Possible curfew for 17-24 year old drivers

[missyburd]

And allowing learner drivers to take lessons on motorways...

Just a tad controversial but then what's new!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21937188

If I'd spent a bloody fortune on lessons etc. to be told I couldn't stay out late to give my sozzled folks a lift back, well I can't see many parents being right chuffed about that for a start!

[yorkie_chris]

I hope everyone goes absolutely mental to stop any legislation bringing anything like that into force.

Simple reason being that people called David who might occasionally want to use the family hatchback to collect their mum and dad from the airport will be punished by it... whereas people called Achmed and "Baz" who have stickers on their front wings will completely ignore it and carry on rallying around with 5 of their mates at 3am... because the 3 traffic coppers left in the country have better things to do.

Pointless, unenforceable and immoral.

[Spank86]

Will this include military vehicles? :D

[joshwalker094]

This better not be true. I drive late all the time. Infact I'm going Cornwall on 7th April, and will be leaving at 2am!

[andrewsmith]

This has been going around for about 6 years!
Its following the Scandinavian model who have done this for over 20 years

If they want to cut the accident rate put car drivers through the same test regime as bikes

[Wildkid]

They can suck my left one as I need to be able to drive late! I understand younger people are higher risk than older people but you still cant tar everyone with the same brush!

[EssexDave]

Could put a few people out of a job - 24/7 Fast food places/Supermarkets/Petrol stations/Pubs etc

[Specialone]

I like the idea, not just while they are driving, curfew all under 25's, it would solve drunken behaviour, majority of crime, late night violence etc etc.

You wouldn't get drunken youths walking past your house at 4am singing really bad Justin barber songs.


Insurance should offer incentives for young snots not to drive between 11pm and 5am, then they wouldn't need to implement a law then.

[maviczap]

Could put a few people out of a job - 24/7 Fast food places/Supermarkets/Petrol stations/Pubs etc

Yep that'she big problem with this idea.

A better idea would be to fit the big brother black box to monitor their driving and that would influence how much they pay for their insurance

[Specialone]

Yep that'she big problem with this idea.

A better idea would be to fit the big brother black box to monitor their driving and that would influence how much they pay for their insurance

Yeah it would be a tragedy if big johns and the like had to close and deprive young fatties of nutritional food :rolleyes:

[yorkie_chris]

A better idea would be to fit the big brother black box to monitor their driving and that would influence how much they pay for their insurance

No it wouldn't, it would be the start of an insurance driven big brother state where this was the norm.

I wouldn't have one fitted. If I had to it would go faulty very quickly.

[Specialone]

No it wouldn't, it would be the start of an insurance driven big brother state where this was the norm.

I wouldn't have one fitted. If I had to it would go faulty very quickly.


Me too, once we as a country accept this kind of monitoring, there would no stopping them, might as well give up and just use public transport.

[Wildkid]

Totally agree with YC..

[Littlepeahead]

At 18 I worked as a delivery driver doing overnight shifts when needed to deliver the newspapers to shops all over Essex from 2am in a Luton van. A law like this would have lost me my job. I also roadied for mates bands. Again that would have been impossible. Teenagers are not all bad drivers. What about the old dears with poor eyesight especially at night driving their mates home from bingo in their grannymobiles?

[maviczap]

No it wouldn't, it would be the start of an insurance driven big brother state where this was the norm.

I wouldn't have one fitted. If I had to it would go faulty very quickly.

Then your premium would rocket until it got fixed, as it transmits the data to the insurance company.

Me too, once we as a country accept this kind of monitoring, there would no stopping them, might as well give up and just use public transport.

Totally agree with YC..

Well would you rather have a curfew for drivers in that age bracket, preventing them from getting to and from their place of work :confused:

No buses or trains late at night, who can afford a taxi these days.

Might push up sales of scooters mind

There was a bit about it on our local news, where a young guy had one fitted on his car. OK I agree its very big brother, but he was happy because it reduced his premium to affordable levels.

