http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … 001S33.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?
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?