'Drivers intending to stay behind the wheel well into old age may have to pass exams proving they are mentally up to it.
Ministers want to ban anyone over 75 who does not pass the exams and they will insist that drivers repeat the series of IQ tests every five years if they want to stay on the road.
The new barriers to elderly motorists will also include an eyesight exam, but they will not have to re-take their practical driving test.'
Increasing the age for taking the test and now this. Looks like we will just be allowed a tiny band between to drive before being pushed out on to the festering mess that is British public transport.
|
Sounds like a basic "can you see and are your marbles present" check - hardly unreasonable.
I would oppose it though on the grounds that there are (much) more important things to worry about; but if it does happen it should apply to everybody, not just the old.
|
|
In a country ravaged by gun and knife crime, when random attacks of violence are carried out on people in their homes and on the streets, day in and day out, the only utterences we seem to hear from our elected law makers concerns the motorist and how they can be restricted even further.
|
In a country ravaged by gun and knife crime, when random attacks of violence are carried out on people in their homes and on the streets, day in and day out, the only utterences we seem to hear from our elected law makers concerns the motorist and how they can be restricted even further
In a country ravaged by gun and knife crime and random attack of violence how many people were seriously injured from these causes and how many by road accidents?
|
|
|
In a country ravaged by gun and knife crime when random attacks of violence are carried out on people in their homes and on the streets day in and day out
Sorry are we talking about Kenya or the Congo here?
Please Step away from that Daily Mail.
|
|
And step back into motoring discussion. DD.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with this in principal, also possibly raising the min age though really driving should be based on aptitude and attitude and not age, there are surely many 15 year olds that would be quite safe and many 20 year old that are not, likewise at the other end of the spectrum.
Driving is a privilege not a right, it should be about skills training, attitude assessment and then being empowered yet accountable.
|
There are too many things in this country that are changing to 'privilege ' from 'right "
|
|
I disagree, driving should be a privilege though it should not be dumbed down by the legislators, safety is likley to be to the fore if drivers perceive it as a privilege and feel empowered to be responsible for their own actions rather than herded about like sheep.
|
I personally think it's a good idea, this is one of the most practical ways to remove those from the roads who can no longer see and/or don't have all of their mental bits and bobs present and correct. Would you really think this was a bad idea if one of them had just run you over? :-)
I also disagree that the country is ravaged by knife and gun crime, yes it's a problem in some cities, but by and large, the UK is a fairly safe place to live, just. Unless of course Sunderland is one of the last bastions of civilisation and I am living in cloud cuckoo land. :-)
|
cloud cuckoo land.>>
Isn't that between Hexham and South Sheilds ?
;-)
|
>> cloud cuckoo land.>> Isn't that between Hexham and South Sheilds ? ;-)
No, that's Corbridge...
|
|
|
|
I personally think it's a good idea this is one of the most practical ways to remove those from the roads who can no longer see and/or don't have all of their mental bits and bobs present and correct.>>
>>
As a disproportionate number of fatal road accidents are caused by/ involve drivers under twentyfive years old, should we have mental/psychological attitude and aptitude tests for those drivers under the age of twentyfive?
|
>>should we have mental/psychological attitude and aptitude tests for those drivers under the age of twentyfive?
>>
I have said it before, I think it should be applied to all drivers as part of the test.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm rather with Blue on this. However, I think the thread title, for other reasons, is pretty spot-on.
|
|
|
Blue, despite my long standing and culturally ingrained prejudices about Sunderland I agree with your overall point.
And to the OP, driving has never been a 'right'. Now that we have a large and growing number of over 65s the problem of incompetent drivers, through eyesight or general ability is going to get worse. Something needs to be done ahead of time to take account of it, because many people just don't want to stop driving even though they really should. Ironically this is the generation that built the 'great car economy' and will find in old age that they are dependent on their cars but can no longer drive them.
|
Thinking of a driving licence as a right is at the root of the problem. Give it away free with the cornflakes and you have a problem.
You make the rather bold assertion that the country is ravaged by gun and knife crime. Obviously I'm not calling for more violent crime, but how many innocent people are killed and injured in random acts carried out by gunmen and knife wielders each year and how many by motorists whose skills at the time of the incident weren't up to it or whose attitude contributed to it?