I can see this happening whether you like it or not

This happened at the weekend, to a 22 year old

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4857691/Driver-seriously-ill-after-Audi-becomes-embedded-in-house.html

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR32E9G3VN2UUo89OmI8kaWhyY26BRFj UwxKf-IcD2nRsuUf6b5Bg

[yorkie_chris]

Then your premium would rocket until it got fixed, as it transmits the data to the insurance company.


Well would you rather have a curfew for drivers in that age bracket, preventing them from getting to and from their place of work :confused:

No I'd rather people had freedom of movement as is morally correct!

The problem wazzocks, like that tit in the audi, would be completely unaffected by this. It's unenforceable.
If he was 21 and driving a sports car like an idiot what sort of person do you think he is?


If they sorted out the rip-off b*stard claims handling cartel and maybe got some police on the roads to enforce the laws already in place none of this would be needed.

[maviczap]

Yes, agreed, like we all did when we were learning

Trouble is too many wazzocks bumping up our premiums and the Daily Mail readers tutting at it all

There is a reform of the claims compensation going on, so maybe that'll help a bit

Even less Police about in the future, so technology will probably take over I'm afraid

[ClunkintheUK]

Even if this were enforceable and "baz" and his mates couldn't and didn't drive after 11pm, its still not going to stop them driving like a n*bber. So they hold their rallies at 1pm in the afternoon and crash then into people going to the supermarket instead of just their n*bber mates. Then because they cannot do anything saturday night, might as well go get ratted, or go shoplifting. The reason these drivers are dangerous is not because they are driving at 2am, but because they are tools, who can't drive that well, but think they can and try to drive like Lewis Hamilton.

Stupid, retarded, un-thought out* legislation. Driver training and testing should be more strenuous, and traffic penalties more severe. Make Baz's mates who are in the car culpable so they loose their licenses and get jail time too if Baz has a crash.

*un-thought out is they are actually trying to achieve the stated aim of reducing collisions, maybe very well thought out if they are trying to reduce the number of people driving altogether.

[otaylor38]

I like the idea, not just while they are driving, curfew all under 25's, it would solve drunken behaviour, majority of crime, late night violence etc etc.

You wouldn't get drunken youths walking past your house at 4am singing really bad Justin barber songs.


Insurance should offer incentives for young snots not to drive between 11pm and 5am, then they wouldn't need to implement a law then.



You cant just go around banning all young people like that for what a small majority do. Thats like restricting all motorcyclists to not go out on a sunday, because some of them exceed the speed limits

[yorkie_chris]

Stupid, retarded, un-thought out* legislation.

To be fair we're reading the BBC's rubbish on it, not actually anything they have released.

[otaylor38]

Also. I dont see the harm in having a good night and having a sing along. Were you not young once? Lol.

[Specialone]

You cant just go around banning all young people like that for what a small majority do. Thats like restricting all motorcyclists to not go out on a sunday, because some of them exceed the speed limits

To be fair mate, It was a very firmly placed tongue in cheek comment, it'll never happen hence my sarcastic /jokey remarks, perhaps I should've added some smiley faces :)

[maviczap]

To be fair mate, It was a very firmly placed tongue in cheek comment, it'll never happen hence my sarcastic /jokey remarks, perhaps I should've added some smiley faces :)

Tut tut and you're a mod inciting bad reactions from members ;) :thumbsup:

[maviczap]

To be fair we're reading the BBC's rubbish on it, not actually anything they have released.

Yes, the Beeb are really bad these days about reporting stuff that isn't factually correct. I saw your other comment about them.

[Spank86]

This happened at the weekend, to a 22 year old

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4857691/Driver-seriously-ill-after-Audi-becomes-embedded-in-house.html

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR32E9G3VN2UUo89OmI8kaWhyY26BRFj UwxKf-IcD2nRsuUf6b5Bg

yeah well that's the kind of thing that happens when you give a TT to a kid.

It's not exactly a Nissan micra.

[maviczap]

yeah well that's the kind of thing that happens when you give a TT to a kid.

It's not exactly a Nissan micra.

But isn't that half the problem, cars are that much faster for what you have to shell out for them these days?

Unfortunately it all started off years ago with the advent of the hot hatches, before that it was Austin Maxi's, Hillman Imp's. The fast cars were souped up mini's and GT Cortina's

[Spank86]

no, the problem is it's so expensive to insure a 1litre micra that you might as well get a two litre Vectra instead for £100 more a year.

[timwilky]

Sadly the stats do say kids crash.

The day my daughter passed her test she was out in my Mondao ST220, 10 years later she still hasn't crashed. For some young drivers enthusiasm exceeds ability, take neighbours kid who flew down the road passed me on the day he passed his test in a 1.6 astra. 4 hours later it was returned on the back of a truck and I congratulated him on bending every panel as he rolled it on a 30mph roundabout and put 2 of his mates in hospital. Chalk and cheese, but they are all tarred with the same brush as being young drivers at the time.

Restrictions such as those suggested place unfair restrictions against the majority of reasonable but inexperienced drivers because of the actions of a few poor young drivers. The current 2 years, 6 points system is a good workable and simple system, extending to 3 years??? I see no problem with. It acts as a brake you know 2 speeding etc gets you back to learner. No alcohol again I think ok, so long as there is the acceptance that a strict 0 is almost impossible.

Late night restrictions no way. It could stop kids coming home, taking parents places (If they get my car they can damn well taxi me) etc.

[EssexDave]

The solution probably arises from saying you're not allowed any points in the first 6 months of driving, up to 3 points in the next year and up to 6 points in the following 2 years (giving them their three year points restriction). - A lot of young people want to drive and so this would provide an incentive to look after the license you've just got.

I also think the black box should be compulsory for all new drivers. One of my friends had one fitted and it saved him over £700 on his insurance. Freedom of movement is unaffected - you can still go wherever you want you just have to pay dependent on the risk that you are.

If you face the facts, young people are more likely to be involved in accidents, serious or not. This is most likely down to their lack of experience and a good way to stop them driving like tools it hit them where it hurts (the wallet).

I wouldn't want a black box fitted, but if it would save me that much money, so be it. I don't speed in my car, I don't drive like a tit and I'm not interested.Luckily, I've always been a year or so ahead of the ridiculous insurance prices. I'm currently paying £400 a year fully comp at 23 - some of my friends two years younger than me are paying up to £2,000 for a 1.1 litre 12 year old pile of ****

[EssexDave]

No alcohol again I think ok, so long as there is the acceptance that a strict 0 is almost impossible.



I may be mistaken and hopefully someone can clear it up - isn't the alcohol limit there not so you can have a drink but so you can take medicine containing alcohol?

[Wideboy]

It won't happen. The government make money from premium tax so why would they enforce anything that would effect their cash flow?. It's probably why no MP's will raise the point of stupidly high premiums in the house of plebs. Same goes for fuel duty, it will never fall back to what it was.

You can hardly blame them, as they say "you don't **** where you eat"

[otaylor38]

To be fair mate, It was a very firmly placed tongue in cheek comment, it'll never happen hence my sarcastic /jokey remarks, perhaps I should've added some smiley faces :)

Haha sorry. Id just got up aswel, i should be banned from all forms of communication until atleast an hour after im up.

Unless its for a bacon butty, that makes everything okay. ;)

[BoltonSte]

May come in via the back door though. The lower insurance 'Black Box' that my niece got had a curfew put on it, although a soft one (she sometimes works until 11) where they told her that if she's a few minutes late, it's not an issue. It's there to stop her bazzing around with her mates on Maccy D's carpark at midnight.

