I am under the personal opinion that there should be no private driving at all, and only public transport. It would do wonders for global warming and there would be many less accidents.IRONCHEF wrote:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2006/11/20/state/n111001S33.DTL
In this article, we see the sentencing that was given to a 89 year old man who killed 10 and injured 70 as he plowed through a farmer's market in Southern California. The judge was to give him a 18 year sentence but because he was so old and too much of a liability for the prison system, he will walk...albeit with a walker.
My point of discussion is not this man's case but rather the issuance of licenses to drivers in general. To be issued a license, there is a written test and a drivers test (in California and probably most states in the US) where you must perform a handful of vehicular movements and observations as you drive...then that's it for life. From my understanding, one can get their licnese at 16, and drive until they die doing remedial written tests every few years to renew your license. But does that really qualify you to drive safely? Is experience in driving always good experience making the roads safe? Is it enough to memorize braking distances, curb colors, and blood alcohol content? I say NAY!
I'm of the opinion that EVERY motorist should undergo vigorous driving training at least every decade, and after 60, every 5 years. Having been a FEDEX courier and marvelling at their driver training course, I'd drastically change the way our DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles) tests by implementing the FEDEX computer based course followed by FEDEX style road tests.
Can you imagine traffic being easier to navigate in? Can you imagine courteous, defensive drivers? Can you imagine farmer's markets not being plowed by crazy old drivers who should not be on the roads?
How would you rate the driving in your country/region/state and what would you do to improve it?
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Your thoughts on DRIVERS licensing and the elderly
Exactly why there should be routine testing for the elderly. So the 9 that are crap drivers get off the roads and the 1 who isn't crap doesn't get penalised for it.Bernadictus wrote:
But on the subject of 9 out of 10 elderly driving like morons.
Damn straight. Except biannually means twice a year. Biennially is the word you were looking for I think.Stingray24 wrote:
I want driving tests biannually after 60 years of age. Period. Having been nearly run off the road in my town more times than I can count by older folks
I agree 100%, especially that it should be increased to annual testing for those over 70. Not just a lax test, a proper driving test.
Well, yes. But isn't this true of everyone?Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Yes, but that is something totally different. It's not so much that the driving test is too easy, so much as it is that those in that age range still tend to make bad decisions. They still have that invincible mentality, and think it's cool. However, these people can have their licenses taken.
With the older drivers it's not about their making immature decisions as it is that their health has declined to the point where they simply lack the reflexes, motor skills, and often eye sight, to properly drive a vehicle. These are physical limitations, which simply can't be overcome in most cases, as it is due to age deterioration. Becuase this is an inevitable fact, and the fact that their health can degrade quickly, they should be tested more often to ensure that they can safely operate a vehicle.
Is one hour of your life per year worth significantly reducing the number of accidents on the road? Seat belts are mandatory in most states...lets do this too.
Also, what I really want is a cell phone interrupter on key roads. I saw something on TV (Mythbusters???) where no one could pass a drivers test while talking on a cell.
Yep, but jamming communications will get you some serious FCC fines and jail time if you're caught. I've shopped around for portable ones and would love on in my car to make sure nobody within a few hundred meters from me could talk on the phone..and you've never get caught unless you crashed and it was seen, or pulled over and spotted.
Some restaurants and movie theaters have them, but you'd never know..blaming the walls or microwave interference...etc.
Some restaurants and movie theaters have them, but you'd never know..blaming the walls or microwave interference...etc.
My bad, biennially. Posted in a hurry and didn't double check everything.Bertster7 wrote:
Exactly why there should be routine testing for the elderly. So the 9 that are crap drivers get off the roads and the 1 who isn't crap doesn't get penalised for it.Bernadictus wrote:
But on the subject of 9 out of 10 elderly driving like morons.Damn straight. Except biannually means twice a year. Biennially is the word you were looking for I think.Stingray24 wrote:
I want driving tests biannually after 60 years of age. Period. Having been nearly run off the road in my town more times than I can count by older folks
I agree 100%, especially that it should be increased to annual testing for those over 70. Not just a lax test, a proper driving test.
I don't think you've thought that through. Do you know what kind of resources it would take to be able to process every single driver through testing on a yearly basis? The amount of increased resources needed for the DMV would be astronomical. You also have to realize that the general health of the average person is pretty good, in terms of reflexes and motor skills, to be able to operate a vehicle through most of their adult and working lives. Most health issues start at about age 60, and progress more quickly, which is why I said testing every 2 years from 60-70, and then yearly after that.Pug wrote:
Well, yes. But isn't this true of everyone?Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Yes, but that is something totally different. It's not so much that the driving test is too easy, so much as it is that those in that age range still tend to make bad decisions. They still have that invincible mentality, and think it's cool. However, these people can have their licenses taken.
