Routine licence re-testing - would you support it?

He was arguing against retesting, which is why it was a bad analogy. It's a great analogy if you're pro-retesting, which is why I used it myself several pages ago!

[yorkie_chris]

Aye, must read more closely...

NO because they already get enough of my cash

if it did ever come in, every 10 years would be better and then take another test at 60 and then every 5 years after that

[L3nny]

I can't see any point in this whatsoever. When I learnt the drive a car I did everything right in my lessons then on the test got a bit nervous and forgot to engage the handbrake while putting the car into reverse on the 3 point turn and failed.

Since passing my test I have never engaged the handbrake when putting the car into reverse and I am still alive 13 years later. And I have never been involved in an accident after at least 200,000 miles of motoring.

If I had an examiner with me every time I get in the car I would probably fail every time for things like crossing my hands on the wheel and other stupid stuff everyone does.

If I had to pass a driving test today I probably could, would I drive like that the minute the examiner got out the car, doubt it.

[yorkie_chris]

Exactly same as old bike test... you ever hear of someone horrifically injured after they put thier foot down on a U turn? Anyone actually done a U turn after their test? lol

I'm occasionally guilty of U-turns - part of the fun of only ever having a rough idea of where you're going all the time, and its a handy skill to have in the locker. Of course, when it came to the test, it was a particular weak spot of my riding, so I've been trying to keep on top of it since.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Exactly same as old bike test... you ever hear of someone horrifically injured after they put thier foot down on a U turn? Anyone actually done a U turn after their test? lol

You're assuming the point of the U-turn in the test is purely to show that you can do a U-turn

[yorkie_chris]

Anybody who's died as a result of poor slow control, raise your hand.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Anybody who's died as a result of poor slow control, raise your hand.

Anyone who's dropped their bike and damaged as a result of poor slow control, raise your hand.

Not everything in the test is about avoiding imminent death. Some of it is just about good roadcraft...

I asked this question at work a while back, and the people who's driving was good enough said yes. Those who had a poor driving standard said no (some have trouble parking a car between two white lines). Even if you didn't have regular re-testing, there should at least be riding/driving assessments, if you fail an assessment, then you'd have to go in for another test. I would rather go through assesment and re-tests than be a bad rider. I also think there should be more than the current 'at 70, sign here if you think you're ok to drive' malarkey.