BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

Skill Based Licensing System, let me know what you think?? (Very Long)

5K views 32 replies 12 participants last post by  IvanDias 
#1 · (Edited)
Hey Everyone, I had to do a project for writing a new law, here it is, let me know what you think...would it work, or not. Any improvments, or things that should be taken out? Thanks!!

~Jason

Explanation…

This law would restructure the current licensing system used today, and would have graduated levels, signified by classes of: A through E with A being the highest-class driver. Every driver would have to be reevaluated of their driving skill, they would be tested on every driving level, from residential driving to highway and turnpike driving. A more advanced maneuverability test would be implemented and a reaction test would be developed. In addition, a hazard and environmental test would be constructed to test the level of thinking a person has when confronted with a dangerous situation.
After the reevaluation process is completed, a person would be assigned their driving level.

Class A: Highest-class driver, is given most privileges, fast lane on highway is for their use. Can exceed posted speed limit by up to 25 mph on rural highways, state highways and turnpikes are limitless to a “Class A” driver, but must remain in left most lane when observing limitless driving. May exceed speed limit by 5-10 mph on rural roads, but other laws still apply. All residential laws still apply including posted speed limit. “Class A” drivers may drive at any time day or night and in any weather, as long weather does not impede traffic completely.

Class B: An intermediate driver, Given most privileges of a “Class A” driver, other than state highways and turnpikes always have a limit of 20 mph over the posted limit. May drive in fast lane, but must always merge to a slower lane in the event a car would like to pass them. All other “Class A” driving laws apply.

Class C: An average driver and today’s driving laws apply. May exceed posted speed limit on all highways, rural and state, by 10 mph. A “Class C” driver is not allowed in the left most lane on any highway. May exceed rural road posted speed limit by 5 mph. Is allowed to drive in any weather granted the weather does not impede traffic completely. A “Class C” driver is also allowed to drive any time. All other traffic laws of a “Class A” driver apply.

Class D: A below average driver that must “at all times” abide by all posted speed limits on all roads. May only drive in right most lane on highway, and highway usage is restricted to off-peak hours. Are not allowed to drive in weather where a weather advisory or warning has been issued. In addition, driving hours are restricted to 5:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; driving hours may be extended under special circumstances.

Class E: An inadequate or new driver, a driver who has had their license less than 6 months, or has not tested out of this level is assigned a “Class E” license. Drivers are never allowed on any highway under any circumstance. And must always abide by posted speed limit on all rural and residential roads. Driver times are restricted to time of sunlight, and may never drive in any inclement weather of any kind. Driver can be accompanied by a higher-level, Class A through C driver, and may be considered a “Class D” driver under that circumstance.

License level may be advanced through classes and retesting. Also with each driving level come certain requirements to keep their respected level.

Class A: Free retesting every 2 years, no tickets or offenses within that period.
If a ticket is issued or an offense is committed, License is immediately dropped to “Class C” and Cost Based retesting is implemented at next retesting. In addition, a fine of $5,000 is issued.

Class B: Free retesting every 2 years, 1 ticket or offense within that period. If a ticket is issue or an offense is committed, License is dropped to “Class C” at next retesting period for a period of 1 year, and cost based retesting is implemented.

Class C: Free retesting every 5 years, 3 tickets or offenses within that period. If a 3 tickets are issued or 3 offenses are committed, License is dropped to “Class D” at next retesting period for a period of 1 year, and cost based retesting is implemented.

Class D: Free retesting every 7 years, 5 tickets or offenses within that period. If 5 tickets are issued or 5 offenses are committed, License is revoked for a period of 6 months, and “Class E” license is issued for a period of 1 year. After a year period cost based testing is implemented.

Class E: Cost Based Retesting every 2 years, 2 tickets or offenses within that period. If 2 tickets are issued or 2 offenses are committed, License is immediately revoked for a period of 5 years, and a Fine of $1,000 is issued. In addition, cost based testing is implemented.

Class Laws under no circumstances, except in life threatening cases, can be broken, if set laws for a drivers license level are broken, a ticket will be issued at a cost of $500 for the first ticket and $500 more for each ticket fallowing the first.

Addendum...

