Should a 97 year old man be driving on a public road?

There is an argument that 93 year olds should not be driving however it is young men that will continue to be the number one threat on the roads causing carnage.
Do we ban all them until they are mature enough to drive?
 
Typical old people pull out onto a 60mph road as they think the car in the distance coming towards them is only pootling along at 30mph like they will be once they joined the road.
 
DXP55 said:
No one should be allowed to drive on public roads until they have 10 years driving experience no matter what their age- :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You do realise you’ve created a paradox?

I.e - how do you get experience if you can’t drive in the first place? Pass your test and wait 10 years for things to “make sense” I presume :D
 
I'm aware that the following would cause an absolute nightmare to to administrate, mostly given that the DVSA is run by a load of incompetent personnel, but the huge work load it would entail.

1. Mandatory certification for basic eye-sight testing.
Personally I don't believe the quick "read that number plate from roughly the right distance" test, done only on your driving practical is sufficient, especially as eye-sight can and does deteriorate. Mine was a numberplate in the test centre window, which you walked past to get in and easy to remember (AB12 CDE).

Firstly the eye-sight test should be done during your theory test. It would be quite easy to hang a number-plate or rotate several (to prevent returning testees from remembering it) on a wall and have a mark on the floor at the required distance. After the test new certification should be submitted every X amount of years. Drivers who fail to submit certificates have their licence suspended until they do. Possibly have an online system that the company administering the test to enter a certificate number which is then update on the database, think of it like an MOT for your eyesight.


2. An end to the simple "tick this box if you're ok to drive" form. There should be some form of competency test, administered earlier than 70 & every 5 years after 70.
 
Destination said:
Well there is a retest system here, where if a person states you are not fit to be driving you can ask for a DVLA test, where the instructor sits beside you, watches you drive for a period, not a full test, more a behaviour and process test, and declares if you can retain your licence or not.
I wonder if this should become compulsory at an age.
Click to expand...

I unfortunately had to report a grandparent (94) for the state of their driving. It was truly shocking. They'd run red lights, fail to give way and then road rage at any other driver who dare to remonstrate them with their horn. My grandparent was the type of driver at the time that would cause an accident but not necessary be involved in it, if that makes sense. Reporting them was the last resort because as a family we had tried to convince them to give up voluntarily and were met by refusal.

They were called for an assessment, which there was a cognitive part, done in a room & they failed that spectacularly. However surprisingly the examiner decided to take them out on the road. Well he did but never made it out of the car park before halting the assessment and revoking the licence.
 
I asked this a few years back and every considered answer went along these lines.

"No government would dare alienate those likely to be affected by trying to introduce changes that impact elderly drivers. Far too many voters in that category to rile them up."

I agree that mandatory retesting of theory and eyesight etc should be done periodically once the initial driving test has been passed. Especially for those over a certain age.
 
Driving test every 5 years after age 65.
Will have to be free to encourage it, or at the least a nominal fee.

Also a driving test for 25 years assuming they got their liscence at 17/18, to check up on their skills. Then 35 45 55 65. Refresh update people on highway codes etc.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
There is an argument that 93 year olds should not be driving however it is young men that will continue to be the number one threat on the roads causing carnage.
Do we ban all them until they are mature enough to drive?
Click to expand...

But young men need to go to work, so they need to drive.

97 year old should be watching TV or relaxing.
 
Interesting that the SUV rolled. I know these cars tend to do that in a crash. Maybe not as safe as some people presume them to be.
 
I know 40 year olds that shouldn't be driving and 80 year olds that are fine. Unless there's regular testing or refresher courses then there's no way to regulate. And do we want more regulation?
 
Age has nothing to do with it. Ability is all that matters. Until someone develops a foolproof scientific way of measuring it nothing will change.

You could argue that we should increase the driving age because it's the younger ones that are having more accidents.

As for the specific incident in question, all the news was talking about was his age as though that was the deciding factor in the accident and when I last watched it the cause was unknown.
 
If there is a recognisable point after which health is known to deteriate significantly for driving purposes then some sort of re-test is really the minimum that should occur (in an ideal world).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom