Old people should be retested every year if they want to drive

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: virtueixi

Originally posted by: Amused
I'll agree to that when the posters on this board agree that teen drivers are even more dangerous than the elderly.

HA! Haven't heard of young drivers plowing into people because they hit gas instead of brakes and stupid sh!t like that.

No, but they go street racing and take out innocent drivers. They plow into cars, lightposts, homes, you name it.

Let's face it, teens killing others on the road is so common, it rarely makes national news. But the elderly plowing into crowds is rare enough that when it happens, it makes national headlines.

The fact is, teens are responsible for more auto deaths than the elderly.

A notable point of differentiation is that teen drivers kill random people, while the elderly do not. They are usually involved in incidents in close quarters such as in parking lots and in school zones.

For the most part, when a major teen-related accident occurs, the occupants of two vehicles are killed.
When a major elderly-related incident occurs however, it usually involves half a dozen women and children.

What about the elderly guy that plowed through an open mall in Cali? I don't think it's fair to say they aren't dangerous, and comparing them to teens is a moot issue.

The issue is, "Are elderly drivers dangerous?" Teen driving safety is a seperate issue, comparing the two is a straw-man tactic.

I agree. I just wanted to show that either way people die. The specifics of my point were that in certain areas, elderly drivers are an immediate problem. This by no means is meant to discoutn the threat of teen drivers. In school zones and such, it is more of an elderly problem than a teen one with exceptions of course. Teens are a problem everywhere.


Test everyone.

 

[puffff]

The problem with retesting is that the driving test is ridiculously easy. The test is in a closed course, no other traffic, no 'unexpected' situations, no reflexes needed. You hardly ever go faster than 25-30 mph. Most of these accident prone old drivers will still manage to get their licenses.

I don't think retesting is going to solve this problem.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: virtueixi

Originally posted by: Amused
I'll agree to that when the posters on this board agree that teen drivers are even more dangerous than the elderly.

HA! Haven't heard of young drivers plowing into people because they hit gas instead of brakes and stupid sh!t like that.

No, but they go street racing and take out innocent drivers. They plow into cars, lightposts, homes, you name it.

Let's face it, teens killing others on the road is so common, it rarely makes national news. But the elderly plowing into crowds is rare enough that when it happens, it makes national headlines.

The fact is, teens are responsible for more auto deaths than the elderly.

A notable point of differentiation is that teen drivers kill random people, while the elderly do not. They are usually involved in incidents in close quarters such as in parking lots and in school zones.

For the most part, when a major teen-related accident occurs, the occupants of two vehicles are killed.
When a major elderly-related incident occurs however, it usually involves half a dozen women and children.

What about the elderly guy that plowed through an open mall in Cali? I don't think it's fair to say they aren't dangerous, and comparing them to teens is a moot issue.

The issue is, "Are elderly drivers dangerous?" Teen driving safety is a seperate issue, comparing the two is a straw-man tactic.

I raised the issue of Teen drivers, and for a good point. This forum loves to bash elderly drivers but refuses to admit the danger that teen drivers present.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

I don't think that we don't agree that teen drivers are dangerous, but more that it's unavoidable to have inexperienced drivers unless you state that noone new can ever get a license.

 

[Tremulant]

Originally posted by: virtueixi

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: synchronizer
Please define "old people".

"You" or older.

Oh, and to everyone throwing the irresponsible teen card out there - 21 and a crystal-clear record. Suck it.

- M4H

19 and the same! No accidents.
Knock on wood.

Also 19 and no accidents. I did get a speeding ticket once though.

My grandfather is 71, has lived through 2 heart attacks and needs to be on oxygen because he has a heart problem. He drives, but he only knows how to go to a few places: my house, the hospital (walking distance from his apt), church (also walking distance), his son's house, and the supermarket. So he doesn't drive much. A lot of things we take care of for him, because of his age and because he doesn't speak english.

 

[Tremulant]

Oh, and both teen and elderly drivers are dangerous. They're just dangerous for different reasons. Teens are inexpierenced and don't know what they're doing, whereas elderly people know exactly what they're doing, they just sometimes forget.