Speed limits are as fallows;
  • State turnpikes 75 mph.
    a.Left most lane has a minimum speed limit of 90 mph.
    b.Right most lane has a minimum speed limit of 65 mph.
  • Interstate highways 70 mph.
    a.Left most lane has a minimum speed limit of 80 mph.
    b.Right most lane has a minimum speed limit of 60 mph.
  • Route (Rural) highways 60 mph.
    a.Left most lane has a minimum speed limit of 65 mph.
    b.Right most lane has a minimum speed limit of 55 mph.
    c.One lane highways minimum speed is the posted speed limit.
  • Rural roads 55 mph, unless otherwise noted.
    a.Rural roads must always have a minimum speed limit of 35 mph
  • Residential areas 30 mph.
    a.Maximum speed is always 30 mph, with a 20 mph minimum.
    b.School zones are always 15 mph
    [/list=A]
    A new driver is given a “Class E” license unless they test out of “Class E” at their initial testing session.

    A “Class A” license may only be given to individuals that attend High performance and dynamic driving schools to improve their driving skills. “Class A” drivers are required to have a vehicle able of obtaining at least 95 mph.

    Drivers must only pay for their initial license test and any unscheduled test to improve their license level at a cost of $100. All retesting is free.

    After the age of 65, drivers must retest every 6 months until it is determined that a driver is unfit to drive, and is a threat to the safety of other drivers.

    Under no circumstance must a license be given to a person that is not qualified for the lowest class license.

    On a two lane highway, all drivers except “Class A” drivers must remain in the right lane, and only use the left lane for passing slower drivers, after a pass has occurred a driver must immediately return to the right lane.

    On a rural road, or 1 lane rural highway, if a car determines it is safe to pass another driver, the passing driver must flash headlights to signal a pass, and the slower car must slow down so the pass occurs in the least amount of time and distance possible. Once the pass has occurred, both drivers can return to their respected speed level.

    In the case a dangerous life threatening manuver is attempted, all level of licenses will be revoked, and the driver will immedately be taken to jail for a minimum of 1 year, and a $10,000 fine will be assest.

    All Class levels only apply to passenger vehicles; all other vehicles, i.e. Semis and Service vehicles, are issued a “Class C” license with their own special regulations.
    • All Speed Limits Apply on all roads.
    • Driving is permitted in all weather.
    • Always have right of way, except for on Rural roads, and Residential areas.
    • Never permitted in left most lane, and should in most cases not pass other vehicles.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Hello! This topic is going to be "comment central." mmmmmm I'd love to be the first to offer suggestions and opinions, but I need to read it carefully and think about it. No time now so I'll do it at the end of the week. Can't wait to see some of the responses.:)
 
#3 ·
Hmmm. Though I like the idea of better drivers having fewer restrictions, I think there are some problems with this plan, to wit:

1) It's too complex. The speed limit and lane restrictions are widely variable from driver to driver, greatly reducing the predictability of other drivers' actions. If driver 1 does not know what driver 2's license level is, he won't know what to expect driver 2 to do in traffic, because he doesn't know what rules that driver has to follow.

2) It invites unlimited random traffic stops to check license levels.

3) The maximum fines are too high and the violations are subjective. Any time you dangle the promise of money in front of local governments, they will find ways to levy as many of those fines as possible. This is particularly true of your $10k subjectively-judged "life-threatening dangerous maneuver" fine, which will wind up being levied against people who run yellow lights.

4) Reserving certain lanes for certain drivers creates greater traffic problems in the remaining lanes. Atlanta's had most of their leftmost lanes reserved for carpool vehicles for years. The result is more congestion and greater road rage as single-occupant traffic is forced into a smaller area. It also prevents that traffic from using any left-lane exit, forcing people to take less convenient exits and proceed on local roads. Now they're talking about allowing people to buy the privilege, which is creating all sorts of controversy (the opponents refer to the proposal as "Lexus lanes"). Which brings me to point 5:

5) It's politically unworkable, for three reasons: a) if you bar a majority of drivers from traveling on roads their tax dollars paid for, you will be accused of elitism; b) senior citizens have lots of free time to vote and lobby against proposals like mandatory 6-month retesting; and mostly c) no state government will pass a law that allows anyone to exceed the posted speed limit, because those limits are designed to generate revenue for them.

Generally I oppose increased government control of the individual, and though this plan on the surface allows some looser restrictions for a few drivers, the net result is that ALL drivers come under greatly increased scrutiny and more draconian enforcement. I'd oppose this plan if it came to a vote.
 
