the driving age should be raised to the age of 18

[Hielly]

my older sibling has done about 30 hours, its been 5 months

[mypurpleundercracka]

grrrrrr, i hate the logbook. I've had my license for over a year and have only clocked about 8 hours haha. If I was born 1 or 2 months earlier then I wouldnt have to fill in that stupid thing.

LOL and i thought i was behind, i've done about 65 hrs and I got about 6 months until I'm eligable to get my license

[costargh]

What's the big deal about the log book? Besides that the fact that it's an inconvenience and a pain in the arse, can't you make up the log entries because there's no way to police it?

[excal]

It's a legal document, and the person signing it bears responsibility for ensuring it's truth.

It's a weak deterrent against falsified documents, but it's there.

I personally think that the log book is a great idea. It's worked in aviation for god knows how long. Perhaps the sign-off process needs to be optimised somewhat, though.

[mypurpleundercracka]

It's a legal document, and the person signing it bears responsibility for ensuring it's truth.

It's a weak deterrent against falsified documents, but it's there.

I personally think that the log book is a great idea. It's worked in aviation for god knows how long. Perhaps the sign-off process needs to be optimised somewhat, though.

they say apparently harsh penalties apply such as imprisonment or hefty fines for falsifying the log entries, i find this somewhat had to believe 

[costargh]

It's a legal document, and the person signing it bears responsibility for ensuring it's truth.

It's a weak deterrent against falsified documents, but it's there.

I personally think that the log book is a great idea. It's worked in aviation for god knows how long. Perhaps the sign-off process needs to be optimised somewhat, though.

But... there's really no way of policing it. Which is what I'm saying. Telling people something is a legal document yet we have no way of knowing whether you are telling the truth or not (not that they actually say that) sounds absurd.

[bubble sunglasses]

 I think Excal is saying the log-book has the benefit of making *some* people abide by the rules and thus enter the road as safer drivers, even if it's possible to disobey.
  Like the viewpoint that the UN helps prevent conflict by its existence, though obviously not all conflict.

[humph]

I've had my Ls since, oh, November 2005. And I've clocked up exactly zero hours in my logbook

[beezy4eva]

Being a learner at 18 would be shit. The government can't seriously expect a legal adult to rely on their parents or whatever, especially if they have a job or other commitments.

CRAZY WAY TO GET AROUND THE PASSENGER RESTRICTION: If you have a relative that is recently deceased and you have their ashes in an urn, you can drive with their ashes and as many passengers as you like if their licence hasn't expired. The law is that if u have a fully licenced, non-intoxicated relative in the car with you you can have as many passengers as you want. It does not state that they have to be alive.

[Eriny]

120 hours isn't as hard as what you think over two years. I did 122 hours quite easily (I kept a log, even though I didn't have to). You only have to average a bit over an hour a week (not so difficult if you're driving to the shops, to school, to other peoples houses, and to holiday destinations).

I like the idea of driving with ashes. But what if my dead relative wasn't cremated? The corpse might stink up the car.

[bubble sunglasses]

 ^ Isn't being alive part of being "fully licenced"

    I'd love to be there when that excuse is attempted


 
  you could have any old jar of ashes and claim they were your great-aunt or something

[Hielly]

For driving lessons it cost 40+ an hour :S:S

[costargh]

CRAZY WAY TO GET AROUND THE PASSENGER RESTRICTION: If you have a relative that is recently deceased and you have their ashes in an urn, you can drive with their ashes and as many passengers as you like if their licence hasn't expired. The law is that if u have a fully licenced, non-intoxicated relative in the car with you you can have as many passengers as you want. It does not state that they have to be alive.

lol... im not too sure how well that would hold up in court. The courts would just interpret the act as assuming that you have to be alive to be in the car.

(sorry if I missed the sarcasm or whatnot lol)

[beezy4eva]

^ Isn't being alive part of being "fully licenced"

Nope, a licence can still be valid even after a person dies. Hence that person is still 'fully licenced'

ANOTHER HANDY LOOPHOLE: if you get a fine + demerit points, overpay the fine by $1 or so. Vicroads or whoever handles those things will send you back a cheque refunding the amount you overpayed. They can't give you the demerit points until you've cashed the cheque as demerit points aren't processed till a fine is 'fully paid'.  

[hard]

^ Isn't being alive part of being "fully licenced"

Nope, a licence can still be valid even after a person dies. Hence that person is still 'fully licenced'

ANOTHER HANDY LOOPHOLE: if you get a fine + demerit points, overpay the fine by $1 or so. Vicroads or whoever handles those things will send you back a cheque refunding the amount you overpayed. They can't give you the demerit points until you've cashed the cheque as demerit points aren't processed till a fine is 'fully paid'.  

but then you have to prove the remains are of a human aged over 18 and is the owner of the license. Plus who would hold his license?