 

[GtPrOjEcTX]

I agree.

 

[purbeast0]

wtf ... you guys are way off track. this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH TEEN DRIVERS!! The whole issue here is about ELDERLY PEOPLE DRIVING. yes, its obvious that teen drivers are not that good ... they obviously have no experience, and they think they are all cool driving and worry about alot of other things before road safety, and this is just a generalization. i know from experience in myself and friends, as I'm only 22 now. I know now I drive alot better than I did when I was 16, and I also know that my other friend who's 21 has no clue how to drive.

but ANYWAYS this whole thread has to do with elder people not being physically functionable to drive, it has nothing to do with the teen drivers. so wtf did people start bringing that up for? yes old people should be tested again once they hit a certain age, and NO its never going to happen! but in the whole idea of this thread, it is alot easier to get an older person off the road than it is a younger person off the road, because younger people are going to HAVE to eventually drive. people who are just getting older don't have to. where i used to work i saw PLENTY of elder people with younger people who would be with them, shopping for their groceries with them and driving their cars.

EOT

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS

Originally posted by: Amused
I'll agree to that when the posters on this board agree that teen drivers are even more dangerous than the elderly.

Like that'll ever happen. A bunch of teenagers admitting they can't drive for sh!t?

Viper GTS

You're right, they do drive like sh!t. The difference is that every year, a teenage driver gets better at driving, and an elderly drivers gets worse.

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
wtf ... you guys are way off track. this has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH TEEN DRIVERS!! The whole issue here is about ELDERLY PEOPLE DRIVING. yes, its obvious that teen drivers are not that good ... they obviously have no experience, and they think they are all cool driving and worry about alot of other things before road safety, and this is just a generalization. i know from experience in myself and friends, as I'm only 22 now. I know now I drive alot better than I did when I was 16, and I also know that my other friend who's 21 has no clue how to drive.

but ANYWAYS this whole thread has to do with elder people not being physically functionable to drive, it has nothing to do with the teen drivers. so wtf did people start bringing that up for? yes old people should be tested again once they hit a certain age, and NO its never going to happen! but in the whole idea of this thread, it is alot easier to get an older person off the road than it is a younger person off the road, because younger people are going to HAVE to eventually drive. people who are just getting older don't have to. where i used to work i saw PLENTY of elder people with younger people who would be with them, shopping for their groceries with them and driving their cars.

EOT

:thumbsup:

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: puffff
The problem with retesting is that the driving test is ridiculously easy. The test is in a closed course, no other traffic, no 'unexpected' situations, no reflexes needed. You hardly ever go faster than 25-30 mph. Most of these accident prone old drivers will still manage to get their licenses.

I don't think retesting is going to solve this problem.

The driving test in Penn is on a closed course? It's on city streets on California.

 

[Gulzakar]

There was an old man in here the other day (80's ish)...

he had parkinsons, used a walker...took him about 5 minutes to move about 7 feet...I kid you not...

I thought he was standing, but upon further review, he was shuffling to the chair and sayin "I'm comin"...

HE WAS TRYING TO GET A NOTE FROM HIS DOCTOR SAYING HE COULD DRIVE.

 

[George P Burdell]

Originally posted by: Amused
I'll agree to that when the posters on this board agree that teen drivers are even more dangerous than the elderly.

i'll agree that the 40 or so year old business man driving on the freeway and shaving while on the HOV lane can't drive for shit. and the 25-30 year old woman applying makeup at 80mph probably isn't a safe driver.

it's true that many teenage drivers suck, and even though i'm under 21, i wouldn't be against re-testing (say once in two years until the age of 21) because atleast once a week, i see someone driving around campus and say "who gave that fool a license?"

 

[jadinolf]

Originally posted by: alexeikgb
They should have a cutoff age when you can no longer drive (70?)

Wait until you are 70. That won't be your opinion then.

 

[puffff]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: puffff
The problem with retesting is that the driving test is ridiculously easy. The test is in a closed course, no other traffic, no 'unexpected' situations, no reflexes needed. You hardly ever go faster than 25-30 mph. Most of these accident prone old drivers will still manage to get their licenses.