#4 ·
I don't mean to be repetitive, but like dwasifar also points out:
-- would lead to less personal freedom than there already is;
-- alot of the proposal is too general and arbitrary, leading to legal confusion (who decides for a class E driver that it's a bit too cloudy for him to drive in? well, except the cops... *after* they have stopped and fined him);
-- too complex laws for the public to be aware and follow them at all times, confusion as to what kind of behaviour to expect from other drivers (besides, most people would probably pretend to be A-class drivers and stomp on it in the left lane)
-- fines are way out of proportion ($5000 for a class A driver who commits *one* offence?!)

IMO traffic laws should regulate only two things, and they should enforce them in the simplest possible terms.
1. Ensure that only qualified drivers are let out on the road.
2. Ensure that drivers take responsibility for other people's lives and safety; while having full culpability for their own actions.

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies, The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
--C.S. Lewis
 
#5 ·
Thank you, Xipe - you reminded me of another point I wanted to make but left out:

6) The weather-related restrictions are unworkable. What if you're out driving on a class-D or class-E license and the weather changes? What are you supposed to do? Pull over and wait for it to stop raining? Or say there's a weather advisory issued while you're out driving - how are you supposed to know about it if the warned-against weather hasn't begun where you are?

The time restrictions are similarly impractical. Let's say you're driving on a class E license, you get caught in traffic, and dusk falls. Guess you have to pull over until morning - just what every parent wants their newly-licensed teen doing, or claiming to have done. "Morning, Dad! Where have I been all night, you ask? Oops, got caught in traffic again, had to sleep in the car at the side of the road, honest!" And what's with the midnight-to-5am restriction on the Class D? What makes this class of driver safe at 11:30pm but not at 1:30am? It's just as dark. In fact, at 1:30am, there's less traffic - should be SAFER.
 
#6 ·
You need one more class!! Class "O" or Zero. This is for all the drivers without insurance and/or, no or a suspended license. If you fall into this catagory, when you are stopped, you go directly to jail, do not pass GO, and do not collect $200. You have to pay $200 a day for every day you are in jail. But only $100 if you are on a chain-gang!
 
#7 ·
Thanks for the replys, this is what I was hoping for, constructive critisim....

Just for your reference, this isn't a law I would inact, just one I thought to make up and see what people think...I know there are some points which really are not mandatory, such as the weather and time laws, but here in OH, night driving is restricted to young drivers already...I was thinking of replacing the weather law with something along the lines of passanger laws, such as younger or less qualified drivers can not take along a passanger due to distractions, this would be mostly for the younger driver though...also I was considering changing it so that there is only a minimum speed limit everywhere except for rural roads where it would be anywhere from 35 to 55, and residental where it is always 30 or 25...that would be more like an american autoban, and if you are pulled over for something, maybe that is where your higher skill level would keep you out of a ticket...And lastly one more think I was thinking is that the stay out of the left most lane law would only be used in situations where the road or highway they are on is 3 or more lanes, thusly having two traffic lanes, and a passing lane...

As for the dangerious action regulation, I only added that thinking of road rage and stupid driving, but really did fail to take into account what some people would think, like running yellow lights like you said... Money was really the only punishment I could think of that effects the most people...and I realize that a government would try to abuse that, but I don't know what else I could suppliment for a monitary punishment?

I wanted to start it with the most possible and restrictive laws, and greatest amount of control, and slowly adapt and remove certian regulations until it would sound workable, so keep letting me know what you think...

Thanks,

~ Jason
 
#8 ·
I agree the weather part is unworkable. I'd axe it completely.

One thing you should consider is a window decal to indicate classes other than C.

Also, you can't completely prevent even the worst classes from ever driving on "highways", since that may be the only way to get around some areas, such as crossing rivers.

Overall, try to come up with the simplest set of rules possible to acheive what you want. That will make it easier to think through the possible outcomes.

Kudos for actually trying to come up with a complete plan for such legislation! Most people (including myself) just spout off vague ideas about how to achieve better driving conditions...
 
