Not necessarily. Actual accidents don’t always confer citations and many of those can be discharged for simply proving your insurance paid the other person. It’s not illegal to be a klutz, it’s just expensive.
I have a friend who has, give or take a couple, wrecked vehicles more than 20 times. Most were minor, barely involving damage to the vehicle he was driving or the vehicle/object he hit, but a couple were catastrophic. I think the majority were because he has roadway hypnosis/narcolepsy. I’ve had him fall asleep mid sentence talking to me when he was a passenger. A perfect candidate to have that license taken, right? The two ways I know of to take a license involve driving while intoxicated or a doctor personally notifying the licensing agency about a person’s inability to drive. Believe it or not, most doctors have a vested interest (because they want clients) in not personally notifying the agency. However, there is no set path to revoke a license for simply being a bad driver.
I personally know someone who totaled 4 cars before turning 18. He literally treated the gas as an on/off switch.
So people that bad at driving are out there.
Truth be told, drivers here in the US are TOTALLY untrained for the most part. My oldest is currently in driver’s Ed and it is a joke, in regards to actually how to drive a car. I have spent a lot of time training him as I have a long history taking racing and advanced driving courses. I’ve held SCCA and FIA racing licenses and I have taken some courses that are usually reserved for police officers The only problem is I do not feel that I’m a very good teacher for him. But he has picked up some things, even if he isn’t up for threshold or trail braking.
Most of the USA also seems to lack options for adults to take a class and be given professional instruction on how to drive, for some odd reason. If you’re out of high school there are no classes for you.
I wonder if it’s like that in most other countries as well?
Not in Hungary. Getting a category B license, which covers automobiles and mopeds, starts with a long course in driving theory, basic maintenance, and traffic laws, capped by an exam. Then a one-day first-aid training and exam. The next step is driving practice with a certified instructor – basic skills on a practice course, then real traffic, plus parking and reversing maneuvers – 30 hours total, which must include one hour of highway and one hour of night driving, and has a minimum required distance travelled, ending with a one-hour exam with the instructor and an examiner employed by the state. Next you have to pass a medical exam (sight, hearing, balance), and THEN you can apply for a driving license.
All in all, it took me about six months and cost 150,000 HUF (~400 USD using today’s conversion rate). I passed the driving exam on the second attempt – the first failed because I didn’t yield to an old beater with a busted indicator light.
Also, just for comparison, when I started driving, my insurance was around 170 USD a year and it’s only gone down. $500 per month is fucking absurd.
Not necessarily, but the state then requires proof that the reduced hearing (1) does not impact balance, and (2) can be compensated sufficiently by the driver (e.g. actively looking out for blinking blue lights because they cannot hear the horn of police/ambulance/fire brigade vehicles).
Nah I’m hard of hearing and allowed to drive without hearing aids. All our traffic signals are predominantly visual and sirens are treated as a secondary component to the flashing lights. Hell, cops often only use the auditory components when the visual has failed, the visual never fails for me because I understand that I absolutely must rely on my eyes when driving.
So actually this is an area of professional interest to me and yeah, it’s often horrifying how easily many systems could incorporate visual sirening but choose not to. Fire alarms have flashing lights in every workplace in my country, but tornado sirens basically never do.
In as car centric of a country as America it would be a fairly extreme injustice to prohibit the deaf from driving if we’re able to effectively use visual signals within a reasonable margin of error (I’d say so long as our best drivers are better than the average hearing driver)
Flashing blue lights with a pattern mirroring the rhythm of the siren. So a slow undulation of luminosity of blue lights. If you see something like that out of nowhere you’re gonna know something is wrong, it isn’t a fire, and if you don’t recognize the pattern to do as others are.
As a bonus, put them under the fire lights with a blue backing and the word tornado in white.
ok and what do you do when you are not in range of a tornado siren to see it? Where i live we can hear them, but cannot see them. Only in particularly nearby circumstances would you see one.
In a building i suppose that would work though, usually there are plenty of other indications there. Like other people. Also i probably wouldn’t explicitly label them as tornado, unless you’re in the US. Extreme weather perhaps elsewhere.
Well considering I’m treating this as an and not an instead… so probably whatever was happening then? Combining sensory outputs in alarms and sirens saves lives because different senses have different merits and not everyone has every sense. There is no perfect warning except forewarning and when you hit the “evacuate or seek shelter” stage of an emergency any leg up is valuable
I went with tornado siren in a building as my frame of mental reference as in my part of the United States workplaces and other similar gathering places often have mandatory audio-visual fire alarms and mandatory audio tornado sirens. These are our two drills. These are our emergencies, and one leaves me absolutely fucked if I’m not wearing my hearing aids at the time.
nah i get it, i just don’t think it would do much in many cases. Especially considering that everybody has a phone these days, with a third sensory addition. Those usually tend to also notify people about severe weather events as well.
