Re-Tests For Age 70+?

[milleplod]

Interesting. Personally, I think we should all be re-tested regularly, but this is a start I suppose.

https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-state-for-transport-introduce-compulsory-age-appropriate-retesting-every-3-years-once-a-driver-turns-70?recruiter=167411614&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Pete

[Lexmanic]

Interesting. Personally, I think we should all be re-tested regularly, but this is a start I suppose.

https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-state-for-transport-introduce-compulsory-age-appropriate-retesting-every-3-years-once-a-driver-turns-70?recruiter=167411614&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Pete

Disagree. Clearly those backing and promoting this aren't yet 70years of age

[mikeyv]

Interesting. Personally, I think we should all be re-tested regularly, but this is a start I suppose.

https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-state-for-transport-introduce-compulsory-age-appropriate-retesting-every-3-years-once-a-driver-turns-70?recruiter=167411614&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Pete

Disagree. Clearly those backing and promoting this aren't yet 70years of age

Young drivers, uninsured drivers, drunk drivers, foreign drivers with micky mouse licenses, drivers with no licence, drivers of stolen cars.............probably all more likely to kill you on the roads than a 70 year old.

[milleplod]

Interesting. Personally, I think we should all be re-tested regularly, but this is a start I suppose.

https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-state-for-transport-introduce-compulsory-age-appropriate-retesting-every-3-years-once-a-driver-turns-70?recruiter=167411614&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Pete

Disagree. Clearly those backing and promoting this aren't yet 70years of age

Those who introduced the drink/drive legislation weren't drunks, but it doesn't mean they weren't right to do so.

At least doctors now have an obligation to report older drivers who might be losing some of their abilities.

Of course there are other motorists who might do us harm through their incompetence and lack of regard, but should one particular group be protected from standards that are applied to others just because of their age? Should we be pro-active in an attempt to reduce risks? Or should they be allowed to 'soldier on' regardless because, for example, 'its their only way of getting around'? We all know that, with age, both physical and mental ability tend to decline. If a new, younger, driver went for a test and had reactions so slow that he was a risk to others, would he, should he, be given a 'pass'?

Like I said, I think we should all be re-tested regularly anyway. At present, re-tests can only be ordered by a court under certain circumstances - its a reactive process, something has to already have happened for it to be applied.

Pete

[bluenose1940]

I agree with mikeyv, on a daily basis I see young mums driving their cars as if they were at Silverstone and where are the kiddies, in the back playing on whatever 'i'thingy is flavour of the month, totally oblivious to the dangers mum is exposing them to.

Equally I see elderly drivers causing chaos by their ultra slow driving and really getting up the noses of those following who can't get past them.

It is without doubt a matter of common sense to realise that one's driving ability is 'not up to scratch' but it is quite another to admit that it is time to give up. I well remember the difficult time I had convincing my dad that his driving time was up. He had driven everything in his time, from an autocycle to massive artics. He did listen to reason in the end but, I have to say that it was quite upsetting at the time. I then became his 'driver' and he quite enjoyed it.

I have been speaking to my cousin who has just passed the next stage of the Advanced driving test and I now have it in mind to go down that route myself.

[true blue]

I agree with ' bluenose' I am over 70 but have no problem with taking a test on my ability to drive . The problems I perceive are the poor standards of so called professional drivers in large vans and trucks who drive with a total disregard for every other road user ,and the drivers with eye sight problems who are a danger to us all .In my opinion drivers should have to take an eye test every 2 years with legal implications if you continue to drive when advised to wear corrective glasses . I do not at present wear glasses normally ,but because of my age I am very aware of the need for regular testing .I recently had a test and the optician said my eyesight was fine .I the asked her as a matter of interest to show me on her charts the minimum standard she felt would require glasses to drive.I was astounded to me it seemed I would need to be in a bad way not to pass this .She then went on to say many people do not reach this standard but when told what action they need to take, leave and continue driving ,and there is no action she can take .

dave

[rayaans]

I can't remember half of the stuff I got taught when taking my driving lesson. Frankly a re test doesn't prove anything. Older drivers will just take lessons and go back to how they drove normally

Like all tests, it shows how good you are at faking/learning to drive properly, it doesn't show that you WILL drive that way.

Take a look at all the Taxi drivers who reverse into main roads, undertake, go over the speed limit by a great proportion, park pretty much anywhere to pick people up etc etc.

[Lexmanic]

Interesting. Personally, I think we should all be re-tested regularly, but this is a start I suppose.

https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-state-for-transport-introduce-compulsory-age-appropriate-retesting-every-3-years-once-a-driver-turns-70?recruiter=167411614&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Pete

Disagree. Clearly those backing and promoting this aren't yet 70years of age

Those who introduced the drink/drive legislation weren't drunks, but it doesn't mean they weren't right to do so.

