Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,271
- Location
- La France
And a maximum of 70 going by this:
Unfit/ unsafe drivers
- Thread starter potatolord
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,271
- Location
- La France
Tractors are allowed to travel at 40km/h or 25km/h with a trailer over here.Had a front row seat to a near fatality on Weds, which involved an elderly driver in a small fiesta.
I was behind them when they had stopped in the road, indicating and waiting to turn right. There was an oncoming fastrac (big tractor) towing a silage tank going at a rate of knots, which I assumed he was waiting for....but no, after waiting long enough to let the tractor be right on top of us he slowly pulled off and turned right in front of him
The look on the tractor drivers face! He stomped on the brakes so hard it looked like he was going to go through the windscreen - there was no chance of stopping with that weight on tow. How the hell he missed him I don't know, but he would have steamrollered over that fiesta if he hadn't.
The modern ones can pull up very smarty, but the braking time for the 1970s Italian tractors some of my neighbours still use is measured on a calendar.
And the heroes who brag they do 8-10 hour stints cruising at 80+ whilst being fully alert
not aimed at you btw.
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,851
And a maximum of 70 going by this:
Yep, chart 1 is pretty stark, isn't it? Risk from under 25 males tails off sharply (and some will be inexperience) but trajectory of older drivers is clear.
Here in Surrey, which may as well be the UK's retirement home, the standards of driving are hilariously bad. The amount of driving that is nothing more than bimbling is alarming, and I hoestly don't think these people can see more than 10ft in front of them, and quite often they park by touch. They literally have absolutely zero clue what's going on around them and I suspect their attitude is largely that they simply don't care.
That said, when I get to that age I'm buying an armor plated Hummer H1 and good luck to anyone who gets in my way.
That said, when I get to that age I'm buying an armor plated Hummer H1 and good luck to anyone who gets in my way.
I fully support Graduated Drivers Licence's, as my son turns 17 in a couple of weeks and already has his Provisional, with his Theory booked for two days after his birthday.
I'm terrified. He already drives very well, although I worry that he will be overconfident.
We will invoke some of the restrictions that are law in other countries, and we're able to do that because he'll be driving his Mum's car, but we will make up our own form of GDL That will only really be enforceable until he gets his own car and is paying his own expenses. Hopefully by then he will have gained some experience and some real life hazard perception.
I would also fully support restrictions on drivers after 70. I don't feel voluntary decisions are adequate.
This doesn't mean that all drivers between 25 and 70 are perfect! I see disgusting/useless/ill-mannered/incompetent drivers every single day.
after reading about the recent xiaomi/tesla fatal crash, there needs to be some myopia studies/test on the cars ADAS systems (we'll have brexit on our side),
at least LIDAR knows a car is there even if it couldn't tell you the reg plate.
"Cause" or be involved in? I suspect there may be some difference in the figures there! Granted younger drivers are more likely to take risks and be over confident, causing them to drive outside of their abilities, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if a significant number of incidents occur due to drivers performing dangerous overtakes due to impatience caused by dawdling older drivers or from performing evasive manoeuvres when Doris in her Micra does something stupid in front of them!
And you have evidence of this instead of coming across as bit sexist and ageist?
It isn't granted that younger drivers take more risks it is a fact that a disproportionately high percentage of younger drivers are killed or seriously injured as a result of their own behaviour.
This isn't a UK trait either yet what 'appears' to make the news is when one older drivers are involved.
What generally makes news is lazy journo's taking up whatever can whip the public into a frenzy for a while and even more so for sites that are filled with adverts, cookies and some that are now asking us to pay to read their utter drivel.
Next week cyclists
Week after Motorbikes
Week after that mobile phone drivers
Last edited:
Why I tend not to take much notice of that kind of media outlet.
No, I haven't any evidence, which I'm sure you'll be aware of if you can manage to actually read my post through your tears of outrage, you'll notice the use of words such as "suspect" and "wouldn't be surprised".
Also not sure which part is sexist? And thanks for confirming my point (*hint* when someone uses the word "granted", it essentially means that it's a given, e.g. a fact).