More testing has to be the way forward along with intelligent alternatives to punishment - the few people I know who have been on speed awareness courses after getting pulled have all said that it was time well spent, but I admit this is a skewed sample as I don't tend to spend much time in the company of SAXO driving chavs.
|
Beware of letting this become a political football. We had testing for the olds for many years. Medical check at 70 and 75, then medical plus practical every 2 years from 80. The licence was re-issued just for the period until the next medical / test date. It was dropped as an election bribe 2 years ago. Not long enough to discover whether there is any measurable effect yet, although crashes that make the news are always involving the younger set.
|
I love that down-under phrase "the olds"!
The fact you need a license, and the fact it can be taken away means that driving has not been a basic human right since the license was introduced
of course some kind of regular test should be applied to the olds of a certain vintage. We all know of many an elderly motorist who was starting to display signs of not being fit to drive.
The trouble with young boys is that they are capable of driving well, and fit enough to drive well. They just choose not to. You cant test that really.
|
"The trouble with young boys is that they are capable of driving well, and fit enough to drive well. They just choose not to. You cant test that really."
Psychometric testing as an extra part of the driving test would be one option.
Re old people driving, they already have to make medical declarations at various ages to indicate that they still meet the minimum health requirements for driving and this is currently taken on trust with no recourse to either doctors or opticians. Of course many are less than truthful when completing the forms.
If all that is being proposed is the introduction of proper medical checks for eyesight, etc then this is simply enforcing regulations which already exist. A driving licence is a priviledge and not a right.
|
|
|
|
|
Some info in the press today.
"Drivers over the age of 55 take 22 per cent longer to react compared with those under 30 - adding about 25ft to their stopping time at 70mph.
Separate research by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency shows that only one in ten drivers of any age with a "notifiable" condition, such as epilepsy or heart problems, actually admits to it on the form.
In 1975, elderly motorists constituted fewer than one in six drivers on the road, but by 2004 it was nearly half.
In 2006,
some 23,000 registered drivers were over the age of 91,
with 1,555 aged 96 to 100
and 34 who were 101 or older."
The report says "registered" drivers rather than active drivers.
I have not seen statements about over 55 year old drivers. That should jolt a few !
IMO there should be a regular ( say 5 year ) eyesight test for all drivers up to say 55 then more frequent tests ( they are free after 65 anyway).
Perhaps all drivers stopped by the BiB should automatically have at least a " Can you read that number plate over there ?" check.
I suspect that would identify a few for further checks.
|
When I read every month of yet another piece of perceived legislation aimed at the motorist , I start to wonder if there is any other crime or anti social problems blighting our country.
When I look at the spread of speed cameras, red light cameras, box junction cameras, parking cameras, bus lane cameras I can't help but gain the impression that owning a driving licence makes you public enemy No 1.
|
When I read every month of yet another piece of perceived legislation aimed at the motorist , I start to wonder if there is any other crime or anti social problems blighting our country.>> {edited to sort out hidden quoting caused by placing the < symbol a the start of the text}
2cents - it's not often I make a non-motoring related comment, but I think you need to get out more, broaden your horizons a bit and stop reading Mike Rutherford's column in the Auto Express.
S6 1SW
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 28/01/2008 at 12:49
|
|
|
|
So 55+ drivers reactions might be slower - but might this not be related to the fact that, with much more driving experience, hazard perception and pro-active driving as practised much more?
For example - how long does a set of brake pads last a 25 yeard old compared with a 55 year old. Or a set of tyres, or a clutch? There is evidence to support that older drivers anticipate more, hence they are more relaxed about responding to incidents, so their reactions SEEM slower. It's just that, with better driving, they don't need to respond quickly!
|
|
8< SNIP! political rant deleted
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 28/01/2008 at 13:42
|
|
|
I would not anticipate being the best if I did a comparative test for hazard perception and reaction times with my father.
And he was 79 a few days ago!
If they do it they should do it to everyone, after all discrimination by age is illegal now, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
well that gives me fifteen years before I have to have an mot then. SWmBO just found out today that she will not get her pension til she is 63 now and not 60 as was....all good news ain't it?
|
I really don't get some of you. IT IS POLITICS that is shaping motoring in this country.
If you can't see that then I hope you are not driving down the same road as me. Roll over and play dead if you want but don't complain when none of you are allowed to own a car let alone drive on the highways.
|
IT IS POLITICS that is shaping motoring in this country.
'Twas ever thus, though. Red Flag Act, anyone?
|
|
At least there's one plus point with the oaps, I suspect most of them will have valid insurance, unlike certain other motoring minorities according to another thread!
|
You don't need the IQ of Prof Stephen Hawkins to see what the governments plan is. They intend to get as many people disqualified from driving as possible by way of speed cameras, random breath testing and lowering of the alcohol level, age related IQ tests and as many petty laws as they can introduce, all carrying points.
