Periodic Driver Retests.

[Grahamm]

[quote author=Grahamm link=topic=4835.msg41832#msg41832 date=1349380733]
I think I'd ask whether you are capable of driving (or riding!) without deliberately or through carelessness, recklessness or simple inability, causing others to have to rapidly adjust their speed or direction because of your actions.

Yes to all of that.

If you pull out on someone at a roundabout and they have to slam on their brakes to avoid you, but it doesn't actually result in an accident, do you think that there's nothing wrong with that? If you do an overtake into on-coming traffic making someone have to swerve out of your way (but not physically crashing), is that acceptable? If you decide to do 60mph in a 30mph limit and nearly hit someone coming out of a T-Junction because you were going too fast, do you not think there might be a problem with your road use??

No to all of that. Need proof? See 31 years no claims (if only) clean license, clean conscience.[/quote]

Which is absolutely no proof at all. You could drive (or ride) like a complete twunt, carve people up, speed, do foccing hand-brake turns in the middle of the M25 and still, if you're lucky, get away with all of that with a clean licence etc (your conscience is your own business). It does *NOT* mean that you're a good road user!

So now can you tell me why I might need compulsorily educating further?

Who said anything about "educating"? I said you (and everyone else) should need to *prove* that you can still drive to an acceptably safe standard. And, yes, that includes me and all bikers too, before you start on that one. Simply saying "well I've done this for X many years and not had an accident" is not proof.

Oh, and the old chestnut you pulled back there about vehicles being able to do 70 in a 30 still doesn't answer the point - do you want all vehicles limited to 70mph on the grounds that it is the legal maximum? There can be no possible excuse for going any faster regardless of what speed you do in town etc, so how about the legislation 'in the name of safety' starts with that?

Erm, it was *you* who tried to pull that old chestnut, not me! And I've already addressed it once, I'm not going to give a different answer just because you're trying to pull it again.