Centurionguy
User
Fresh Boarder
| Posts: 3 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Re:Why a "learners" for licensed drivers? - 2008/05/10 02:13
The reasons stated by the DTLC are flawed:
"The applicant for a new driving licence has never driven a vehicle of the relevant class on a public road. The applicant is thus a learner driver for the class of vehicle."
This I know. I'm asking that experiences car drivers be allowed to have LEARNER driver status for motorcycles.
"The road signs and rules change over time. 'Experienced' drivers tend to neglect driving properly, start ignoring the basic principles and only start paying attention again after a road crash or a near miss. The applicant has to be made aware of the (changed) rules of the road so that the applicant and other road users are protected, especially in the time of training."
If this is so important, why aren't all drivers re-tested every five years during the renewal of our licenses?
It is the duty of any driver to keep up-to-date with the changes in law. An "experienced" driver already has "road sense" and the ability to interpret changes in road signs. If DTLC considers it necessary to test experiences driver, then regular testing should be done on ALL drivers.
It is further required as part of the driving test that the examiner check whether the person has sufficient knowledge of the rules of the road; a valid learner's licence is sound proof that the applicant complies with this requirement. Thus the requirement of holding a learner's licence at the time of a driving licence test is driven by the quest for road safety.
Again, if the applicant is an 'experienced' driver then they must already have "sufficient knowledge of the rules of the road". They learned it when they obtained the light vehicle license and they have learned it by experience. This should be proof enough.
I'll repeat myself, I'm asking that experiences car drivers be given LEARNER license status for motor cycles. They must still apply for, and be tested for a full drivers license.
This principle is accepted internationally.
It wouldn't be the first time that South Africa has led the world.
As for "safety", I would feel a lot safer allowing a car driver with more than 5 or 10 years experience to ride a motor cycle, than letting loose a kid out of school who has no road sense whatsoever. Nevertheless, 18 year olds are allowed to get a learners license, buy a 1000cc road rocket and are let loose without any practical training, yet an experienced driver must undergo the same theoretical test. To my mind this makes little sense. I personally have had a "50cc" license, a "big bike" license and a car license and therefore wrote the same theoretical test 3 times in the space of 2 1/2 years. A pointless exercise.
To re-iterate, all I am trying to do here is to relieve some of the load on the testing centers, and to encourage more car drivers to switch to motor cycles thereby reducing traffic congestion and saving fuel.
As for the practicalities, my suggestion would be that an application for LEARNER license be made (with payment) and granted without a theoretical test but based on light vehicle driving experience (at least 5 years, maybe even 10). This license is then valid for 18 months as normal.
This method would mean that DTLC can still keep track of learner licenses, and the license holder is still encouraged to be fully tested for a drivers license since the learners license expires after 18 months and a new fee would have to be paid.
Even with the DTLCs response to my initial suggestion, I cannot see any valid reason for not implementing it. Would DTLC please reconsider.
|
Forums 