#9 ·
Yupkwondo said:
I wanted to start it with the most possible and restrictive laws, and greatest amount of control, and slowly adapt and remove certian regulations until it would sound workable, so keep letting me know what you think...
I would probably have chosen the opposite approach, but you're off to a good start anyways. Just remember:

You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered.
-- Lyndon B. Johnson

;)
 
#10 ·
pmiranda said:
One thing you should consider is a window decal to indicate classes other than C.
The scarlet letter, hm?
This assumes no one ever shares cars. Let's say I have a class B license and my 16y/o newly-licensed son has a class E license and no car of his own. If I put an E sticker in my car window so he can drive it, I get pulled over constantly whenever I try to drive up to my privileges; if we don't, he gets arrested whenever HE drives.

I agree with you about setting the simplest rules possible. The rules of the road as they are work pretty well, except when governments try to twist them to create revenue (speed limit enforcement) or perform social engineering experiments (carpool lanes). Besides those abuses, the only thing I would change is highway lane usage; enforce the laws about slower traffic staying right.

The whole carpool lane idea is a failure, achieving the opposite of its intended goal. It should be scrapped completely, by federal legislation if necessary. As far as speed limits are concerned, we could have realistic limits if the financial incentives of enforcement were replaced with financial liabilities. Outlaw speeding fines entirely - again, this would probably require a federal law - and replace them with mandatory jail time, one day per mph over the limit. This would create a situation where speeding enforcement COSTS the locality money, removing the incentive to set speed limits unrealistically low. If a road was safe at 80, they'd set the limit to 80, and save the enforcement efforts for people who were REAL hazards.
 
#12 · (Edited)
dwasifar said:

Ironic, coming from the "Great Society" president.
:) I know, but it's still valid. Something every legislator should ponder on before going on their do-good crusades in order to boost their own ratings.

I'm getting off-topic here, but from all of the great sayings of american presidents (Jefferson in particular) that I can think of, there's one that just can't be beat:

Facts are stupid things.
-- Ronald Reagan

Let me conclude my presence in this thread for now, not totally unrelated...

"Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)"
--Ayn Rand
 
#13 ·
Xipe said:


:) I know, but it's still valid. Something every legislator should ponder on before going on their do-good crusades in order to boost their own ratings.
I agree. That's why it's ironic. It's right on the money, yet Johnson himself violated it massively.

Xipe said:

"Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)"
--Ayn Rand
If you agree with Rand's ideas, what on earth are you doing living in Sweden? :) "Look at Sweden" is the knee-jerk reply of any American leftist when faced with laissez-faire capitalist philosophy or any other critique of socialism. I'd expect actually LIVING there would drive any Rand fan nuts.
 
#14 · (Edited)
dwasifar said:
If you agree with Rand's ideas, what on earth are you doing living in Sweden? :) "Look at Sweden" is the knee-jerk reply of any American leftist when faced with laissez-faire capitalist philosophy or any other critique of socialism. I'd expect actually LIVING there would drive any Rand fan nuts.
I was born libertarian, as an allergic reaction to the philosophical and political climate up here, I gather. As for Rand I agree with alot of what she wrote and said, some truly great and rational ideas can be found with her.
But why I'm still living here I can't explain (actually, it's not as bad as you might think :)). But why run when you can work to change things. I'm counting on EU to help put the Swedish economy and taxes where they should be (mainly by pushing the public opinion in the right direction) - and then all I have to do is to work for a EU that embraces the idea of the inviolable rights of the individual. Piece of a cake. ;)

Anyways, if you look at the more 'fundamental' objectivists, like Peikoff, I'm pretty sure he'd actually be angry with me for living here! :)
 
#15 ·
I agree with the sticker idea. I think it's possible to create a workaround for driver's of varying classes by adding a secondary sticker which would be placed on say the oposite side of the window from whatever the standard location would be to designate a secondary driver. (They do this at the driving schools!)
Since our police departments are used to the idea of having to exercise judgement in determining whether a crime is actually being committed they could use existing rules concerning traffic stops.
I agree with the weather being a bad idea. Hard to justify.
The fines however, I have to agree with. Driving is a priviledge, not a right. Fines would help cover the cost of upgrading public transportation as well. Currently every gallon of gas is taxed for road improvements. If people are not paying for gas then they're not paying for roadways. The argument that they are then becomes moot.
This also will finally address the congestion problem as well. There are far too many drivers on the road, who should not be. Either they are operating without licenses or do not have the skill to operate a vehicle properly and safely.
Nevermind those who simply cannot afford to properly maintain their vehicles.
Our society is growing at an alarming rate. without controls on growth, we will have to place controls on individual freedoms. It is an unfortunate situation, but I believe this thread to be a sign of things to come.
 
