For a second I mixed up Philip and Charles and was like no fucking way
Why the fuck are 97 year olds allowed to drive period.
I know in the US the AARP tries to stop any legislation on laws for old drivers, citing "ageism"
You should just be required to retest every time your license expires.
this man is immortal
Did you know drivers that pass their test in their first 6 months are more likely to crash than elderly drivers who hang up their keys within six months? I'm all for testing again when you get to a certain age, but we shouldn't have an age limit.
why is this getting 100% agree.
who cause a majority of road traffic accidents? it's absolutely not over 70s.
I have met many individuals over the age of 80 who are more than capable of taking care of themselves and competent to drive.
reassess your thoughts and go into the real world before making sweeping opinions on elderly people.
Old people have much less situational awareness, most of the time they also drive much slower allowing other people to adjust to their driving.
I'm on a road a lot, yes young drivers are a big risk as well. But so are old people, and we should try to lower the risk in both.
Do you think setting an arbitrary age limit on driving is any kind of solution?
After a certain age medical testing should be done yearly (as is the case in many countries), and later on it should also be required to take a road test with every renewal (yearly or at least bi-yearly).
But if someone passes those requirements, they are cleary fit to drive, period. It doesn't even matter if they are 102 year old.
Personal note: my grandfather has been driving just fine semi-regularly until he was 86, and even then he was perfectly fine mentally and physically, just figured it was no longer warranted to keep the car around.
Which causes more death on roads?
you can try to make a big deal about "situational awareness" but this is about competent driving.
old people driving at the speed limit may be inconvenient for you, but it's the reason why they're still alive.
I'm in no way ignoring the fact that young drivers present a big risk. This is about elderly people. However you have to keep in mind the there are a lot more young people driving way more often then there are elderly people.
And, situational awareness is a BIG part of competent driving. I'm not for taking away freedom from elderly people, however I'm all for taking people off the road who aren't fit to drive.
you still argue in favour of it with false information though..
even on an individual basis, elderly people do not get into road traffic accidents, it is rare. I have spoken to many old people about car insurance and an overwhelming majority pay less than £200 a year.
The reason being?? because they are much less likely to be a danger to the public.
We need to look at the whole picture here because clearly people are upset that an old man is driving his car.
No people are upset that an old man crashed his car and was "Dazzled by the sun".
Most people aren't saying its because he's just too old and his age number is too high. It's because as you get older things get worse, that is an undeniable fact. Vision, hearing, reaction time, most of the crucial skills for driving safely.
Eldery people need to be retested periodically to make sure they are still safe to drive. There is a huge problem where I live with elderly people refusing to stop driving and most accidents around here in my suburb are from eldery people losing control/accidentally hitting accelerator than brake or falling asleep at the wheel. Maybe it's because most people are 50+ in my suburb and it skews the statistic, but damn is it fucking scaring driving here sometimes. I CONSTANTLY see people entering roundabouts the WRONG WAY, and turning off into INCOMING traffic.
Ok I'm not sure which area you're from but I've never seen that. Maybe in Australia things are different but I have heard far more instances of young dudes hitting the throttle rather than braking in emergency scenarios.
That being said... I don't think it's viable to make it mandatory to "periodically" test elderly people only. That simply makes no sense when they do not statistically cause harm to the public.
At this point in time, I think a mandatory eye test would be as far as I'd go. But the individual should still decide if they are okay to drive.
Your idea is to challenge people's own judgement and my counter is that why not do this for all age groups? It just isn't viable.
And on top of this, if you want to make it mandatory for all over 60s to have a driving test every 5 years or some shit, then how pissed off do you think you'd be if you have never been involved in accidents.
My grandpa is 83 and drives pretty much daily, at least around town to the shops etc. He is in amazing health, all things considered, but he doesn't want to do long trips anymore.
My neighbour is over 80 and once, he had some memory issue, sat into his car and just drove around town with no recollection later that he even did it. I'd say that he shouldn't drive anymore and I am not sure if he does. But having old neighbours makes for some interesting sights, something like an 84 year old giving a chainsaw to a 87 year old guy sitting on a tree, cutting off branches.
Not a driving test, a medical test to renew their license.
Estonia is in an interesting situation with that, we have small cars considered mopeds, and everyone who was born before something like 1. january 1993, is allowed to drive in either a scooter with <50cc engines or small cars with less than 4kw, top speed 50km/h. Old fucks drive these loud diesel polluting deathtraps, because that's legal and you don't have to own a license, probably not even a medical check.
that's way too vague...
but even looking at the statistics now. in Britain there are far more elderly drivers than young and yet the rate of accidents are 4/5 times more likely in the lower age group.
So you ignore the fact that your sensory abilities get worse overtime and your argument is "why not do it for all age groups"
what? Why else would people be talking about it lmfao. Don't play dumb.
I also never stated an age, but I believe there should be studies done to find the average age where driving crucial abilities start declining rapidly, and then create a 3 - 5 year periodic retest be mandatory.
Yep, it sucks. But killing someone because you refuse to put the keys down also sucks.
Don't call me dumb when your idea is shit. How viable do you think it is for 5 million people to all have a full medical work up for no reason.
And if then a bunch of people who are indeed competent don't get signed off by a doctor then how pissed off would you be. You're just out of touch with reality with this idea, the NHS is already hard pressed as it is.
Yes, old people may not be as responsive as young folk but when you aren't driving dangerously, how responsive do you need to be? They don't drive like they're in Gran Turismo.
Being breathalysed is standard after a road accident and the counsel was discussing reducing the speed limit on that very same road the day before.
And the main issue I have with OAP drivers is how different things were from when they passed vs now and especially with an ever aging population. On top of that how lax things are when it comes to reporting things to the dvla, people can be very stubborn and think nothing of conditions that can be very serious and its the person's own duty to report that.
That would explode transportation departments across the country. Most driving instructors are arbitrary as hell about how they handle testing criteria, too.
This isn't entirely accurate.
Elderly have a pretty high mile per accident ratio, they just don't really just much and do so far less as they get older hence why insurance is cheaper.
Theirs plenty of research that proves age impairs your ability to operate a vehicle, the FAA requires more strict competency checks when you get older for a reason to keep flying.
mm perhaps i went too fast with my initial thoughts.. i was more for encouraging elderly to have their independence regardless.
having read a few articles now there are some interesting discussions:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3920283/#!po=45.8333
talks about varying factors about getting old hampering the ability to drive competently.
At this point I think if there was a change, a mandatory eye sight and cognition test would be the only realistic tests that can be carried out on such a large scale.
Why don’t they just make older people retake their driving test when they retire and get their pension?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46935721
Would you not agree that having everyone take the test again when they retire is a better solution?
This would allow older people to be rereminded of the road rules.
I dont want to overgeneralise, but I’ve been in plenty of situations where I’ve been stuck behind an older driver doing 40 in a 70 zone.
I even once once saw a car with an older guy driving on the highway going 40 when the speed limit is 110.
I think if if they were rereminded of the rules, this wouldn’t be an issue.
the issue is that how do we go about this?
you can't really expect 5 million people to immediately book a driving test. There just isn't enough test centres capable of doing this.
that being said, I do recognise this issue and maybe after road traffic collisions they should be doing a retest.
in the immediate future I think mandatory eye test is absolutely vital, I know people who tell me they can't even see the signs when they drive..
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
