Or maybe teach people to drive better, and make the US driving test (because I doubt the UK wants to ban left turns...) worth more than the paper it's written on, instead of the pathetic excuse for a "test" that it is.
- No hill-start or hill parking
- No emergency stop
- No driving on different types of carriageway
- No higher-speed driving
- No reversing
- No reversing around corners
- No 3-point-turn
- No distance measurement ("how far away is the red car ?")
- No use of the hand-brake (or parking brake if you prefer)
All of these were on my UK test. None of them were on my US test, which consisted of exiting the DMV, turning right 4 times around a block and turning back into the DMV. Seriously.
And the written "test" was a walk in the park too - one of the questions on mine was a picture of a stop sign, and the multiple choice answer to "What does this sign mean" included "You must stop at the sign"... [sigh]
Also, if you take your test in an automatic car in the UK, you get a restricted license that only allows you to drive an automatic car. WTF is up with passing on an automatic and then driving a manual car. Half the skill is in the clutch balance, and hill-starts are a lot harder.
I'm sure there are places in the US that have a harder test than I took in California. I'm equally sure there are places that are easier (though come to think of it,... I mean, how?) But a lot of people think they can drive when in reality they've never really been tested
Just addressing the transmission complaint, it's really difficult to end up with a manual in the US by accident. I'd be more worried about people passing the test in a tiny hatchback and then driving an enormous SUV.
That's fair, and I agree the fraction of people who "drive stick" over here is far smaller than in the UK, where it's the majority case (by far).
I do know a few people who've bought themselves a manual drive car (normally a performance one, after they've got to the point where they're financially secure) and without exception they passed their test in an automatic...
I've no idea about the US, but I do know that here in Germany, inattentive right turns is a major reason that cars run over people.
Left turns risk crashing into another car. But even if 61% of car crashes at intersections occur then, I have reservations about replacing one opportunity to crash into a car with three extra opportunities to run over people. And particularly if the research doesn't even describe that tradeoff.
5 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 19.1 ms ] thread- No hill-start or hill parking
- No emergency stop
- No driving on different types of carriageway
- No higher-speed driving
- No reversing
- No reversing around corners
- No 3-point-turn
- No distance measurement ("how far away is the red car ?")
- No use of the hand-brake (or parking brake if you prefer)
All of these were on my UK test. None of them were on my US test, which consisted of exiting the DMV, turning right 4 times around a block and turning back into the DMV. Seriously.
And the written "test" was a walk in the park too - one of the questions on mine was a picture of a stop sign, and the multiple choice answer to "What does this sign mean" included "You must stop at the sign"... [sigh]
Also, if you take your test in an automatic car in the UK, you get a restricted license that only allows you to drive an automatic car. WTF is up with passing on an automatic and then driving a manual car. Half the skill is in the clutch balance, and hill-starts are a lot harder.
I'm sure there are places in the US that have a harder test than I took in California. I'm equally sure there are places that are easier (though come to think of it,... I mean, how?) But a lot of people think they can drive when in reality they've never really been tested
I do know a few people who've bought themselves a manual drive car (normally a performance one, after they've got to the point where they're financially secure) and without exception they passed their test in an automatic...
Left turns risk crashing into another car. But even if 61% of car crashes at intersections occur then, I have reservations about replacing one opportunity to crash into a car with three extra opportunities to run over people. And particularly if the research doesn't even describe that tradeoff.
I count three on this figure from the article:
https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images...