[cb1000rsteve]

IMHO I have never been bothered by racers etc. they overtake then fly off up the road either not to be seen again or in a hedge upside down. The worst driving offenders I come across daily are middle aged blokes who think everything a race and try there hardest nit to let you gain a yard and useless women drivers (just the useless ones) who r to busy doing their make up or feeding there kids on way to school!!
A passenger and power restriction would be a better way to address the problem.

[Fordward]

sod the legislation, just let the insurance companies sort it, so long as they incentivise with discounts for participating, not penalties for not

then you have the choice, buy a black box, save the money and comply with whatever curfew they want, or stump up the same cash you have to stump up now and have your freedom

journeys to and from a permanent place of work should be exempt from curfews

hit peoples wallets and they'll only shell out the extra if they really need to

those who don't have insurance break the law anyway and more legislation isn't going to make any difference to them, the only thing that will sort them is enforcement of the legislation we already have

[yorkie_chris]

I can't believe how accepting a lot of people are about this stuff.

Those Sunday morning blasts out with the lads... bend over... you'll be paying more than fuel and tyres when you've been punished for (perfectly legal...) harsh braking and acceleration.


then you have the choice, buy a black box, save the money and comply with whatever curfew they want, or stump up the same cash you have to stump up now and have your freedom

Probably a lot more round given that these won't actually reduce claims...

[Mr Speirs]

I don't think it'll ever happen.

Completely unenforceable and too complicated.

They've been on about raising the age limit on driving since I learnt to drive which over 10 years ago.

[yorkie_chris]

I don't think it'll ever happen.

Completely unenforceable and too complicated.

Not by law but by insurance I think. The rot is already creeping in with black boxes.

I can forsee an interesting trade in bypassing the things to leave them in the front room when you go out.

[SvNewbie]

24? What age to you have to be to be an adult again? You can legally have an 8 year old child at that point, no way that would ever fly.

I wish people would stop messing with Darwin's theory. If you are stupid enough to buy a car at 17 year old and go out and kill yourself then I'm just glad you (probably) haven't yet reproduced. Admittedly that's a bit callous in that they could hurt someone else in the process.

[andrewsmith]

Not by law but by insurance I think. The rot is already creeping in with black boxes.

I can forsee an interesting trade in bypassing the things to leave them in the front room when you go out.

Not got a electromagnet that'll run on a ciggie lighter ;)

[yorkie_chris]

I wish people would stop messing with Darwin's theory. If you are stupid enough to buy a car at 17 year old and go out and kill yourself then I'm just glad you (probably) haven't yet reproduced. Admittedly that's a bit callous in that they could hurt someone else in the process.

Yeah it is a bit callous and I'm sure everyone gets a bit throttle happy some times.

I'm all for people being occasionally daft, if it wasn't for people being a bit daft on occasion we'd still be living in caves. Who would notice being dead, if you've never been alive?

[Geodude]

Yeah it is a bit callous and I'm sure everyone gets a bit throttle happy some times.

I'm all for people being occasionally daft, if it wasn't for people being a bit daft on occasion we'd still be living in caves. Who would notice being dead, if you've never been alive?
I know i dont get out much but that has to be one of the best comments i have read in a long time.

[Mr Speirs]

Not by law but by insurance I think. The rot is already creeping in with black boxes.

I can forsee an interesting trade in bypassing the things to leave them in the front room when you go out.

Mmm hadn't thought of that!! Interesting. If you are 17-24 you must not drive between 10-6, carry more than 1 passenger etc....but if you want to do it you can but you'll have to pay double!!

I wonder if it is insurance companies pushing this into the news anyway.

[Fordward]

Probably a lot more round given that these won't actually reduce claims...

evidence please?

i see your claim and raise you

http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/2173.html

;)

[yorkie_chris]

I think that's a case of cause vs effect because the least problem groups have gone for the trackers.

[Fordward]

even if that's true, it has reduced claims

[yorkie_chris]

even if that's true, it has reduced claims

In that particular area of policies which is a very short sighted way of looking at things.