#16 · (Edited)
...faced with laissez-faire capitalist philosophy or any other critique of socialism... born libertarian, as an allergic reaction to the philosophical and political climate... embraces the idea of the inviolable rights of the individual... if you look at the more 'fundamental' objectivists, like Peikoff....
Yeah !

What he said !!

:confused:



Back to the `proposed law`, is this a uni project, if so then what a great idea for a subject. There are lots of open ended questions that need to be answered comprehensively, which would make a wonderful rounded thesis. Good Luck.

If this is more a psychological test, then possibly the captive audience of this err.. M5 site might be a little bit biased towards the idea of letting us all drive a bit faster than Mr Everyday Joe.

The M5 is a serious, powerful car that needs a wise mind to drive it. Not in the way of "driver prowess"; young and old *can* drive well and safely, but more the mindset of with *so much* potential in speed and power available, a mature attitude is needed. This often only comes with age, and the sheer costs involved in buying and running the modern generation of ///M5, ( financially & emotionally), prevents the accidents and injuries that I believe immature drivers (note avoided the use of `young` there) would otherwise cause given such a car, because they simply do not have one.

I really do believe that driver awareness is the key to safety, my personal opinion is that on a clear (freeway / autobahn / motorway / interstate / insert wide straight road of your choice here) then you should go as slow as you wish, but when traffic is present, or there is pedestrian presence (all residential areas) then you would be required to drive to the conditions around you. Crawl near schools. Be able to brake for a child in neighbourhoods. Go with the flow in traffic. Mind the closing speed you approach that truck on the freeway, what if a tyre blew, could you avoid him? All clear? Then go with throttle up.

Once people realise and act upon the knowledge that they should be responsible for their and others safety, then maybe we could all have a bit more liberty on the roads, and the arguably draconian, regimented system of driver classes proposed above would not need to be an option.



Then again, does anyone know when "The Cannonball Run" comes out on DVD ?
 
#17 ·
Thank you all for the great responces, as of right now I am revising it to a more practical form, with a little more thought on downfalls of each law and not what it would actually improve on...

The weather idea was one that I truly realize was a far stretch to try and accomplish, but after watching some drivers here in the snow we just got, I had to throw it in...even the more mature drivers here seem like they have never driven in the snow before in their life with some of the dumb things they do...it just amazes me...but ohh well, tis life, and I guess in one way or another with those actions they will eliminate themselves from the driving population. Be it a good or bad thing.

This is actually a cross class that I'm taking, that is taught by a Poli Sci prof and a Psych prof...so it's funny that was mentioned.. and it's a semester long project that has a few parts, and developing a new law is the first part of it...by the end of the semester the law that is graded to be the best (which is subjective to the professor) will be taken to congress and put into the "suggestion box" and it will put upto vote....sounds like fun to me.

Thanks again for spending your time helping me out...this first part is due friday, so I have to kinda revise it quickly, but just from what I've gotten so far, it's quite a bit different than how it started...I really would like to stick with the different level license idea for as long as I could, until I find it completely impossible and need to revise that too. So can anyone think of a way to show your license level even when one or more person uses the same car?

Thanks,

~ Jason
 
#18 · (Edited)
So can anyone think of a way to show your license level even when one or more person uses the same car?
Thanks,
Jason
Easy.

Most banks now use a Smartcard chip on their credit cards, you know the one that looks like a cm square of gold chip.

They only cost a few pence in bulk.


Make the card in to the driving licence, ie the driving licence is now a credit card shape and size.

Printed on plastic it would be bulletproof, easy to carry as it fits you wallet, and you would have to insert it into a slot on the car somewhere, where it would light up a small LCD logo/letter to one side of the rear registration plate, or a little lcd panel inside the rear glass screen in one corner.

The registration plate lcd could be built into new cars, the lcd/panel/light placed somewhere near the rear windshield could be added to exisiting cars easily.


The chip on the license/card could have details of the class of licence, and could also store if the owner wanted his insurance details, plus any medical records such as allergies or blood groups or donor information in case he is involved in a road accident and the doctors need to know.

A picture license would be recommended so they know who the license belongs too in bigger crashes !!


I would not go so far as to wire the license into the OBC. Although this would make an ignition key redundant, it`s too much hassle to retrofit to existing cars. Also, some people would worry about civil liberties as the car could monitor who drove at what speed and where they went it they had GPS. Big brother could be your car in court !!