Also, I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that it's not ageist if it's true, much like your statement that a high percentage of younger drivers are killed or seriously injured due to their own actions (a "fact" that you'll also note {again if you bother to actually read my post} I'm not disputing)
Last edited:
Interesting that you are in denial about your language, which is obvious, and your, at best guesswork, which you've admitted to.No, I haven't any evidence, which I'm sure you'll be aware of if you can manage to actually read my post through your tears of outrage, you'll notice the use of words such as "suspect" and "wouldn't be surprised".
Also not sure which part is sexist? And thanks for confirming my point (*hint* when someone uses the word "granted", it essentially means that it's a given, e.g. a fact).
Also, I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that it's not ageist if it's true, much like your statement that a high percentage of younger drivers are killed or seriously injured due to their own actions (a "fact" that you'll also note {again if you bother to actually read my post} I'm not disputing)
May I also respectfully point out that in the bbc article, if you bothered to read it and despite the misleading headline, the coroner was pointing out it was concerning that the UK was the only European country to issue driving licences without any visual checks for a continuous period up to the age of 70. So he was not singling out elderly drivers but all drivers should have regular eye tests.
Just a small point..
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,657
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
I don't think it is an age thing but you should have some form of medical to drive a car at the very least. You have one for HGV's, Pilots etc. You might not even realise that your senses are deteriorating.
My grandad got T-Boned coming out of one of those dual carriageway roads where you need to cross a central reservation to get across. Luckily everyone was okay but the sun was in his eyes and misjudged it. Both cars were totalled however.
He gave up driving at 85 years old after that accident because he knew his eyesight was deteriorating. He was a fantastic driver too. He used to take me to secondary school. Learnt to drive on a flatbed lorry before WW2 and drove everything from Austin 7's to Mercedes and BMW all over the world.
Even the year before he died at 92 years old he taught me how to use the clutch etc when I was learning to drive. He was more than capable, his reflexes were still there but his eyesight was gone.
My point is if medicals existed he would have most likely had his licence taken off him before that accident.
Last edited:
Slightly ironic post. The youngest drivers are the most likely to crash, however those over 65 are the second most likely per mile driven.
Young drivers lack experience, that can only be gained with time behind the wheel.
Older drivers have no excuse. They should know the limits of their ability, particularly in the instances linked where those selfish ***** should have given up their licences.
I'd expect if they raised the minimum driving age to 25 then there would be a shifted increase in the number of fatalities in 25-30 year olds as they wouldn't have accumulated the driving experience they had from 18-25. Yes, it would also probably be less deaths than the equivalent 18-24 bracket, but wouldn't be a significant enough drop, even with the possible increase in driver maturity. But what about industries that rely on workers being able to drive? All of a sudden they can't employ younger staff and that wouldn't help anyone, especially with a lot of people needing to travel to work.
I don't think it's the answer to increase the minimum age, but possibly be a restricted licence for longer in terms of cars they can drive (i.e. power/max speed) would be beneficial. (I'm a motorbike licence holder and the restricted licence for younger riders would be an example of this)
As for older drivers, I think some lose confidence in driving, especially if it's only a semi-regular thing they do compared to when they were perhaps working or had a more active life. My mum has no confidence in driving now as she's late 70's, but then my Dad has done most of the driving for them in the last 20 years or so. It's a tough decision, but a more regular physical exam from a doctor & a separate one from an optometrist, both of which have to be a "Pass", would be a potential way forward.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,657
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
And the heroes who brag they do 8-10 hour stints cruising at 80+ whilst being fully alert
not aimed at you btw.
I did a 9 hours drive yesterday and it is crazy that it is even legal. Even more crazy that I can extend it to 10 hours twice a week. Even more crazy that big fat Boris when he was PM slacked it off during COVID to allow you to do more 10 hour drives during the week.
It is not often I do a 9-10 hour drive but when you do your brain is fried by the time you get home and sit and eat your dinner. I would compare it to being drunk. Yet 100% legal.
Last edited: