It's nice to be apart of the responsible 10%

[MustangNewb]

I think it's safe to say the population of this message board makes up the 10% of the people who don't go past the speed limit or drive agressively.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/27/dan...ing/index.html

[cyberstang5.0]

I'm a firm believer that the speed limit signs are just a suggested speed while driving under bad conditions

[MustangNewb]

Hey Cyber, I've been looking at ALOT of Fox stangs the past few days to get ideas on how I wanna deck out my exterior and I have to compliment you on your GT. It's simple, sleek and looks bad ***. I have no idea why your selling that thing, I hope I can get my stang to look half as cool as that.

[cyberstang5.0]

Originally posted by MustangNewb
Hey Cyber, I've been looking at ALOT of Fox stangs the past few days to get ideas on how I wanna deck out my exterior and I have to compliment you on your GT. It's simple, sleek and looks bad ***. I have no idea why your selling that thing, I hope I can get my stang to look half as cool as that.

Thanks
You know, if you buy my car you can have a stang that looks as good as mine

[MustangNewb]

Only if it's for free and if you ship it to NY.

[Fox Body]

Originally posted by MustangNewb
I think it's safe to say the population of this message board makes up the 10% of the people who don't go past the speed limit or drive agressively.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/27/dan...ing/index.html

MMMmmmm. I doubt that.

Apart from that, most people just don't know how to drive. Whether they engage in "overly aggressive" maneuvers/practices or not. They do not understand how a car responds to certain conditions and cannot adjust when they get into trouble. Simple fact is that the driving requirements are TOO LOW and people are just "getting by" with low amount of skill. Too many people's knowledge of a car is utterly limited to getting, turning the key, putting the car in gear and pressing the pedals and turning the steering wheel accordingly. THERE IS MORE TO IT THAN JUST THAT!!!!! and knowing what a road sign means.

[MustangNewb]

Well our system of roads is designed for just that. So where as most of the people on this board consider driving one of their passions and know what something like oversteering means, when they put the petal to the metal you have much less to worry about. The 91% is actually a significant number and not a number based on worthless driving laws. If all you do is put her into drive, throttle, brake and turn then I think the laws on the books make sense. Proof is in the pudding, how many SUVs you see in car accidents during winter snow because they think they are snow warriors and really have absolutly no clue how to control their vehicle? Subsequently, how many Mustang owners between the ages of 25-40 total their cars? I guarentee that number is much less then most other cars.

Things that should be added to driving requirements for a license:

1) A demonstration of knowledge reguarding how gears work in a car, possibly requirement to be able to drive a stick for further understanding.
2) Braking techniques in non ABS brake systems and another class of license that requires you to demonstrate braking techniques in ABS systems if you own one.
3) SUV Class license. End of story. If you wanna own the biggest things on the road you need to know how to control them and how they are meant to be driven. Mainly aimed at all those clueless soccer moms out there.
4) Staged licensing from ages 16-18. Becoming 16 and passing your drivers test does not mean you know how to drive by any stretch. Some states already have this and insurance rates are dropping and accidents are on the decline in these areas.
5) When you file for social security, your license should be revoked unless you can repass the road test.
6) Basic automobile maintence. The number of accidents from an underinflated tire having a catastrophic blow out and an unoiled engine seizing up need to be at aproximately ZERO. There is little to no excuse here.

[mustangII460]

Im with Fox Body,

I was a road officer for years and people can't drive.

When I was younger there was always atleast one person in our group that coundn't handle anything, much less a car.

People act like cattle, they have to be told constantly who, what, where when and how to do every day tasks. If you don't, these same people will kill you. Because they can't think for themselves.

[Crazy Horse GT]

i drive slow, never break the speed limit & never, never race.----- bwahahahah lets rock.

[Sicy Stang]

I more than agree that people cant drive

[Fox Body]

Originally posted by MustangNewb
Well our system of roads is designed for just that. So where as most of the people on this board consider driving one of their passions and know what something like oversteering means, when they put the petal to the metal you have much less to worry about. The 91% is actually a significant number and not a number based on worthless driving laws. If all you do is put her into drive, throttle, brake and turn then I think the laws on the books make sense. Proof is in the pudding, how many SUVs you see in car accidents during winter snow because they think they are snow warriors and really have absolutly no clue how to control their vehicle? Subsequently, how many Mustang owners between the ages of 25-40 total their cars? I guarentee that number is much less then most other cars.

Things that should be added to driving requirements for a license:

1) A demonstration of knowledge reguarding how gears work in a car, possibly requirement to be able to drive a stick for further understanding.
2) Braking techniques in non ABS brake systems and another class of license that requires you to demonstrate braking techniques in ABS systems if you own one.
3) SUV Class license. End of story. If you wanna own the biggest things on the road you need to know how to control them and how they are meant to be driven. Mainly aimed at all those clueless soccer moms out there.
4) Staged licensing from ages 16-18. Becoming 16 and passing your drivers test does not mean you know how to drive by any stretch. Some states already have this and insurance rates are dropping and accidents are on the decline in these areas.
5) When you file for social security, your license should be revoked unless you can repass the road test.
6) Basic automobile maintence. The number of accidents from an underinflated tire having a catastrophic blow out and an unoiled engine seizing up need to be at aproximately ZERO. There is little to no excuse here.

This is a good thread. I very much agree with your points, MustangNewb. I'm not so sure about the SS thing, though. It is a bit harsh and not completely just to revoke someone's driving priviledges just b/c they file for SS (which is, of course their age we're talking about, something that may greatly vary from person to person). It seems descriminatory whereas the other points are for all drivers. Maybe we could say "beyond the age of 70, a recheck process is required (vision and hearing test)." What do you think?

I would also like to add a point to #4) which puts stipulations on FIRST time drivers of ANY age, just not as harsh as stipulations for first time drivers of 16-18 years old.

Allow also me to add to your wonderful list:

#7) Required Drivers License renewal (which includes a mandatory written and road test of a distance of at least 5-10 miles at low, medium, and hwy speeds) for anyone who has been involved in an accident more than 2x in one year with at least one other vehicle in which that person is found to have caused the accident both times.

#8) Wet and dry traction, safety, advance braking, and defensive/offensive driving classes/courses for those who would like to pay the extra fee. These courses could be offered in different stages so one could pick what is suitable for him/her (pricewise or in accordance with their normal driving habits). I would rather like to have people around me driving who had some insight into what not to do or how to correct a vehicle if it lets loose in adverse conditions.

Originally posted by mustangII460
People act like cattle, they have to be told constantly who, what, where when and how to do every day tasks. If you don't, these same people will kill you. Because they can't think for themselves.

mustangII460, I strongly agree with you as well.

What kind of sense does it make to pull out onto a 2 or 3-laned hwy into the lane that has a vehicle quickly approaching instead of pulling into the empty lane??? Why not merge over when you see someone coming off an exit ramp (even though you have the right of way) if possible? Why when the speed limit is 55mph, this dork in front of me is going 45, then 55, then 50 then 55, then 45, etc, etc???? Why is this young punk trying to race me or showing off with his stupid little car in the middle of noonday traffic? Why are these punks doing burnouts and doughnuts in the middle of the crowded parking lot to show off and messing up the local cruise spots for all the decent people? The list goes on and on even outside of normal driving courtesies.

It is absolutely amazing how mindless some people can be. When I see this crap, it really makes me want to join the sheriff's dept so I can write them the biggest tickets ever know to man....

[Fox Body]

With all that said above (now I know a handful of you are not gonna agree with this), but....

Also, let me say, I don't necessarily disagree with moderate street racing (eg., say from 0 to 80 in a 55 mph speed zone) as long as it's done with a well-kept car in LOW traffic hwy-type (especially multilaned) areas during the daylight hours, person knows when to shut it down and end it and if the person has some clue/experience how to control the car if it starts losing control, to bring it back into submission. All these requirements are many times not fulfilled and that's where people run into problems.

[MustangNewb]

Legal street racing? Isn't part of the thrill that you could get caught?

