I saw this news clip on the BBC a couple of days ago. In one way, it’s old news (if you’re an instructor who reads the relevant channels). since DVSA announced its plans well over a month ago, and is due to commence trials very soon. It was also covered in various newspapers during February. The story concerns proposals to alter the content of the driving test.
Judging from the BBC news item, you’d be forgiven for thinking it was all about cyclists yet again. The item features a woman who lost her husband (a cyclist) when he was hit by a (female) motorist who was farting about with a satnav and didn’t see him. In typical, saccharin-sweet, knee-jerk manner, this now means that the driving test should change solely to teach people about satnavs.
For f***s sake, satnavs come with an instruction manual. Even if people bothered to read it – or look at the pictures if they’re especially stupid – they are unlikely to follow any rule if it suits them not to. For example, every satnav manual in existence says – in words or in pictures – that you shouldn’t attach it directly in your field of view. Of course, that’s precisely where the vast majority of people put the damned things, where they could easily obscure the driver’s view of pedestrians, cyclists, and even other vehicles. They do it because they’re idiots – you know the ones: they have the satnav running when they go to the shops or travel to and from work – and no amount of “training” would ever make them do it any other way.
Every satnav manual also says not to use it while you are moving. Some units (and I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that this applied to all of them) even nag you about it every time you turn them on – on my Ford, I don’t think you can’t turn the visual nag off, and you just have to press OK each time you start it for the first time after each engine start. And yet almost every driver in existence attempts to programme them or play around with the settings while they’re moving. Again, no amount of “lessons” now will ever change that – if they want to fiddle with it while they’re driving, then they will, and no one is going to persuade them otherwise.
It’s the same with mobile phones. Every jackass 17-year old (and anyone else, come to that) knows full well they shouldn’t use them while they’re driving. But of course, that rule only applies to everyone else, and not to them.
To be honest, I’m sick and tired of cyclists being held up as sentimental shields to try and prove points against motorists. The vast majority of cyclists are far less well-behaved on the roads than the vast majority of drivers. The majority disobey almost every Highway Code rule going at one time or another (not giving signals, riding on pavements, riding across pedestrian crossings which aren’t designated for cycles, red lights, and so on). The fact that they also ignore cycle routes and deliberately mix it with traffic might well appear to be a brilliantly militant way of proving their entitlement to use the roads, but it’s bloody stupid if they end up dead as a result of being right.
If these bleeding hearts are going to keep going on about petty issues like using satnavs, maybe they need to look elsewhere for the cure. Because another thing that makes my blood boil is the number of times I see mummies and daddies stopping on yellow zigzags in the morning to let their own brats out, obviously believing the rules about stopping on those only apply to others. And those idiots in spandex who shun cycle paths to deliberately get in the way of busy traffic on national speed limit roads. Or those who ride in huge groups on narrow country lanes.
Most of those people are parents, and their arrogant and ignorant attitudes are the real reasons why idiot 17-year olds use satnavs and mobile phones while they’re driving. Pity the kids being brought up by people who behave like this. It’s inevitable that if they are being taught adult skills by a bunch of retards who think it’s fun to get in the way of lorries and cars traveling at 60 or 70mph just to prove a point (or stop where it is illegal to stop, or cross where it is illegal to cross, and so on), is it any wonder they run the risk of killing someone when they become responsible for themselves? Poor parenting is the problem, and that’s where any training ought to be taking place.
As things stand, a 40 minute test involving 10 minutes of using a satnav – one of the changes being trialled – will have as much effect on the attitude of the average 17-year old as a drop of water does on the level of the Pacific Ocean. Much bigger changes are needed.