-
there is no thought that if someone has shown that they are an inconsiderate driver that they should no longer be allowed to drive.
We allow people who have committed other crimes such as murder, drug traffiking and embezzlement to have their liberty restored to them after a certain amount of time. Why should we treat drivers differently? In essence, why do you think that bad drivers are incapable of rehabilitation into good drivers? Or maybe it goes in the other direction, rehabilitation simply isn't possible and people who go to jail should never leave there.
The_Seldom_Killer-
Also pathetic punishments for those caught without a license/insurance, driving whilst banned. No automatic re-testing after 5 years. No automatic re-testing after bans/points/murder/manslaughter.
When ever I find myself having words with drivers, my default question is: "If you did that during your test would you be passed?"
MultiGrooves
I think that although it is a privilege it is often treated as a right. Look at the bans that drivers get after convictions, they're normally a year or two, there is no thought that if someone has shown that they are an inconsiderate driver that they should no longer be allowed to drive.
As for whether driving is necessary or not, as others have said London is significantly different from most places. I've not owned a car in London and I don't see the need. However, where I'm from public transport would be once an hour or so after 6pm and stopping at 9pm (it has improved somewhat) and other nearby places would have about 3 buses a day. Add in the fact it's considerably hillier and wetter than London and, although you may get the odd cyclist, most people are going to drive.