It doesn't show it's changed behaviour.


I take it you'll be having one on your bike then?

[missyburd]

IF they did enforce this curfew...would it include young bikers too...

[ClunkintheUK]

Baz will still drive like a bazzer no matter what time of day. Also for saying young driver cannot carry more then one passenger, that TT would only take one passenger.

[ClunkintheUK]

even if that's true, it has reduced claims

Only for a while. If the trend continues, soon you'll only be able to afford insurance by having a black box. Bazzers included, and you'll be right back where you started, but with black boxes.

[EssexDave]

More important, ignoring everything else what would concern me is getting a letter saying your insurance is going up as your driving is 'risky' - but you don't get provided with the information OR how your driving is 'graded' so it's like a constant test and you don't know what the criteria are.

Allows companies to exploit young drivers - this would HAVE to be so closely regulated.

[SvNewbie]

Only for a while. If the trend continues, soon you'll only be able to afford insurance by having a black box. Bazzers included, and you'll be right back where you started, but with black boxes.

And the 'Bazzers' would obviously be the first ones ones to get their boxes 'chipped' so that it always reports that they've been driving 2 miles a week in a manner somewhere between a granny and a saint.

[munkygunn182]

I disagree with this wholeheartedly. I drive for a living...generally 500 - 600 miles in a day. I'm 22 (for another few days at least) and my driving is one of the better standards on the road. For the sheer sake of argument, why don't we focus on the loonbags that drive the mercs and bmw's at 1000000mph through the 30mph zones because their executive lifestyle is 'so important'. I'll bet they'd kick up hell if that was even suggested, but because it's the "young'uns", that makes it okay.

[Spank86]

even if that's true, it has reduced claims

Has it reduced claims overall for that age group or has that sample (with the black box) shown claims reduced compared to a random sample whilst claims trends remain normal and have not dropped overall?

[SvNewbie]

Has it reduced claims overall for that age group or has that sample (with the black box) shown claims reduced compared to a random sample whilst claims trends remain normal and have not dropped overall?


Even that wouldn't be scientifically rigorous. Surely part of the 'black box' deal is that the less miles you do the less likely you are to have a crash, and therefore the less you pay.

Therefore, do the black box kids leave their cars at home more often than the other sample.

[Fordward]

I take it you'll be having one on your bike then?

if installing one meant I woke up in the 17-24 bracket like tom hanks in big, i'd do it in a shot!

I said it would have to be a matter of choice

Has it reduced claims overall for that age group or has that sample (with the black box) shown claims reduced compared to a random sample whilst claims trends remain normal and have not dropped overall?

if it's not in that article you'd need to ask the Co-op

[TamSV]

Has it reduced claims overall for that age group or has that sample (with the black box) shown claims reduced compared to a random sample whilst claims trends remain normal and have not dropped overall?

You're spot on. While black boxes are voluntary, there will be positive selection in their use. By which I mean, you won't opt to have if you enjoy driving like a knobber.

The people selecting the black box are overwhelmingly receiving a discount because they already exhibit the characteristics likely to bring a reduction in premium - the main one being very few miles covered.

In other words, they were 20% less likely to have an accident before they got the black box fitted.

Dog owners have fewer car accidents. Should we attribute that to a characteristic in the person choosing to own a dog, or should we give the dog the credit for reducing accidents?

[Spank86]

if it's not in that article you'd need to ask the Co-op

They wouldn't know. They're not that cheap for non black boxed drivers so those that choose not to have one would be likely to go elsewhere.


Even that wouldn't be scientifically rigorous. Surely part of the 'black box' deal is that the less miles you do the less likely you are to have a crash, and therefore the less you pay.

Therefore, do the black box kids leave their cars at home more often than the other sample.

Good point, realistically you'd need to select a group and randomly assign them black boxes and monitor miles to compare the two goups with regard to crashes per mile travelled before comparing to the wider population.