I don't think retesting is going to solve this problem.

The driving test in Penn is on a closed course? It's on city streets on California.

well i got my license in NJ, it was closed course there. and i'm fairly certain it's closed course in PA too. (my motorcycle test was in a closed course here)

 

[jadinolf]

Originally posted by: Amused
I'll agree to that when the posters on this board agree that teen drivers are even more dangerous than the elderly.

Yep. The elderly drive much fewer miles than teens.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Gulzakar
There was an old man in here the other day (80's ish)...

he had parkinsons, used a walker...took him about 5 minutes to move about 7 feet...I kid you not...

I thought he was standing, but upon further review, he was shuffling to the chair and sayin "I'm comin"...

HE WAS TRYING TO GET A NOTE FROM HIS DOCTOR SAYING HE COULD DRIVE.

Parkinsons? Isn't a symptom of that uncontrollable shaking? If so, all other things ignored, should he even be driving at all?

 

[Chunkee]

more like every 6 months

jC

 

[Supermercado]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
Oh, and to everyone throwing the irresponsible teen card out there - 21 and a crystal-clear record. Suck it.

- M4H

Same. Well, I'm 22. Not even a parking ticket on campus on my record

As for the topic, I agree that there should not be a cutoff age where people can no longer drive (one of my grandfathers is nearly 80 and can drive just fine, for example) but there should be testing for people over say, age 60.

Even so, testing can only do so much. For example, all these terrible teen drivers had to drive well enough to pass the test to begin with. They were able to "turn it on" so to speak, for the test. Having people come in and get tested again won't do anything unless like in the case of the elderly, it's an actual physical impairment. I suppose testing older people would catch those sorts of things.

Also, now that I'm older, the driving age should be bumped up to at least 18

 

[jadinolf]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: puffff
The problem with retesting is that the driving test is ridiculously easy. The test is in a closed course, no other traffic, no 'unexpected' situations, no reflexes needed. You hardly ever go faster than 25-30 mph. Most of these accident prone old drivers will still manage to get their licenses.

I don't think retesting is going to solve this problem.

The driving test in Penn is on a closed course? It's on city streets on California.

Yep, anyone who can drive here can drive anywhere. Exception: Rome.

 

[darkamulets]

Originally posted by: Fatdog

Originally posted by: virtueixi

Originally posted by: Amused
I'll agree to that when the posters on this board agree that teen drivers are even more dangerous than the elderly.

HA! Haven't heard of young drivers plowing into people because they hit gas instead of brakes and stupid sh!t like that.

You're right, usually it's more of the drunk driving, not paying attention, driving like racer wannabe's, failure to yield, running redlight, talking on cell phone wrecks, they're involved in.

They should retest every year before 21, and after 65.

You know I'm 20, and I fully aggree, I have a clean record and I don't mind showing that I'm competent enough.

 

[rh71]

poor kid and his family... lost his leg cause of an old dude with a prosthetic leg. He should work his whole life toward making a law for re-testing old people a reality. I'd be behind it 200%.

 

[faZZter]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
This happened a couple days ago at my nephew's school.

He is 7 years old and is traumatized over this. One kid lost a leg.

Its always an old person that loses control of their vehicle like this.

I agree, they should be retested every year after age 60 or so.

 

[rezinn]

I personally think that when you get your first license, like a lot of people do at 16 years, it should be provisional and you should have to be retested a year or two later. Most kids I see driving have no regard for other cars, pedestrians, etc.

I also think older people should have to be retested no matter what. I had an old woman cut me off the other day and I had to slam on my brakes and almost skid into her. After that she continued 20mph under the speed limit on the same one lane road, still unaware I was anywhere near her. Most angry I have been in a long time, I didn't even think to stop her or write down her plate number.

 

[thomsbrain]

near where i live, a 59 year old woman was trying to parallel park her corolla and managed to not only mess up, but get the tiny little vehicle up to such a great speed that it broke the concrete wall of the buisness she was parking in front of. WTF BITCH!? GAS ON THE RIGHT, BRAKE ON THE LEFT! LEARN IT!

everyone over 55 should be tested, IMO.