With the older drivers it's not about their making immature decisions as it is that their health has declined to the point where they simply lack the reflexes, motor skills, and often eye sight, to properly drive a vehicle. These are physical limitations, which simply can't be overcome in most cases, as it is due to age deterioration. Becuase this is an inevitable fact, and the fact that their health can degrade quickly, they should be tested more often to ensure that they can safely operate a vehicle.
Is one hour of your life per year worth significantly reducing the number of accidents on the road? Seat belts are mandatory in most states...lets do this too.
Also, what I really want is a cell phone interrupter on key roads. I saw something on TV (Mythbusters???) where no one could pass a drivers test while talking on a cell.
As for cell phone use, I agree. It has been repeatedly shown that people trying to talk on cell phones and drive have the same potential of creating an accident as some one who is impaired from drugs/alcohol.
I thought it through, and as long as it results in tons of money, they're up for it I'm sure!Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
I don't think you've thought that through. Do you know what kind of resources it would take to be able to process every single driver through testing on a yearly basis? The amount of increased resources needed for the DMV would be astronomical.
"Arnold, we got the bond measure passed to allow us to staff road test trainers and a few extra servers to control the testing data. Should we procede?" "YAH! Proceed! It's the best thing to do for kullifohnias drivers, yah!"
ok, bad impression.
I've actually said a road test every 10 years and every 5 years after 60. I'm aware that accelerated senility occurs as you leave the 70's...but many drivers are already abandoning cars by the 70's.
It requires hiring drive test staff in each office, making a calendar, and adding some data fields in the software. But the money..that can be a good source of state money if they charged $100 per road test..maybe less for seniors as a discount.
It'd be nice if insurance companies offered reduced rates based on voluntary road test agencies so maybe something in the private sector would help too.
Yeah, I know it's expensive. I think I'd pay for it though.
Did you know 12 people die in car accidents every minute in the US?
If you saved 1/2 of them...or 3 million or so...we could make them work in the DMV. And you don't have to pay people if they're dead.
Just kidding - the 12/minute is a true stat BTW
I know that I'd like to kill a minimum of 12 people per commute...
Did you know 12 people die in car accidents every minute in the US?
If you saved 1/2 of them...or 3 million or so...we could make them work in the DMV. And you don't have to pay people if they're dead.
Just kidding - the 12/minute is a true stat BTW
I know that I'd like to kill a minimum of 12 people per commute...
where i'm from it should be simple, as soon as they start wearing flat caps take the fucking keys away from them for ever..
I've always said once people hit 60 they should get tests every 4-5 years. If they pass, they can still drive. If they don't...revoked license for 2 months and if they pass again next time they get to drive. If they fail THAT time, the cycle continues.
i think southpark summed it up
Last edited by INFERNO552 (2006-11-21 16:46:39)
I always amuses me that older persons (note the generic term) are technophobic about using computers, ATMs, iPod type devices, mobile phones.
But put them in front of a poker machine at a casino - and suddenly they get the technical skills of a fighter pilot and can work the splits, multi-line options, double ups, whatever.
WTF does it take that much more brainpower to work out the play/stop buttons on an iPod?
But put them in front of a poker machine at a casino - and suddenly they get the technical skills of a fighter pilot and can work the splits, multi-line options, double ups, whatever.
WTF does it take that much more brainpower to work out the play/stop buttons on an iPod?
There was a great example of this a few years ago near where I live.
Some old dear who hadn't driven for something like 10 years decides to go for a drive in her husbands car. She eventually hits a roundabout, gets confused and ends up driving up the wrong way down a dual carrigeway. At this point she apparently decided to make the most of a bad situation and so she stuck to the UK driving rules. Drive at the speed limit on the left hand lane. Somehow she avoided killing anyone while doing 70 the wrong way down the overtaking lane, gets to the roundabout at the end, goes round it the wrong way and comes back down the wrong lane again.
Should old people be re-tested every couple of years or so? Sounds like a good idea to me.
Some old dear who hadn't driven for something like 10 years decides to go for a drive in her husbands car. She eventually hits a roundabout, gets confused and ends up driving up the wrong way down a dual carrigeway. At this point she apparently decided to make the most of a bad situation and so she stuck to the UK driving rules. Drive at the speed limit on the left hand lane. Somehow she avoided killing anyone while doing 70 the wrong way down the overtaking lane, gets to the roundabout at the end, goes round it the wrong way and comes back down the wrong lane again.
Should old people be re-tested every couple of years or so? Sounds like a good idea to me.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Your thoughts on DRIVERS licensing and the elderly