Because you should never trust personal handheld devices to do the job of final warnings. My phone is on do not disturb at work. Many people do that. Sometimes people leave their phones in meetings. No phones are allowed on basically any factory floor unless it’s a work phone that like 1% of employees get.
So I’m an industrial engineer in addition to being deaf and one of my major professional focuses is actually human factors and as it pertains to the disabled it becomes extra important. So yeah this is basically all industry wide known to be better. So why is the fire flashy and the tornado not? Because both follow the legal minimum. I think workplace legal minimum should be raised so that any mandatory audio signal should contain a visual signal that shares the beat of the audio signal.
i mean, that’s definitely fair, in the instance of something like factory, having some sort of global warning system would be advantageous. Does this stem from the recent tornado that hit a factory floor in indiana and killed like 100 people or something i think it was? If so that would make sense. There was definitely a significant issue in that scenario.
Outside of something like work or an institution though im not sure.
No I’ve actually pitched this idea to safety departments for years. Also I’m a Midwesterner, there’s always dead factory workers thanks to a tornado.
And like I do actually think that flashing lights in certain areas can be a good idea outside of work and institutions but it’s important to keep in mind how big of a net work and institutions are. It’s a third of your time for most of your life.
there are definitely instances outside where it would be productive, but then again, as midwesterners i swear going outside during a tornado warning or watch is like a genetic feature of our DNA or something.
We’re no where near $170 a year but $500 is very high. I haven’t had a ticket or accident in about 15 years, I think insurance companies can only go back 6 years, and I’m paying about $75 per month.
I have full coverage with decently high coverage values (above minimum across the board, some substantially so)
I pay 60/mth, but I have a flawless driving record (driving since 04, not so much as a ticket) and live in a rural low cost state so that may factor in.
For someone who’s over 25 with a clean driving record you can get good coverage for one vehicle for about $500/6 mo. My wife and I have no tickets and 1 accident (deer on a county highway on a blind curve, completely unavoidable, but totaled the car) and our rate hasn’t changed in the 3 years since we last made any adjustments
Wow, 400€ is good, I (or rather, my family) paid about 4000€, and that was even with passing every exam the first time and generally being a good student. But I’m from Germany, not Hungary. Still, that can surely not account for such a vast difference, can it?
It can, easily. Hungary is cheap, both the wages and cost of living (although the ratio of the two is getting worse every day), compared to the rest of Europe and even many former Soviet republics. Foreign companies are flocking here for cheap, skilled labor. That 150,000 HUF was a significant part of the average gross monthly salary at the time.
My wife didn’t even do drivers’ ed, since she didn’t get her license until after high school. She just had to pass a test and got her license that day. I did the whole drivers’ ed thing, but it barely prepared me at all, and I ended up getting into 2 accidents while still in high school since I just didn’t have the experience to deal with unusual situations, and I locked up when I happened to get into a couple dangerous situations. Luckily we’re both experienced drivers by now 10+ years later, but yeah, those first few years are basically just learning how to drive by driving, being a danger to everyone.
Tailgaters. I was terrified that if I slowed down too quickly they’d smash into me, so one time I took a turn too fast and crashed into a car I couldn’t see because of a hedge, and the other I didn’t brake quickly enough to stop for a guy who suddenly realized he wanted to take a left turn right then. I eventually told myself that if tailgaters crash into me, that’s their problem for being so close behind me, and I just need to focus on what I’m doing.
It’s pretty standard in Britain to learn to drive when you’re 17. The testing seems to be much more rigorous than whatever happens in America though, and Anon would hopefully have lost their licence by now!
I suppose it is technically possible for Anon to have been ruled to not be at fault for all of those accidents, but that’s like winning the lottery twice.
Unfortunately in huge swaths of America a driver’s license is practically a necessity – there are no realistic alternatives. A 30 minute to an hour drive to go to work or get groceries isn’t uncommon.
NL here: driving education is something you have to do at driving schools, separate from regular schools. Getting your license requires a written exam (traffic rules, hazard recognition, stuff like that) and a practical exam, with both the practical and all lessons done in regular traffic. If you see a car with a blue square sign with a white L in it, that’s a student driver.
It also costs a few thousand euros to go through the process. Though getting your license for cars does often get you a license for some other vehicles. Mine came with a moped license.
Getting your license requires a written exam (traffic rules, hazard recognition, stuff like that) and a practical exam, with both the practical and all lessons done in regular traffic.
Sounds the same as the US, although zero lessons required and costs like $45 or something.
Brazil: You need to do psych and eyesight evaluations, 40 hours of classes, 20 hours of practical lessons ( you need separate practical lessons for cars, bikes, semis etc) and tests for both.
