Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Random Rants _ Should over 70s be made to take a driving test?
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:20 PM
Emma Soames, writing for Saga magazine (that represents the over 50s) believes that over 70s should retake their driving test.
Read the article below.
http://www.saga.co.uk/homeandlifestyle/people/columnists/emma-soames/november-2010-we-should-take-a-test-at-70.asp
My view:
I am all for testing bad drivers; whatever their age. But focusing on the 70s or over is discrimination and the writer of the article should be careful. Emma Soames is supposed to speak for Saga, who represents people of a certain age. They shouldn’t be in the business of discriminating against those they stand for.
In the article Ms Soames says “I’ve changed my mind since a particularly po-faced edition of Traffic Cops featured footage of several quite serious incidents caused by the erratic driving of older people in Sussex – though it could have been anywhere.” Yippee, she saw a programme of bad drivers who happen to be old. I saw a programme of black drug dealers dealing to kids, does that mean those black dealers represent every black person? No and to suggest it is discrimination. And what she said is discrimination against people of a certain age. She should not be judging everybody by her narrow focused observations. It is offensive. There are some brilliant ‘older people’ who drive on our roads, as there are evil nasty young drivers out there.
There is also another problem with people who are no longer young, taking their driving test again. When I past my test in the 70s (i.e. 1970s) I told my driving instructor ‘Everything you taught me will go out of the window,’ in which he agreed with me. We become more skillful and judge things differently (compared to learning parrot fashion). That is why when they retest people many, many years later they fail. But they don’t fail because they are bad drivers; they fail because they are a different/ better drivers than when they first started out (naive even).
‘Older people’ have a lot of obstacle to contend with when they get older, what they don’t need is somebody who represents them also joining in to kick their legs out from under them. By all means attack and remove bad drivers – whoever they are – from our roads. But picking on good drivers because they are of a certain age is prejudice, bigotry, abusive and offensive to those that expected more from their representatives.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Nov 2 2010, 09:26 PM
Yes, very well put.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 09:27 PM
Driving test should be every three years for everyone.
Having said that, age does have a bearing on ones physical ability & being of sound eyesight & quick reactions is a pre-requisite for driving. So, yes I think the over 70s should be tested.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 09:35 PM
In theory a good idea, but we could see plenty of reasonable drivers lose their jobs through failing.
I would advocate a 'fit to drive' test.
Posted by: user23 Nov 2 2010, 09:36 PM
Sounds like a good idea to me. Tests every three years for everyone would almost certainly raise the standard of driving.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:40 PM
Having said that, age does have a bearing on ones physical ability & being of sound eyesight & quick reactions is a pre-requisite for driving. So, yes I think the over 70s should be tested.
Yes, but that should apply to everybody. There are some very alert 70 year olds, whilst there are some very bad 25 year olds. We should punish the bad drivers, not the good ones; no matter how old they are.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 09:40 PM
I doubt it, but people would lose their jobs.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:41 PM
No, because it wouldn't work. People change from when they first past their test. They mature and learn different skills.... better skills, but skills that are taught differently when first learning to drive.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:42 PM
Exactly... the only reason for it would be to make money, not help to make better drivers.
Posted by: user23 Nov 2 2010, 09:43 PM
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:47 PM
But the 'standards' you talk about are different than when a person matures as a driver. As i said to be driving instructor; what we learn when taking our test gets thrown out off the window and we learn different skills. Even driving instructors admit that. It has also been show that mature drivers - whatever age they are - are likely to fail their test if they had to take it again.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 09:47 PM
My little 'un passed third go. There's no-way she suddenly become a better driver on her third go. The driving instructor thought she was good enough when she first started driving lessons (she did a lot of off road practice). Amongst other things, passing the driving test is about luck that you don't get stitched up by some other ahsole on the road. On my test, I drove better on my first test than second, but according to the examiner I didn't.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 09:48 PM
I would advocate a 'fit to drive' test.
Err, maybe a test every 3 years would make reasonable drivers better?
