Fog light rant!

[Niall]

You're taking it out of proportion/perspective I think.  I have owned and do own a car with next to no driver aids...it does take away some concentration to operate certain controls, whether that's eyes off the road or hands off the wheel, I don't know how you can deny that?  I'm not saying I couldn't drive without them there, obviously I can and do, but if there's a safer option available, why would you actively avoid that?

Because is it safer? If cars get to a point where you just have to point them in the right direction, people will not pay attention. They will think its ok to sit there on their phone whilst doing 60 because they dont need to make sure they are staying below the speed limit. Their variable cruise will do that. They dont need to brake because their emergency breaking will do that. They dont need to stay in between the lines because their active lane guidance will do that for them yet with all of these, you are relying on a computer that has a tiny amount of thinking power compared to a human that when concentrating, should be constantly carrying out a risk assessment of whats ahead of them and changing their driving style to suit this. A computer just cant do that as effectively.

 Really annoys me when people do things like removing ABS, yeah 9 times out of 10 maybe they don't lock up on a wet corner coming across a hazard...but personally I'd like to have that safety net, for everyone else as much as myself, for the 10th time when you're not at full concentration for whatever reason, and I guarantee no-one is at full concentration/ability for 100% of the time.  You also don't know how you'll react in a crisis situation until you're in one.

For once i agree with you there. There is only two situations i can think of where by having no ABS on the road would be better. Track use, yes get rid but thats a whole different kettle of fish.
Although everyone should be at 100% concentration all the time, they arent. No one is otherwise we wouldn't have car crashes.

How do you plan to implement this removing licences due to lack of skill?

The police do that. They see bad driving, they give the driver points for their troubles or if severe enough, send them to court to have their licence revoked

 It amazes me how some of my Nans friends drive to hers, theres one old lady in particular, she cant walk more than a few steps, can barely see, can barely hear....yet she's still allowed to drive her 1 tonne killing machine (albeit at 15mph everywhere with lots of clutch slip and just 'parking' where she likes) in a public area and past the village school every day...  Now compared to that I'm a long way off lol.

Thats why elderly drivers should be re assessed but thats a whole different argument. I bet though if you had the figures in front of you, there is a lot more younger drivers who dont pay attention as much as they should or dont have the required skill levels than there is poor elderly drivers.

 Not only that, but you've got terminally ill people still driving...my Grandad died walking through the front door...after a 20 minute drive from the supermarket!!  About a month ago another of my Nans friends was in a car crash...her husband was driving and died at the wheel!  Its all very well talking about basic skill, but anything can happen to anyone at any time to cause accidents.  The licence really only proves you're at a basic level for one day.  This is what I mean by diversity, if you remove every possible hazard from the road, there would be no-one left.

Now you really have missed the point
Every single action in life is a risk. Our entire lives are spent assessing them risks. Any single one of us could die without any warning behind the wheel but how many do? Sod all. And that is a risk that has been chosen. The world would not progress if risks were not taken.
Now, when you're behind the wheel, you should be assessing every risk all around you. Every situation that may turn into a hazard. Like i said earlier, a computer just can not do that as well as you but the risk isn't just outside the car. Because you are a more accurate method of staying inside a lane than an active lane guidance system, you should be concentrating on staying inside that lane rather than relying on this computer to do it for you which has more of a chance of error and therefore a higher risk.
Same again with auto lights. The computer isn't intelligent enough to see if foggy and therefore you should have your headlights on. To the computer, it over a certain lux level outside and therefore the criteria isn't met to turn the lights on. Again, raised risk level.
Active breaking assist. On paper, its a fantastic idea but in reality, not so much. You are relying on a radar to detect the vehicle in front. Again, this amazing computer of yours isn't as clever as a human. It wont always detect the car in front and by the time you have realised it hasn't picked it up, chances are its to late. If the driver was paying attention and seen the car in front suddenly brake rather than not paying attention and relying on this magical system, a crash could be avoided. Again, raised risk level.
I could go on for ages but i'm sure you see the point i'm trying to make. Give drivers these aids that are cleverly marketed as being amazing and perfect and they are brought into a false sense of security that the car will take over the risk assessing. To put it in an extreme yet potential way, you are putting your life in the hands of a computer which is no where near as intelligent as you. The only driver aid i would agree with 110% would be abs because its physically impossible for a human to modulate a brake pedal that quickly. I wouldn't really call it a driver aid though as it doesn't make a drivers life easier. You still do all the work and risk assessing, its just an improvement on an already essential but basic system which you control