Driving instructors less likely to believe collisions “are usually the cyclist’s fault” and that cyclists are “nuisances” after cycle awareness course, new government pilot study finds

"Right to drive."

"Why should the children / elderly / disabled / employees (at drivers' business) be made to suffer - they didn't do anything?"

"The points system is petty - and arbitrary.  Why should going over some random total mean sudden disproportionate punishment?  That could be just a couple of occurrences of infringing minor rules.  Things which everyone does - and most people will never see any sanction for!  (And by the way some of those rules shouldn't even exist like some of those 'idiotic' speed limits)."

Did that explain it?  I've heard / read stuff like that not infrequently.

I'm curious to know which motor insurers are accepting those drivers and what the premiums are.

And if some of those drivers aren't able to get insured (ie it is too expensive) with that many points but still cotinue to drive...

Reportedly a 26year old as well, so that's 18points per annum since they could have passed assuming none have lapsed...
Not only should he be banned but they should ban all the magistrates involved in the last 160 points.

I've just read that is someone with 217 points.

As an unrelated aside, whilst I'm sure most instructors are perfectly decent people, I've heard far too many horror stories about sleazy instructors for whom being in a car with a teenage girl is a highlight of the job. I await the driving instructor Me Too moment with some interest.

I've had 3 bad close passes from learners in as many weeks. Fine learners make mistakes but why isn't the instructor correcting them, teaching them how to drive properly?

When I caught one up and challenged the instructor about it, the guy was completely clueless about the highway code.

I had a scarily close pass from a learner recently, with oncoming traffic. When I threw an arm up to remonstrate, the instructor just waved at me out of the window. I sent the footage to the police and the school. Had an email from the instructor who insisted that his wave was meant to be an apology. Not convinced but even so I still don't know why he allowed the student to make the pass at all.    

it seems that a lot, if not most, driving instructors teach that you only need to indicate in the presence of other motor vehicles; cyclists and pedestrians can just have a guess.

I have come to the conclusion that driving goes against the usual rule that practise makes perfect. It seems that the more you do it, past a certain point, the worse you get at it.

I remember my driving test examiner, straight after congratulating me for having passed the test said, "Don't be a twat and have that as your best ever days driving. You were good enough to pass, now go out, practice and GET BETTER." That last bit screamed at me as only a Sergeant Major knows how.

bensynnock wrote:

I have come to the conclusion that driving goes against the usual rule that practise makes perfect. It seems that the more you do it, past a certain point, the worse you get at it.

Quoting the "rule" in that way is inviting misunderstanding - "practice makes ... habit. Perfect practice makes perfect."

eburtthebike wrote:

This could be breeding a whole generation of drivers who think that cyclists have no right to be on the road, and drive accordingly.

As opposed to the current and previous generations who... er... umm...

eburtthebike wrote:

This has bred a whole generation of drivers who think that cyclists have no right to be on the road, and drive accordingly.

FTFY

eburtthebike wrote:

How can it possibly be that these attitudes exist in highly trained, informed, expert drivers?  If, as it is implied, that most instructors think that cyclists have less rights than drivers, how the hell has that happened?  Surely part of becoming an instructor is knowledge of the law? and if it isn't, why not?

"Expert drivers"?

One may make a small personal experiment of the sociological kind by asking a range of acquaintances to list the features defining "an expert driver". My own experiment, conducted many times with various types of folk, indicate that knowledge and application of the highway code is almost never part of their answer. They base their notion of "expert driver" more on a racing driver's antics than those approriate for a bog-standard wage slave safely auto-driving to & from the satanic mill or slopermarket.

As to "knowledge of the law" ..... the law and rule by it seems to have fallen into disfavour; a fall that seems likely to continue down the slippery slope to a generalised anarchy in the same way that it has in the MeSA, where law and justice are just something that rich people buy to browbeat their opponents; or some sort of brownshirt service to cow the hoi-polloi if they interfere with the profit-making or are of a shade that offends the richer's sense of aesthetics and tribal symbolism.

Cars and the mad driving of them have long been a harbinger, a signal, a portend of an inherent presence in our thin-skinned civilisations of the churning human monsterism always waiting to pop up and run amok. Driving instructors will not be immune and may even be a vector for an increased motoring monsterism, as they reflect to zeitgeist of wider society. "You must own the road".

Civilisations are rarely murdered but rather die by suicide.

Cugel wrote:

They base their notion of "expert driver" more on a racing driver's antics than those approriate for a bog-standard wage slave safely auto-driving to & from the satanic mill or slopermarket.

For most people, I don't think it even requires that much 'mastery'. If you've managed to keep doing it (however badly) for more than about 5 years, then that makes you an 'expert'.

Everyday that I go out on my bike, there's always some smart ass who decides to pass too close at speed. All it needs is a small right down pull of the steering wheel to give me more room when passing. But they don't because they think I shouldn't be there. 
stiffer penalties needed for aggressive and dangerous drivers.

I agree. I would rather that punishment for close passes was more enforced and harsher, than have a shared path installed along my commute. I don't need or want to cycle on a pavement at 10mph for a 20 mile each way commute, having to cross more than 100 side roads and trying to avoid pedestrians, loose dogs, and kids on bikes popping wheelies.

wtjs wrote:

The epitome of junk pseudo-science, and the findings mean nothing. In practice, they know what they're supposed to say after completing the junk course, but I doubt it this translates to better attitudes and behaviour around cyclists 

You are too generous. Just 15 per cent completed the course, destroying the randomized design. The conclusion would be something like 'The small portion of driving instructors self selecting to complete the survey on average admitted that they were originally ignorant of the subject they claimed to teach and that they would do better in future '