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:48 PM
The same here. It has more to do with luck than skill or good driving.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 09:49 PM
Why? I understand that the standard of driving in the UK is amongst the best in Europe already.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:51 PM
No it won't. What it will achieve, if it achieves anything, is that people will just play the game until they've passed and then go back to the way they were driving in the first place. If you were correct then why do so many people have serious and bad accidents just after they've passed their test?
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 09:51 PM
that happens already.
Fact is when you get old your body deteriorates. Testing divers of an age is about driving fitness - not compentence. You could be a very good driver, but is you can't see more than 100 yds....
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:51 PM
it is, but if we have to take the test again then it would only be a money exercise.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 09:52 PM
Hence my 'fit to drive' idea.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:53 PM
Fact is when you get old your body deteriorates. Testing divers of an age is about driving fitness - not compentence. You could be a very good driver, but is you can't see more than 100 yds....
You don't have to be over 70 for your body or whatever to deteriorate. We should focus on the bad drivers, not penalise the good ones as well.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 09:54 PM
You mean test everyone say, every three years? Or wait until some old codger runs over a pedestrian & then test him?
Age, in this instance is a perfectly good benchmark.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 09:57 PM
Age, in this instance is a perfectly good benchmark.
And what about the young one who runs over a 'pedestrian'? As I said; it won't work or make a difference. The amount of young people who have just passed their tests and then go out and either kill someone or cause a serious accident proves that.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 09:59 PM
They might kill someone. But it won't be through bad eyesight.
Screening for potential problems, such as bad eyesight when in charge of a vehicle, is a good thing.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 10:00 PM
Who said so?
Agreed, but that applies to everybody.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 10:06 PM
OOh, ooh, ooh, please sir... a fit to drive test sir!
Posted by: Bofem Nov 2 2010, 10:08 PM
Come on guys - where's your sense of perspective? We have among the safest roads in the world....surely there are enough real problems worth considering?
http://www.photius.com/rankings/road_traffic_deaths_country_rankings_2009.html
Posted by: user23 Nov 2 2010, 10:13 PM
Perhaps you should start a thread about these real problems?
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 10:21 PM
Agreed, but that applies to everybody.
So you'd just not bother?
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 10:22 PM
About what? if you are talking about eyesight then I agree. But that also applies to the young as well.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 10:26 PM
Great, then you no longer think that a three year driving test is just a moneymaking ploy. Glad we finally got there.
Wading through treacle springs to mind.
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 10:31 PM
Wading through treacle springs to mind.
I didn't say that, but a driving test is not needed to find people with bad eyesight. And I still say it would be a money making exercise.
Wading through treacle springs to mind... but don't worry, I'll eventually get through to you.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 10:33 PM
Wading through treacle springs to mind... but don't worry, I'll eventually get through to you.
Are you suggesting we now start eye checks on those that don't drive? I thought this was about driving?
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 10:44 PM
Are you having me on? it is about drivers and no, I didn't say or even suggest that we have eye tests for everybody (even though that is a good idea).
That phrase comes to mind: 'Wading through treacle'. But don't worry my friend, it takes all sorts to make this forum popular. I can't do it all on my own... every magician needs his stooge and i am pleased to welcome you on-board.
PS I hope you don't expect paying as well?
Posted by: spartacus Nov 2 2010, 10:46 PM
If there was to be a serious move to test and ultimately ban drivers over a certain age if they failed this test, should we think the unthinkable and also enforce a regular re-test scheme for disabled drivers to ensure they are not becoming more of a danger on the roads?
It would doubtless have the PC Brigade boarding 'The Outrage Bus' and revving up the engine... but think about it......... Not all elderly drivers are poor drivers, but there is some merit in taking certain potentially vulnerable groups such as 'all drivers between 70-80' and ensuring that they can still cope with our busy roads.
The same is true of disabled drivers.... They're just as likely to underplay any deterioration in their condition when asked by a doctor if they can still drive, or making a medical declaration that they are still fit to drive as a 70 year old is....