In addtion, not all countries or states would make it standard yet, so you could drive the car without a card by using the standard ignition key. Also people without cards could drive in an emergency if the had the key.

Please standardise the format between countries, so one car can be used in another country.



I reckon $50 in bulk for the windshield device in bulk, and under $5 for the cards on a national basis.

Budget $150 for an inbuilt system in the car in future.



mmm... I`ll also need 1% royalties as it`s my idea, OK?
 
#19 · (Edited)
IvanDias - Jeez. Why not just require a cell-phone-based transponder in every car that transmits a message to the local police every time the car exceeds the speed limit, makes a turn without a signal, drives in the rain without the lights on, or moves without the seatbelts fastened? It can be implemented without cost to local law enforcement by the simple expedient of making the owner pay for the cell service in order to get a license. You could even set it up so that the car wouldn't start without being connected to a Borg implant in the driver's neck, so there'd be no doubt about who was driving. Let's see, what ELSE can we do that forces the individual driver to pay for his own intrusive surveillance?

MarkM5:
The fines however, I have to agree with. Driving is a priviledge, not a right. Fines would help cover the cost of upgrading public transportation as well. Currently every gallon of gas is taxed for road improvements. If people are not paying for gas then they're not paying for roadways. The argument that they are then becomes moot.
I don't agree at all with that "driving is a privilege" thing. You hear that a lot from folks who feel that the people should serve the government rather than the other way around. If I pay public taxes to build public roads and other infrastructure, it is my logical and natural right, as a member of the public, to use those things I paid for.

The gas-tax argument is also disingenuous. It might make sense if roads were paid for entirely with fuel taxes, and if Yupkwondo's plan was an all-or-nothing, drive-or-walk deal; but it's not. He has certain roads or lanes reserved for certain drivers; other drivers have to stay off them and drive on less desirable routes. They are still burning gas, and paying tax on it (probably more gas, since they're relegated to local roads), but they would not be able to drive on many of the roads those taxes built. Does that seem fair?

Finally, depending on fines to finance anything, especially huge money-bleeding projects like public transportation, creates a conflict of interest for government. The point of law enforcement is supposed to be the reduction of crime; but plans like this create situations that make the government DEPENDENT on the continued existence of that specific crime. If traffic fines drop, their budgets have shortfalls, so they have to create more "criminals" to generate more fines. Do you want a traffic-law police state? I sure don't. It's already too much that way. If you want public transportation subsidized at public expense, do it honestly and get a tax referendum on the ballot. Don't be surprised if it fails, though, because in the end, people prefer to drive their own cars, for reasons obvious to anyone who has ever had to depend on public transportation and doesn't have hours and hours of time to waste each week.
 
#21 ·
Updated...

Explanation…

This law would restructure the current licensing system used today, and would have graduated levels, signified by classes of: E an “Excellent Driver,” A an “Average Driver,” N a “New Driver” and finally U an “Unsatisfactory driver.” Every driver would have to be reevaluated of their driving skill, they would be tested on every driving level, from residential driving to highway and turnpike driving. A more advanced maneuverability test would be implemented and a reaction test would be developed. In addition, a hazard and environmental test would be constructed to test the level of thinking a person has when confronted with a dangerous situation.

After the reevaluation process is completed, a person would be assigned their driving level.

“E” – Excellent driver, is given most freedom on the road, has proven that they are capable of handle most any driving situation. Must still abide by strictly enforced laws, such as residential speed limits and school zones, but on other roads such as Highways, turnpikes and rural roads have more privilege to what they feel is the correct speed for the road. A class E driver may exceed minimum speed limit by up to 25 mph on a highway without receiving a ticket and turnpikes are limitless* to an E class driver.

“A” – Average driver, is still given freedom to drive anywhere, and has proven that they can handle the everyday driving situation. Just as “E” drivers must fallow the strictly enforced laws, an A class driver must also. On Turnpikes and highways an A class driver may exceed the minimum speed limit by up to 10 mph without receiving a ticket.

“N” – New driver, a new driver is someone that has not had their license for more than 6 months, or has lost their license for a period of 1 or more years, and has just received their license again. New drivers are not given as much privilege as to what they feel is correct as an E or A class driver is. They must stay within 5 mph of all posted minimum speed limits on all roads. Driving hours are restricted to daylight hours for the first 3 months of their N license** .