At least doctors now have an obligation to report older drivers who might be losing some of their abilities.

Of course there are other motorists who might do us harm through their incompetence and lack of regard, but should one particular group be protected from standards that are applied to others just because of their age? Should we be pro-active in an attempt to reduce risks? Or should they be allowed to 'soldier on' regardless because, for example, 'its their only way of getting around'? We all know that, with age, both physical and mental ability tend to decline. If a new, younger, driver went for a test and had reactions so slow that he was a risk to others, would he, should he, be given a 'pass'?

Like I said, I think we should all be re-tested regularly anyway. At present, re-tests can only be ordered by a court under certain circumstances - its a reactive process, something has to already have happened for it to be applied.

Pete

Only if ALL drivers are tested at fixed intervals. Some of us older drivers still remember how to overtake safetly on single carriageways an art that is being lost because of dual carriageways and motorways. Also most older drivers started out riding motorcycles/scooters as cars were unaffordable in our youth. Riding a m/c or scooter gave them an acute awareness of their surroundingsa as well as quick reflexes. Today and for a couple of decades prior young drivers can go straight into highpowered cars with little experience of how to handle them particularly when they get out of shape

[andyk134]

This is always a difficult debate and people will never agree. but there are 2 issues being discussed here. one is saying that "bad" drivers are more likely to have and/or cause accidents than experienced older drivers. I don't think anyone disputes that, but that is more about the selfish arrogant attitudes of large parts of society, not just in how they drive but in their lives in general who have this "it will never happen to me" approach until of course it does happen to them. Add to that the pathetically soft police and judiciary who don't enforce the laws at their disposal and bad drivers don't need to behave correctly as they wont be caught and it they are it doesn't mean much to them.

The retest though does make sense. Firstly if they are good drivers they will pass so no problem. Secondly if we are going to have a lower age limit to drive because of perceived ability then clearly that works at the other end of the scale. I am sure there are many people who are 16 years and 11 months and 30 odd days old not yet able to who would make better drivers than some 85 year olds. this is more about taking the ones who clearly cant control their cars anymore or don't have the eyesight to protect themselves as well as others. I do agree that there should be more retests for "bad" drivers, but until we have a change of attitude form the muppet drivers, young, old, male and female, and a zero tolerance policy from the law we will continue to see around 2500 deaths and thousands more life changing injuries every year, 95% of which are driver error, or could have been avoided with a bit more care and attention. And yes you will always have those who "fake" the way they drive when they take a test, but that is no different in many areas of life where a qualification in their youth is carried through fro the rest of their lives.

It isn't perfect and never will be, human nature dictates that sadly, but we do need to do all we can to try and keep death and idiots off the road.

[Lexmanic]

This is always a difficult debate and people will never agree. but there are 2 issues being discussed here. one is saying that "bad" drivers are more likely to have and/or cause accidents than experienced older drivers. I don't think anyone disputes that, but that is more about the selfish arrogant attitudes of large parts of society, not just in how they drive but in their lives in general who have this "it will never happen to me" approach until of course it does happen to them. Add to that the pathetically soft police and judiciary who don't enforce the laws at their disposal and bad drivers don't need to behave correctly as they wont be caught and it they are it doesn't mean much to them.

The retest though does make sense. Firstly if they are good drivers they will pass so no problem. Secondly if we are going to have a lower age limit to drive because of perceived ability then clearly that works at the other end of the scale. I am sure there are many people who are 16 years and 11 months and 30 odd days old not yet able to who would make better drivers than some 85 year olds. this is more about taking the ones who clearly cant control their cars anymore or don't have the eyesight to protect themselves as well as others. I do agree that there should be more retests for "bad" drivers, but until we have a change of attitude form the muppet drivers, young, old, male and female, and a zero tolerance policy from the law we will continue to see around 2500 deaths and thousands more life changing injuries every year, 95% of which are driver error, or could have been avoided with a bit more care and attention. And yes you will always have those who "fake" the way they drive when they take a test, but that is no different in many areas of life where a qualification in their youth is carried through fro the rest of their lives.

It isn't perfect and never will be, human nature dictates that sadly, but we do need to do all we can to try and keep death and idiots off the road.

Most of todays qualified drivers, young or old, couldn't pass the current test never mind a revised one. I know this because I used to teach driving instructors. 1st they were taken out in order to study their current driving skills and not one would meet a standard that would allow them to teach. They had to be trained and their own driving skills improved. Those that argued were deemed not fit to teach learners and dismissed from the course