[Spank86]

You're spot on. While black boxes are voluntary, there will be positive selection in their use. By which I mean, you won't opt to have if you enjoy driving like a knobber.


It's like the luminous jacket argument.

Lots of bike safe and IAM riders wear luminous jackets, very few lunatics on high performance sports bikes blatting round the country roads at insane speeds on their weekends do so (stereotypes I know but they're actually useful here) so studies on hi-viz use that merely look at their prevalence in accidents are bound to be equally flawed.

[Littlepeahead]

You're spot on. While black boxes are voluntary, there will be positive selection in their use. By which I mean, you won't opt to have if you enjoy driving like a knobber.

The people selecting the black box are overwhelmingly receiving a discount because they already exhibit the characteristics likely to bring a reduction in premium - the main one being very few miles covered.

In other words, they were 20% less likely to have an accident before they got the black box fitted.

Dog owners have fewer car accidents. Should we attribute that to a characteristic in the person choosing to own a dog, or should we give the dog the credit for reducing accidents?

Maybe the dogs are driving and they are really safe because they slow down at every lamp post.

[ClunkintheUK]

Dog owners have fewer car accidents. Should we attribute that to a characteristic in the person choosing to own a dog, or should we give the dog the credit for reducing accidents?

Insurance companies don't care. If something statistically indicates that you are less likely/more likely to have an accident they'll use it. Thats why certain colour cars are cheaper to insure. Have you ever seen someone driving a pink or light blue auto-missile at 120mph down the outside lane?

Equally they probably reduce insurance on black-box young drivers as it is more likely to be a responsible driver will have one, rather then they are making those drivers better drivers.

Spank, because of the above, no it probably isn't bringing down the total premiums paid by that age group. For that age group they will have a certain amount they have to pay out, whack on some costs and profit margin and that is how much they need to take in premiums that year in order to be able to take premiums next year. The black boxes in these cases are identifying the good young drivers (less likely to make a claim at least), their savings will be passed on as additional cost to those who don't voluntarily take black boxes.

[Spank86]

So your basically agreeing that it will probably not do anything to improve safety and having one is unlikely to make you a safer driver.

It's simply a method to try to make people drive in a way that insurance companies want you to (E.g. running over someone's cat so you don't have harsh braking on your black box log).

[yorkie_chris]

Of course it will also be better to hit someone and claim against them for damages.
Stopping quickly would be dangerous.

Does anyone know anyone who has one of these devices? What do they get? What are the penalties? How is it done?

[EssexDave]

There are accelerometers or something that measure how fast you accelerate/brake/steer etc how fast you drive, when you drive, where you drive and takes all those factors into account to affect the insurance premium you have to pay.

Something like that anyway.

[BanannaMan]

One insurance company in the US has them now.
It's a very small gps tracking device that plugs into your car's OBD-II port.
It is optional but they do offer a discount if you have one.

It simply stores the data from it's own gps and your cars computer.
Then they are exchanged for a new one with the insurance company every so often.

Right now they claim no penalties for bad driving only discounts for good driving.
(but make a claim if they know you're a 'bad' driver and see how quick they drop you.

Believe I'll pass on big brother for as long as possible.

[Spank86]

There are accelerometers or something that measure how fast you accelerate/brake/steer etc how fast you drive, when you drive, where you drive and takes all those factors into account to affect the insurance premium you have to pay.

Something like that anyway.
Pour oil into it?

[yorkie_chris]

You can get solid state accelerometers these days for peanuts. I'd be surprised if they were mechanical.

[Ceri JC]

I suspect there'll be some sort of 'out' under EU "right to work" laws. Imagine (particularly in the current climate) a youngster losing their rural shift job that can only be reached by car.

[barwel1992]

what are they thinking ? talk about encouraging us youngsters to brake the law, the'd have a job stopping me from riding/driving as and when i want

and good learners should be made to go on the motorway as part of the test

[thefallenangel]

I work with blokes aged 20 who cover 24 hour standby. It won't work but by god i'm glad i'm 25 in 2 months no more stupid insurance raping for a driver who (use) to cover monster mileage.