There was a kid at my high school who was famous for wrecking 7 cars his senior year. Parents just kept buying him new ones. Like, brand new. Off the lot. It was insane.
As someone that ended up being the teacher for the majority of my friend group. If you are struggling with the teaching more than likely you’re trying to give answers to their questions. Which is actually more unhelpful than helpful.
If they’re asking you how to make a certain kind of turn, or how to know how close they are to something. Just giving them an answer isn’t really useful because they don’t know how to arrive at that answer, instead you need to help them ask the correct questions.
" you didn’t quite make it in that parallel park, get out and take a look at where the car is. The back of the car is only just barely in the spot, so clearly you didn’t end up deep enough in the spot. What do you think you need to do to change that"
And have them keep practicing until they start to figure it out, it will seem frustrating for them in the moment but it’s genuinely more useful for them to try things on their own and attempt to reach the answer. than it is for them to be handed the answer, because then they understand not just the answer is, but the why of the answer. Why did I not make that turn, what does it feel like to not make the turn properly. Which is very important for being able to apply those same principles of vehicle control to other situations.
One of my favorite things to do with people is to set up some cones or a block of wood or whatever and just tell them to try and park as closely as possible to that object without touching it. I have them do that, get out, go look at how close they were to it, and then try again if they were nowhere near it until they can get it to Within less than a foot. Great way to help train sense of vehicle position.
Yes this. We teach kids, slow down in the rain, but give no guidelines on how to calculate how much they should slow down. Hell I have ran into very few adults that even understand the concept of out driving your headlights.
Yeah, people like this are why my (absolutely spotless record, not even a parking ticket) insurance is so high. They drive rates up for everyone around them, simply due to the fact that you can get hit by them through no fault of your own.
I dated a girl whose brother had four accidents on his record at the time. He was 17 years old, so just barely old enough to have his license, (in my area you can get your permit at 15, and license at 16). After his second totaled car, their parents told him he was buying his third car with his own money. For them, the first totaled car was a fluke; The second was a pattern. So he got a job at 16, bought a junker with his earnings, and totaled it six months later.
The worst part is that two of his accidents happened in the exact same circumstances. Slick roads from an ice storm. He takes one particular corner too fast, hits a patch of ice, and ends up totaled. He totaled two cars on the exact same icy corner, because he didn’t learn from the first accident.
New intern at work was talking about smashing 2 cars while speeding just weeks apart. Then starts talking about wanting to get a motorcycle. Kid isn’t going to make it to 25.
Huh. I’ve never thought of that, and it’s a really good question. I’m guessing there may be some kind of “I own it, but don’t drive it” group within insurance that deals with it, or maybe be kind of shared responsibility between the two.
Depends who owns the car or who has the loan out against the car. If you own the car and hire the driver, you insure the car and put them on the policy as the primary driver.
So best case for someone like this: don’t drive. Get other people to drive you, use public transportation, get a bike, etc. But this is probably America and that is 100% not possible everywhere. Or even most places.
There is another option: State-Owned High-Risk Auto Insurance. These are insurance plans owned by individual states. Because US states all require auto insurance to drive a car and because driving a car is goddamn necessary in a lot of America, this exists.
It’s VERY expensive. Like when I was looking at getting good coverage for 2 newish cars I was staring down $500/6mo. Our state’s high-risk was $2,000+. But it exists for people like in the post who are just too expensive for ordinary insurance companies to want to insure.
No way. Even just commuting assuming $20 each way (cheap for rush hour) that’s $4,800 every 6 months. Probably 2-3 times as expensive as the high risk insurance.
The post said they had been paying $500 a month ($3000 for six months) and it went up with every accident. When you factor in gas and maintenance (let alone deductibles for all their accidents), ride share services might well be cheaper.
$4,800 every 6 months is only $800/month. The OP pays $500/mo on insurance, let’s say $100 on gas a month, that’s only $200/month payment on the loan for an old used car. Car ownership is expensive, but it’s probably more common for the car payment to be $500/month and insurance to be $200/month. This doesn’t even factor maintenance
Where on earth are you getting insurance for 2 cars for $500/6 months? I’m middle aged, drive a 10 year old car, and have a perfect driving record, and mine’s about $100/month. I’ve priced the same level of coverage with other companies and that’s pretty much what all of them offered.
Eta: I’m literally asking. I have no loyalty to my current company, if I can get it cheaper, I’m out.
That was a few years ago. But I have the same coverage and cars for $580/6mo. BTW it’s cheaper to pay all at once usually.
But our cars are compact and subcompact about 9 & 10 years old. We carry 100/300/100. It’s GEICO is MD but it was also about the same with progressive in FL. Only one of us has a perfect record, the other is still minor and rare.