Taking the licence off an elderly driver takes away their independence.. The same is true of disabled drivers who may be just as likely to be suffering with failing health or increased disability of limbs.... and just as desperate to hold onto the thing for as long as they can...
I'm sure there will be people who will say "Disgusting to even THINK such a thing! I know a disabled driver who is a far better driver than me!" But of course you could equally say there are loads of 70 year old drivers who are far better then ME....
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 10:47 PM
That phrase comes to mind: 'Wading through treacle'. But don't worry my friend, it takes all sorts to make this forum popular. I can't do it all on my own... every magician needs his stooge and i am pleased to welcome you on-board.
PS I hope you don't expect paying as well?
so, how o you propse peopel with health issues which may affect their driving be screened?
Posted by: spartacus Nov 2 2010, 10:52 PM
I propose dyslexic drivers should be subject to a spelling test every three years.......
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 10:56 PM
A driving test wouldn't work. However, their doctors could/ and should notify DVLC if any development materialises in their patient (who also drives) that would put them or somebody else at risk. Simples!!!
Don't thank me, just send a cheque to a nominated charity of my choice (i.e. PM me and I'll give you the details
)
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 10:57 PM
What about people with anal problems as well? I can think of a few in here.
Posted by: spartacus Nov 2 2010, 10:58 PM
Nah.... you can get a cream for that....
Posted by: GMR Nov 2 2010, 10:59 PM
maybe, but some obviously don't know that on here.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 11:03 PM
Don't thank me, just send a cheque to a nominated charity of my choice (i.e. PM me and I'll give you the details
)unworkable.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 11:16 PM
I think it is workable, but possibly impractical. People would simply not go to the doctor. Now, a compulsory 'fit to drive' test, however...!
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 11:19 PM
Isn't there a patient/doctor element of trust?
Posted by: Iommi Nov 2 2010, 11:20 PM
Hippocratic oath or something.
Posted by: dannyboy Nov 2 2010, 11:23 PM
maybe a test, not to ensure a persons driving skills were up to the mark - but their fitness to drive would be the answer. Starting with those, say 70+?
Posted by: Jayjay Nov 2 2010, 11:26 PM
Trying to recall if I have ever heard of an over 70 driver being banned for speeding, D & D or drugs and driving and I cannot bring anything to mind.
Posted by: Bofem Nov 3 2010, 02:41 AM
Not in this country, but James Brown managed all three PLUS pointing a gun, I recall!
Posted by: HJD Nov 3 2010, 06:41 AM
Drivers who fail to inform the DVLA of any new / existing or worsening medical condition, ( especially eyesight problems ) could be subject to a fine up to £1000. Obviously in the event of an accident this also invalidates any insurance you may have.
So those of you who are wearing specs you have bought from the Pound Shop while driving beware.
Posted by: GMR Nov 3 2010, 05:38 PM
Which part? The cheque or the doctors? If the cheque then just give me your Access card
Posted by: GMR Nov 3 2010, 05:39 PM
As we are talking about the over 70s they have to go to the doctors so that they can be issued - for another year - a driving licence.
Posted by: GMR Nov 3 2010, 05:39 PM
Don't when signing papers to allow you to claim for another year to drive.
Posted by: GMR Nov 3 2010, 05:40 PM
So those of you who are wearing specs you have bought from the Pound Shop while driving beware.
Exactly.
Posted by: Biker1 Nov 3 2010, 08:17 PM
So re-tests for BMW drivers then?
Posted by: GMR Nov 3 2010, 08:31 PM
Posted by: oldharry Nov 4 2010, 12:21 PM
I have no problem with that. When I turned 70 a few years ago, I was required to take a medical examination if I wanted a licence that enabled me to drive mini-buses and similar types of vehicles. Because I wished to do this, I had the medical and received the required licence.
Three years later I received an amended licence that removed this option, which is probably just as well. I am fortunate to be fitter and more mentally alert than many of my age, but to deny me the temptation to take the responsibility for a dozen passengers in a bus is probably just as well.