“U” – Unsatisfactory driver, an unsatisfactory driver is one that has not shown the ability to deal with everyday driving situations, or has had more than 5 major driving violations*** within 3 years. An Unsatisfactory driver has no privilege; they must always abide by the minimum speed limit, they are also restricted to daylight driving, and are not able to drive on any highways. U class licenses are given in 6-month terms, and can be given for as long as deemed necessary.

License level may be advanced through classes and retesting. Also with each driving level come certain requirements to keep their respected level. With each driving level, all responsibility falls onto the drivers themselves. Speeding tickets are no longer just a point based system, the first ticket comes with a $500 fine, the second ticket comes with a $5000 fine and 30 days in jail, the third and final ticket comes with a penalty of the drivers license being revoked for a period of 5 years. Seeing that you ability determines what your driving privileges are, exceeding those privileges or inasmuch what is deemed your driving ability, comes with strict penalty. All drivers will be required to have a electronic pass on their car what is equivalent to an Ez-pass on toll roads, where their license level will be programmed in for enforcement officers to check your driving level without ever pulling you over. Electronic pass cost will be covered by initial testing fees and ticket revenue.

License level may be advanced through classes and fee based unscheduled retesting. Also with each driving level come certain requirements and regulations to keep their respected level.

“E” – Must retest driving ability every 5 years at no cost. E level drivers are allowed only one major driving violation*** within that time.

“A” – Must retest every 3 years at no cost. A level drivers are allowed 3 major driving violations*** within 5 years.

“N” – Must test for a higher level after having a N class license for 6 months at no cost, if not ready for a higher class license at that point, must retest every 6 months until found able to meet the higher class requirements. May test whenever they feel ready after the 6 month test, but test will be fee based. N class drivers are allowed no major driving violations*** within the time spent as an N class license holder.

“U” – Are only allowed to retest for a higher level when required time of U class license holder has passed. Are allowed no major driving violations*** within the time spent as a U class license holder.

If major driving violation limit is surpassed during given period, penalty is suspension of license for 6 months and $1000 fine at first offense, at second offense penalty is suspension of license for 1 year and $5000 fine. At third offense 5 year license suspension and 1 year in jail. At fourth offense, license suspension for life, and 5 years in jail.

Addendum….

Minimum Speed limits are as fallows;
  • State turnpikes 75 mph.
  • Interstate highways 70 mph.
  • Route (Rural) highways 60 mph.
  • Rural roads 35 mph, unless otherwise noted.
  • Residential areas 20 mph.
    a. Maximum speed is always 30 mph, with a 20 mph minimum.
    b. School zones are always 15 mph
    [/list=A]


    A “Class E” license may only be given to individuals that attend High performance and dynamic driving schools to improve their driving skills. “Class E” drivers are required to have a vehicle able of obtaining at least 90 mph.

    Drivers must only pay for their initial license test and any unscheduled test to improve their license level at a cost of $100. All retesting is free.

    After the age of 70, drivers must retest every 1 year until it is determined that a driver is unfit to drive, and is a threat to the safety of other drivers.

    Under no circumstance must a license be given to a person that is not qualified for the lowest class license.

    On a two lane highway, all drivers must remain in the right lane, and only use the right lane for passing slower drivers, after a pass has occurred a driver must immediately return to the right lane.

    On a rural road, or 1 lane rural highway, if a car determines it is safe to pass another driver, the passing driver must flash headlights to signal a pass, and the slower car must slow down so the pass occurs in the least amount of time and distance possible. Once the pass has occurred, both drivers can return to their respected speed level.

    All Class levels only apply to passenger vehicles; all other vehicles, i.e. Semis and Service vehicles, are issued a “Class A” license with their own special regulations.
    • All Speed Limits Apply on all roads.
    • Always have right of way, except for on Rural roads, and Residential areas.
      [/list=A]


      ____________________________________________________

      * = Limitless until what is deemed unsafe for driving conditions.
      ** = This may be bypassed by being accompanied by an E or A class driver, that is also a legal guardian, in the vehicle
      *** = Major driving violations consist of Accidents, Reckless driving, DUI/DWI and Road Rage.