So you may just live in an expensive state for insurance.
I’m in a similar position, middle aged, clear driving history for about 15 years, car’s an '18. I pay ~$450 every 6 months with Progressive. Paying the whole amount up front gives me a good discount. If you can’t do that size payment at once you can pay with PayPal credit and it should be no interest for 6 months so you can get the discount and still pay monthly.
I need to check on whether I get a discount for paying all at once. I’m finally at a point where I could manage it but I have no idea what it would save.
Ooh, just checked looked and nope, USAA gives me $16/month off for autopay but no pay in full discount. Lots of pretend discounts for other stuff but that just puts them around what other insurers would charge anyway. What a rip off.
I live in the Netherlands and now pay €188 a year. It’s just a “wa” insurance meaning if I hit something they pay the damage of the other’s, but not mine damage.
I drive a car from 2009 and have 10 years of no damages. So if your willing to move to the Netherlands wait 10 years you can lower your payment. (Not really a option I guess)
Damn. I managed to get basic insurance for like $75/mo but it’s one where they require you to install a tracking app on your phone for the first month that gives you a higher rate if you accelerate or brake hard. I just drove like a grandma for a month and uninstalled it after.
I’ve noticed that some insurers give insane “fuck you” quotes for no reason. I had Progressive under my parents since I started driving, and when I got my own insurance, it was around $500/6 months through them. I wanted to get other quotes from some other insurers and the rates were absolutely insane by comparison. Like, $500-800 PER MONTH. I have no idea why they were so much more. I know there are loyalty discounts and such, but I don’t think they’re going to be ~85%.
Car insurance generally hates young adults. I paid through the nose for 6 months of crap insurance through progressive than immediately jumped to a broker who got me a lower rate on better coverage (and actually knew what the right amount of coverage was) and they’ve consistently got me more coverage for a lower rate ever since. Granted some of that probably comes from my aging out of that high risk 18-25 bracket but still
I totally get that, but what I don’t understand is why Progressive was so reasonable compared to literally everyone else for literally identical coverage. It’s like for whatever reason they were the only ones who didn’t care I was in that <25 age bracket.
So, basically, he had one accident per year. And he is not smart enough to understand that the universe is trying to tell him "Don't drive a car, then!"
Nah, people here just drive without a license. I really wish that wasn’t the case but it’s kind of inevitable when so much quality of life here is dependent on driving.
If you’re lucky enough to have people to support you that can really mitigate it, but unfortunately we’re not all so lucky.
If this is real, this guy should not have a driver’s license anymore, he’s a menace on the road. Sorry my dude but I hope your insurance prices goes as high as heaven cause you should not have a car!
It can be done. I drove Uber part time and a group of girls in the back decided why not drunk water bottle fight. One rolled under as I was going downhill. That is up there with one of the most terrifying moments of my life.
I used the emergency brake and stomped the foot brake as hard as i could multiple times until it was crushed then fished it out.
pedals have this thing where they have space behind them, and if you have no concern whatsoever for safety and yours, and others lives, then you can just slap a water bottle on the floorpan in front of you, and when you brake, that water bottle can roll forward and get caught under the pedal. Leading to restricted braking ability.
Come to think about it I think the reason why us americans associate giant SUVs and trucks with safety is because we’ve gotten so lazy relying on computers and finicky cameras that get covered in mud that I personally feel safer driving my 56 bel air over modern cars because I’m able to physically move my head to see the crap around me not to mention the transmission being a two speed automatic it has a hard time getting to dangerous high speeds but I suppose that doesn’t really matter when everyone else is blind quite frankly I would love a car with modern crash safety and handling while still having the ridiculous lack of blind spots that 50s cars had I actually praise the vw golf for having not only a backup camera that doesn’t get dirty while not doing that stupid thing where for some reason a lot of auto manufacturers think we have a backup camera lets jack the rear seats so the driver has to use the camera that gets covered in mud or make the rear windshield flat enough to become unusable during winter thank you Volkswagen for not doing that with the golf I can have the backup camera and my physical neck to look behind me
This part of the reason why I love compact and sub compact cars. My little yaris and versa have better visibility then much larger cars. Yes a back up camera is nice is a lot of situations but so is being able to turn around and see stuff.
And this is the problem. People who have their license suspended often drive anyway. Sometimes they have to in order to get to work because the U.S. has a shit public transportation system in vast areas of the country.
Give insurance companies the will power to say no im not going to insure you. And then cap insurance rates. and by cap i mean no insurance should be more expensive than the rate new drivers are allowed to be charged.
Where i live insurance rates have a discount for being a good driver. Goes up each year to cap at about 40percent. This is tied to your liscence not insurance.
Increase that discount for good drivers and make sufficiently bad drivers unable to be insured.