Posted by: GMR Nov 4 2010, 05:34 PM
Three years later I received an amended licence that removed this option, which is probably just as well. I am fortunate to be fitter and more mentally alert than many of my age, but to deny me the temptation to take the responsibility for a dozen passengers in a bus is probably just as well.
That is fair enough, but we shouldn't judge all because of the few... that was my point. Old doesn't mean stupid or mentally disturbed.
Posted by: Iommi Nov 4 2010, 06:15 PM
No, it can start earlier than old-age; eh GMR?
Posted by: GMR Nov 4 2010, 06:20 PM
That is true.... eh... iommi?
But don't worry, I'll fight your corner.
Posted by: HeatherW Nov 4 2010, 08:24 PM
When I first read this I thought of the film Logan’s Run where anybody over 30 (I think) was killed, keeping society young. Then I thought we should lower the age to 40 to test people and save all those victims’ families out there from such misery. Colliding with a geriatric can not be a pleasant sight. My mum looked over my shoulder and said ‘how dare you. We’ve still got a lot of spu*k in us yet, even at our age.’ I suppose she has a point. When we are young we see anybody over 30 or 40 as decrepit and in need of constant care, gaga even. It is only when we reach those lofty heights that we see things totally different. Then, as my mother says, ‘We see the young as foolish and reckless, with not a care in the world. A daredevil attitude. With age, as my mother points out, comes wisdom, better understanding and a cool collected calm. But I have not reached that age so far so for now I vote that all old dodgers should be retested. That is anybody over 40.
I just hope my mum does not read this otherwise I will not have the luxury of reaching her age.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Nov 4 2010, 08:47 PM
I just hope my mum does not read this otherwise I will not have the luxury of reaching her age.
*Mmmmm, Jenny Agutter* Sorry, what were you saying?
Posted by: Iommi Nov 4 2010, 08:54 PM
Shirley, and I risk reeeeeeeeeeeeeeally boring people here: we should have a periodic examination (increasing in frequency with age) to test out fitness to drive? That is if this is really an issue worth worrying about.
Posted by: HeatherW Nov 4 2010, 09:00 PM
Which part? Logan's run, according to my mum was a film in the 70s. To be honest I have not seen it.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Nov 4 2010, 09:13 PM
Oh, all of Jenny Agutter's lovely.
Sorry, normal programming has now been resumed.
Posted by: HeatherW Nov 4 2010, 09:16 PM
Sorry, normal programming has now been resumed.
I suppose it is a male thing!!!!
Posted by: Strafin Nov 4 2010, 09:24 PM
I think a test of competency at 5 year intervals would be a great idea. Maybe lower the frequency to every two years over 60 years of age, and down to every year after you hit 70. I will hate it if I ever lose my independance because of it, but would hate to kill somebody even more.
Posted by: Jayjay Nov 4 2010, 09:27 PM
So to sum up - we are all mentally and physically able to work to 70 (surgeons, roofers, road works etc.,) but we are not physically or mentally fit to drive at 70 (or if you take Heathers view 40!!!!). What the ....... 
Posted by: GMR Nov 4 2010, 09:31 PM
That sounds about right.
Posted by: Strafin Nov 4 2010, 09:31 PM
But we are not ALL mentally and physically able to work till 70. And it's not about being able to do a job it's about using a lethal weapon without killing anybody.
Posted by: HeatherW Nov 4 2010, 09:32 PM
That is something to throw at the government if they bring the 70s thing up I suppose. But I still stick to my 40, that is until I reach it. Then we extend it.
Posted by: HeatherW Nov 4 2010, 09:34 PM
What about walking frames? Some old man whacked me over the shines with it. If they can do that with walking frames just imagine what they can do with cars?
Posted by: GMR Nov 4 2010, 09:37 PM
It is only a killing machine in the wrong hands... and that could apply to youngsters as well... in fact more so.
Posted by: Strafin Nov 4 2010, 09:51 PM
Hence my post #65 about everyone beiong tested for competancy at 5 year intervals.
Posted by: GMR Nov 4 2010, 09:55 PM
That would be fair, instead of discriminating against one section of the community.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)