[Coupe Devil]

I agree.. In the school system my mother works for the newly turned 16 year olds and soon to be 16 year olds must take a two night safety course approved and taught by local law enforcemtn and the local state police post. If a student of the school system goes to the courthouse to (we dont have a DMV... Were small town) get thier drivers permit without having proof of having this safety course they arent allow to take the written test much less the driving part.. I wish that the other school systems around here would take the same programs into effect. Would make me feel better about all the cronies on the roads.

Bradley

[Fox Body]

Originally posted by MustangNewb
Legal street racing? Isn't part of the thrill that you could get caught?

No way! At least not for me. If I needed a thrill for the sole chance that I could get caught, I'd go rob a bank. Plus if I didn't get caught I'd have a lot of money.

[lx mike]

Marty: Lier Lier!!!

[Crazy Horse GT]

Originally posted by lx mike
Marty: Lier Lier!!!

mike im shocked you would think i race etc. lol.

[rbohm]

i personally think that everyone should have to go to a drving school like bondurant or skip barber. that way they would learn vehicle dynamics and what to do when things happen suddenly. most people panic at the first sign of trouble, and overcompensate everytime they make a correction and make things worse each time. i also believe that graduated licensing should be in effect for people under 18 and over 70. driving should also be treated as the privilage that it is and not the right people think they have. people caught driving without a license should be severely fined(no $25 slap on the wrist, but a $500 hit for a first time offender, and jail time if they refuse to pay).

[ac97gt]

Proof is in the pudding, how many SUVs you see in car accidents during winter snow because they think they are snow warriors and really have absolutly no clue how to control their vehicle?

lol... "snow warriors" ... too true though, i have seen alot, they have no idea that 4wd doesnt affect your braking.

#7) Required Drivers License renewal (which includes a mandatory written and road test of a distance of at least 5-10 miles at low, medium, and hwy speeds) for anyone who has been involved in an accident more than 2x in one year with at least one other vehicle in which that person is found to have caused the accident both times.

this is a great idea, but personally i would rather see it done if you have an accident at all, regardless of fault. some people will disagree with me, and there are certainly exceptions, but some accidents can be prevented even if it was "the other persons fault." many times people are following too close behind someone, or are just not very aware drivers (not watching mirrors or people pulling out) and find themselves in an accident that isnt necissarily their fault. i know that im always careful when im driving, like if someone has their turn signal on i never assume they are gonna turn, or if im driving through an intersection, i never assume that the people who have redlights/stop signs are going to stop. of course there are countless more cases where even the most aware driver can find themselves trapped by a reckless driver and have no choice but to become involved in an accident. basically, though, i would say that this 5-10 mile road test wouldnt be a bad idea for people to take each time they are involved in an accident. it would also allow the instructor to assess their driving abililty (which, by a good instructor can be told in even a short test like this).

i think a few good added license requirements could go a long way, even if just to ensure the driving skills of some of the better drivers out there.

just my $.02 :/ peace.

[MustangNewb]

The SUV thing pisses me off especially. Because soccer moms want to have the status symbol of an SUV but drive it like it's invincible and get into so many accidents cause they are clueless, insurance rates for SUVs are skyrocketed. Now I spend alot of my summer offroad, camping. I have a genuine use for an SUV, so I spec out a Wrangler and I was gonna buy one until my insurance agent told me it was going to be over $5,000 a year to insure it here in NYC. Five grand, FIVE GRAND, I can insure a Viper anywhere else in this country for five grand but I can't insure one of the smallest cars on the road? I guess I should put some money away for a new exhaust on my car again for after this summer.

It's also like the Titanic, SUV drivers, because they can afford a 40-100k truck to use for personal reasons and don't have the responsibility of needing to learn how to drive it, they out-weigh everyone by a ton, and are thereby safe and snug in their monstrosity when they do get into their easily avoidable accidents. So when they smack into someone in a Cavalier, or worse, a Fox bodied stang, they kill the people in the other car on impact but only have to replace the headlight on their tank. Why? Because they can afford to buy the SUV and the other driver can't. Is that really how we want our driving society to function?