      ~ Jason
 
#23 ·
whirlycopter said:
fine ought to be on a sliding scale related to disposable income.
Determined how, exactly? Last year's tax return? That was then, this is now. A lot of people's incomes vary from year to year, especially in the upper brackets. If I made $200,000 last year but am only making $100,000 this year, and you made $100,000 last year and stand to make $150,000 this year, you make more, and I'd still pay double what you do for a speeding ticket. It'd clog up the courts with challenges to the fine amounts.

If your reasoning here is "soak the rich," then I object to that on the grounds that the intent is to punish people for traffic offences, not for being wealthy and/or successful. If the reasoning is that a fine of X stings less for someone whose disposable income is 50X than for someone else whose is 10X, that's just another inherent weakness of monetary fines. Identical infractions should carry identical penalties. That may not be completely "fair," but then there is no such thing as complete fairness; this is simply the least unfair of the options. If you don't feel that works out properly for fines, then pick some other, "fairer" penalty - community service, perhaps, or temporary license suspensions.
 
#24 ·
dwasifar said:
This statement is simply evil. I'm horrified into speechlessness.
??? How so???
In my 38 years I have watched development taking over more and more pristine lands and converting them to use for the human population. In the process destroying our enviroment, driving out and exterminating whole species, and creating a whole host of problems in nature. It's (EVIL) to point out that it is directly related to the growth of the human population?
Please, I'm by no means a tree hugger or the like but I don't believe we can continue on this path of enviromental destruction and overpopulation for much longer without dire results.
There must be controls of some sort before we become the virus.
 
#25 ·
Re: Updated...

Yupkwondo said:
After the age of 70, drivers must retest every 1 year until it is determined that a driver is unfit to drive, and is a threat to the safety of other drivers.
I remember reading somewhere that an elderly person sued a city for trying something like this. They claimed it was age discrimination and won.

I've been reading this thread with much interested. I've always felt there should be some graduated scale, but could never come up with something that is workable. The biggest problem, in my mind, is how the enforcement officer would know one class from another. Several people have proposed some solutions, but anything that is installed on the car can be foiled. For example, someone suggested putting a signal in the rear window that is controlled by some card the person carries. How long do you think it would take for someone to sell an override "card" that defeats this?

I would be happy if we could go closer to what Germany and most of Europe does -- open limits in controlled areas and very strong certification tests. It simply amazes me how poor most drivers are in the US.

I also believe driving is a priviledge, not a right. I pay a lot of taxes for things I never use directly. I have no kids but must pay for the local schools. If I didn't drive, I still get the benefits of the road indirectly through others -- UPS can deliver a package to me, etc. Likewise, I don't have a right to drive fast, but I might be able to earn the priviledge to do so as suggested by the original post. This makes a lot of sense to me.
 
#26 ·
You may not believe yourself an environmentalist, but it's clear you've been taken in by the relentless drumbeat of doom sounded by the environmentalist movement - or perhaps it should be more properly called a religion.

If you check the actual numbers, you'll find that almost all the land that was forested 200 years ago is now covered with... forest; that even the much-lamented Brazilian rainforests are mostly still untouched, and development in that area has slowed to a crawl; and that species are going extinct at pretty much the same rate as they always have before we showed up at the party. It's easy to persuade an urban dweller that the world is becoming overpopulated when the suburbs around his city are 40% larger than they were when he was a child, but this perception is myopic. How big is a city compared to the whole country? A metro area that takes up, say, .005% of a nation's available land can multiply tenfold and still be insignificant in the big picture. It only seems unmanageable and endless when you're in the middle of it. If you really think we're running out of open land, drive from Carbondale, IL to Chicago, and see how much Illinois there is that is NOT Chicago. And Chicago's the third-largest city in the country, in a smallish state. Try the same experiment driving the length of California.

Those are the reasons I think your statement is wrong, summed up in a nutshell and mildly oversimplified for brevity. I think it's evil for a different reason - specifically, that it advocates abridging real liberties to solve an imaginary problem, and it implicitly hands that authority over to the very people who have a 1.000 batting average in making worse any problem they lay fingers on to "solve." (Yes, I am talking about government.) "We must give up these rights and liberties to the government for the good of the environment!" Or "...for the children!" Or "...for the war on drugs!" Or any other cause you care to name. Ten years later, the rights are gone, the problem is still with us and more intractable than ever, and some fool floats the tired old idea that if we just gave up a little more, THEN government would finally be able to accomplish what it always fails to do. And we start again.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top