http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6321186Oh my.
The mountain man primitive who, like all men, nightly pitches his tent one day's march nearer the mausoleum:
ThomWV (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 04:52 PM
Original message
What do you think about retesting of drivers once ever several years after a certain age?
What do you think about the retesting of drivers after a certain age, let me suggest 65? I think it would be a very good idea and I'll tell you what prompts me to tell you so. I watched an old fart (appeared to be in his 70's or 80's) run over a guy on a bicycle earlier today. The old guy was oblivious to the bike, just ran up behind it and ran over it. Never slowed down, never trued to avoid the bike, didn't hit the brakes until after he hit the bike. He stopped of course and the biker wasn't hurt awfully bad, broken leg, maybe his arm too, not much left of the bike - the guy should consider himself lucky he didn't find himself looking up at shock-absorbers.
I'm not trying to knock old farts, I'm in my 60's and I have to admit, my powers are fading fast. Still, I think the states should have mandatory retesting at least once ever 5 years after the age of 65 and maybe even require some sort of medical certification, similar to that we require of private pilots.
What do you think?
quiller4 (899 posts) Sun Aug-16-09 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. Mandatory vision exam with renewals beginning at 50. Mandatory twice test with renewal at 60. I'm in my late 50s.
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. Dreadfully needed but will never happen
Florida is a good example of a crying need blocked by those who put themselves first in all matters.
cloudbase (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. I don't have a problem with that.
I've got to take a flight review every two years to keep my flying privileges, though in this case I would add an either/or: driving test or completion of an approved driver education course within the previous six months or so.
rucky (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. I think a higher priority would be to invest in better public transportation.
Putting some on the road is dangerous, and they know it - but they have no other choice. I'd hate to see an elderly person unable to leave their home because of a restriction, without offering them alternatives.
Instead of being punitive, why don't we try to be proactive first, and offer them some affordable alternatives to driving.
hlthe2b (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. Older and younger (less than 25) both have more accidents...
You can't single out the older drivers without also doing something on the younger ones.
Journeyman (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. I think all drivers should be periodically tested for fitness to drive. . .
And not just elderly drivers, either. I've seen plenty of young drivers who lack the necessary motor skills to drive safely, and even more whose judgment and common sense are inadequate to the task.
With all the recent advances in video games, flight simulators, and the like, why can't a driving assessment test be devised that uses computer-generated scenarios to test everyone's knowledge of the road along with their judgment abilities and reaction times?
It wouldn't have to very elaborate or costly at all -- just a simple simulator that will give an indication of someone's physical and mental capacity to operate a motor vehicle. These could be set up either at the department of motor vehicles, or in commercial establishments. The costs for the driver would be minimal -- how much does it cost to play computer games at an electronics arcade? The simulator could both test for knowledge of the rules of the road, as well as physical ability to drive. If someone didn't pass, or problems were detected, a driving test with a human observer would then be required.
Seems to me, everyone could then get a periodic refresher course on the rules and conditions of the road, the physically incapable (of all ages) could be more readily identified, and all at a reasonably low cost. If the simulators were good enough, they could be used as well to teach new drivers before they were taken on the road.
cherokeeprogressive (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. Test everyone every five years.
Motown_Johnny (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. agreed, if you do well on the test it should be every 5 years. If you don't do so well it should be more often
or if you get a lot of tickets... etc
tosh (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. Definitely for it!
It would take a lot of pressure off of us "kids" as our parents age.
tritsofme (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
9. We do this in Illinois. Licenses renewed every 2 years for drivers ages 81-86.
Every year for drivers 87 and older.
Road tests at every renewal after age 75, which is already every four years in IL.
I think its pretty reasonable.
The sparkling husband primitive:
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
11. I think all drivers should be retested regularly, age notwithstanding.
There are many reasons why even those "younger" drivers could fail a test.
I am also a proponent of mandatory drug testing at the time of renewal.
The sparkling husband primitive's wife wouldn't be for that, though; they might find out what she's putting into the sparkling husband primitive's food and drinks.
KittyWampus (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. interesting topic. By testing everyone regularly you eliminate claims of 'bias'.
Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. That's a side benefit ... but yeah .... there is that, too.
I think we're way too cavalier about driving a car.
And that includes me and some the REALLY dumb-ass shit I have done while driving.
billh58 (140 posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
14. From one old fart to another, good idea but maybe a slippery slope to legislate based solely on age? I realize that we already legislate some things based on minimum ages, and some professions' retirement rules are based on maximum ages; but, why not have everyone tested periodically?
I'm both a licensed commercial pilot, and a licensed driver, and I am already medically tested every year to comply with FAA regs. Having said that, I don't like to drive, or fly VFR, at night due to my reduced uncorrected vision, and a basic desire to get older...
demosincebirth (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
15. California has manditory testing after age 80, and with only a two years lic.
The Rita Hayworth primitive's runner-up, in the age department:
Bobbieo (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I gave up my license this year. I had not been driving for several months because of poor health. I am 86 years of age and have never had an accident or have been given a traffic ticket. It was time to quit while I was ahead.
PhiBetaCretin1 (73 posts) Sun Aug-16-09 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
18. Public education would be better than testing
Testing would be too expensive and less useful overall than a really good public education campaign. WHY do motor vehicle departments and police/public safety departments NOT put money into "getting the word out" and reinforcing information that we already knew - at one time - like when we crammed to take the test at an early age? I mean, everyone could use a refresher course given to us from time to time.
One thing that drives me crazy in NJ where I live is the law that says if your windshield wipers are on, your lights should be on. Hardly ANYONE seems to know this is a law. And why not? (I mean, it IS common sense, but as we all know... that's not enough for some people.) Why? Because it's neither promoted nor enforced. I learned of it by noticing the fine print on a vehicle registration insert. How can you expect drivers to know that's a law if you don't promote it? Things like that are just ridiculous.
How about some real "Better Driving" campaigns? Educate drivers, remind them, highlight safety tips. It's like a lawless frontier out there sometimes. Police hardly ever stop speeders on our highways so drivers show little respect for many rules of the road. How many times lately have you seen someone roll through a "right on red" when they're supposed to come to a full stop before proceeding? (A full stop?! Are you kidding??)
It's always bugged me that, once you pass your driver's test, that's it -- good for the rest of your life. Bad habits develop; people need reminders. Why wait for an accident or a traffic ticket to correct bad behaviors? Public service announcements / education campaigns could be implemented with little cost compared to mandatory testing.
Capn Sunshine (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
19. forget "after a certain age"
ALL drivers need to be retested every few years. From what I see every day on the SoCal Freeways, a lot of under 30's think they drive way better than everyone else, and that we are all just objects in their video screens.
BlooInBloo (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-16-09 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
20. I'm fine with once per year, past some age. Old folks sometimes pretend it's the same issue...with shitty young drivers, but it patently isn't.
With old folks, my concern is their *ability* to drive decently. With young folks my concern is about their *willingness* to drive decently. No test in the world can test willingness, unfortunately.
The issues are in no wise the same.
Viper Mad (38 posts) Sun Aug-16-09 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
21. I'm in favor of it. And I'm 67. Not sure about the physicals though, I take FAA physicals every year and I'm a safe driver - never had an accident in 50+ years of driving except for 2 where someone ran into me...but that seems a little much for car driving. Retesting the driving itself would be a lot more useful than medical checkups, IMO
