. A saying goes that real drivers ed. starts when you are alone in your own car. And if you are fresh after exam and trying to drive legit, you will also be conditioned to drive shitty because alternative to not exceeding the speed limit yourself is having somebody else speeding drive into back of your car. Running red light (called „late orange”) is also very common, and despite there being cameras on most of crossroads, those are used only to measure traffic and not for ticketing. People force their way in traffic because yielding way to car that wants to change lane is very rare and considered dumb. When people are stopped by police, they dismiss it as bad luck. People only follow the limits when there is automated system in area for ticketing. Because they know there is no way to cheat the system. Top app on Google Play is Janosik (named after polish Robin Hood countrpart) - navigation app that has warnings about speed cameras, police patrol routes and speed controls.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]