[chris8886]

and good learners should be made to go on the motorway as part of the test

quite right! or at least they should then have to take a further test before being allowed to drive in the motorway! i think it'd help improve the standard of driving on the motorway and have less middle lane hoggers!

[Lozzo]

I'm so glad I'm now finally 25 and will avoid this curfew :-)

[barwel1992]

I'm so glad I'm now finally 25 and will avoid this curfew :-)

Hahahaha who you trying to Kidd :-P

[maviczap]

Ban em all after 18:00 - 07:00

Then make them drive behind a man walking with a red flag = fixed

[joshwalker094]

Miserable old gits! Not all young drivers are bad!
But then again I have had 3 years road experience on motorbikes before I got my car license

[Dicky Ticker]

I am in complete agreement with this proposal,it will allow me to doddle about at 40mph without all these 125 bees in a tin upsetting me.:)

DOF Cruising Club.

[muzza_sv]

im 22 and have to drive the works van and give 24 hour coverage if an emergency occurs, would be quite funny if this came in and then some tit mp whos bright idea this is, is saying where the **** is the guy whos meant to be coming round to get my water back on (well sir he isnt old enough to drive this late so your ****ed) haha man this countries screwed

[BanannaMan]

Still despite it's unfairness and obviously many drawbacks there's no doubt the crime rate as well as the accident rate would drop to record lows.

Just saying.

[yorkie_chris]

Still despite it's unfairness and obviously many drawbacks there's no doubt the crime rate as well as the accident rate would drop to record lows.

Just saying.

The crime rate would increase.
-The nuggets out committing actual crimes would ignore it
-You'd have just turned a load of normal and law abiding folk into criminals


I bet all the sleazy scumbag taxi drivers would love all those tasty young barmaids being stopped from driving though!

[otaylor38]

Still despite it's unfairness and obviously many drawbacks there's no doubt the crime rate as well as the accident rate would drop to record lows.

Just saying.

In that case, vehicle accident rates would be zero if you just stopped everyone driving. Seems about as fair to me ;). Haha.

Im with YC though, crime rates would go up and the ones that break the law will drive anyway, regardless

[BanannaMan]

The crime rate would increase.
-The nuggets out committing actual crimes would ignore it
-You'd have just turned a load of normal and law abiding folk into criminals

I don't see how that is going to increase crime when all you've got left is the nutters who don't care about the law.
I don't think they are going to commit more crimes because they are the only 17-24 yr olds driving.
If anything I'd think less beacuse of the risk of just being caught driving means picking the place and the time, if the law is being properly enforced.
And this might keep some from being influenced to speed, drive drunk, comit crimes, etc. so hopefully less of them would become involved in such.


Certainly would save a lot of young lives from accidents.






I bet all the sleazy scumbag taxi drivers would love all those tasty young barmaids being stopped from driving though!


Wait, That might be a plus for me. A job in the UK.
What with all the increased traffic they are bound to need more taxi drivers.
I've got the right qualifications, I'm already a foreigner, and I could be a sleazy scumbag for the right tasty young barmaid. LOL
;)

[Spank86]

I don't see how that is going to increase crime when all you've got left is the nutters who don't care about the law.
I don't think they are going to commit more crimes because they are the only 17-24 yr olds driving.
;)
it would increase crime because you've created a new one. Crashing isn't a crime. Driving during curfew would be.

What happens if you're stuck in traffic on the M25 due to a crash, suddenly you're a criminal.

[Littlepeahead]

I was so tired last night I went to bed at 9pm. This is why they don't need a curfew for 40 - 51 year olds. These days I have to be up before 6am whereas when I was 17 I'd have just been off to bed then.

[yorkie_chris]

if the law is being properly enforced.

:smt082