Clearly they think that this will help congestion by reducing the number of us who are actually allowed to drive.
|
They intend to get as many people disqualified from driving as possible by way of speed cameras, random breath testing and lowering of the alcohol level, age related IQ tests and as many petty laws as they can introduce, all carrying points.
Don't go telling everyone. Its meant to be a secret. And don't mention phase 2.
|
|
Are they going to put us to sleep selectively in phase 2 CG? Do tell. Forewarned is forearmed.
|
"Are they going to put us to sleep?"
So you know about the plan too! Can't this government keep anything secret. Its the only way to get cars off the road: everything else has failed. DoE investing heavily in cryogenics
|
|
|
Can you see and are all your marbles present and more or less correct?'
Very sound question where motoring is concerned. And one that applies across the board.
AE thinks the young are capable of driving well. Some are, but in many cases the psychology hasn't caught up with the physical ability. Parental example and careful tutoring counts for a great deal here. All whippersnappers think their parents are slow, fuddy-duddy, etc. It's human nature. The challenge is to get them to understand with some fairly central part of themselves that there may be something to be said for a bit of caution, that it reduces grief and minimises timewasting damage limitation activities. With luck, the brighter, less mad ones will have twigged before they can afford a long-in-the-tooth 140mph car.
As for the old, of whom I will eventually be one, dementia apart they should know when they aren't up to it any more.
|
2cents.
The rest of us are ok. Its you they are after. Got any strange men in cars with blanked out windows parked out side your house? does your phone go "click click"? see the same man in a funny coat following you around?
be careful my friend very careful
Check in with us every week so we know you are still ok. Leave a message to be opened if you disapear so we can try and get you released.
|
|
Those with their heads in the sand ' think " they are o.k
|
First it's Her Majesty with her "dark forces at work in this country of which we know little", now it's 2 Cents.
The game's up
|
|
We all get old & past it - what's new?
Edited by woodbines on 29/01/2008 at 00:20
|
'Young motorists are more likely than older people to take "extreme and life-threatening" risks while driving, a road safety study has suggested.
The charity Brake found that 33% of the drivers aged 17-24 it surveyed admitted overtaking on a blind bend, compared to 9% of older drivers.
Government transport statistics show more than 14 young drivers and their passengers die every week in Britain.
Brake wants the government to bring in a new licence system for young drivers.'..........
Yesterday older drivers, today younger drivers. Don't worry though, I'm just being paranoid.
|
Marginally off-thread, but has any anti-car politician ever hinted at how the reduced fuel tax grab will be made up once cars are minimised by ever-tighter regulation ? Some of our pollies have that dream too, and at least our Treasury is openly worried about it.
|
>Government transport statistics show more than 14 young drivers and their passengers die >every week in Britain.
>Brake wants the government to bring in a new licence system for young drivers.'..........
>Yesterday older drivers, today younger drivers. Don't worry though, I'm just being paranoid.
Ok so that equates then to nearly 30% of all driver deaths are in the young and new drivers category. That kinda sounds about right.
SO let me get this right 2cents. You find it acceptable that young drivers are a significant contributer to the number of road deaths, and that no-one should discuss or talk about means and methods of reducing this number?
Have you ever thought 2cents that if this major cause of deaths was reduced, the pressure on the rest of us road users (in the form of speed cameras, excessive punishment, random stops, etc etc would be signifcantly reduced?
No probably not - it kinda falls outside your conspiricy theory.
|
"Don't worry though, I'm just being paranoid."
Ipse dixit. (Though he probably meant it ironically.)
|
|
|
Be very wary of any statistics from the Government or newspapers or anyone else for that matter,
I was responsible at one time for supplying them in one particular area without the time or resources to do it.
They were simply made up in ten minutes to sound about right.
wemyss
|
99% of statistics are complete nonsense ;-)
|
Only 103% of the time, the other 397% they are accurate
|
|
but did you know that 95% of statistics have been made up?
|
Well what can you do when 74% of motorists can't read, 32% can't write and the other half can't add up?
|
only 57% of the population know that
|
"only 57% of the population know that"
But the other 25% who read this bb....know differently that half all politicians lie about motoring issues.
Which half? I hear you say.
All those speaking I reply...
{in case you hadn't noticed - THREAD LOCKED - DD}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 29/01/2008 at 19:23
|
|
|
|
|
|
