Is it time to have an age limit for driving on the road?
Discussion
CorvetteConvert said:
0000. Would you not at least agree with me that it's all about reducing the CHANCES of an accident, with this and many other subjects? We have all sorts of rules and regulations to reduce the likelihood of an accident, in all spheres of life.
No.- There's no reason to say take a license away from someone who's 90 that won't apply next time there's an accident to someone who's 85. It's an arbitrary line in the sand and they tend to suck.
- Age clearly isn't the issue, if someone causes an accident their age is of zero consequence. You can argue all you like that eyesight deteriorating or other conditions are a factor, but it isn't age.
- The 20-29 year old bracket is more likely to be the cause of an accident. Take them off the road and watch what it does to the economy.
- Roads are dangerous and people die on them, this won't address that at the expense of quality of life for an increasingly large section of the population.
- It's ageist. Try taking knives away from black people in London. Or the gender with the most accidents off the road.
CorvetteConvert said:
I was at the theatre last night. Glass is not allowed in the balcony as it may drop onto those below, you have to have plastic. At worst they'll get wet that way.
Wait, you mean, no one concluded that once a glass was dropped by an old person and it wasn't only 90 year olds that had to have plastic glasses? That sounds like it's probably effective in eliminating all glass accidents and not just discriminatory, perhaps you should look to their example!
bobbsie said:
CorvetteConvert said:
PS I love 2CVs. I always have at least one and i drove from Derby to Monaco and back in a week last year and the year before for charity. It is doing Buxton to Grenoble next May. Again, with a week as the time limit. It's a blackcurrant 1988 Charleston i have now. The last 2 trips were done in my 1987 Bamboo.
sounds great fun. i remember many fun trips in my 2CV which sat alongside a BMW in the drive, so it wasn't my only or first car.as you know, it's actually very relaxing great suspension and very little engine noise it just wafted along at 63mph all day. Big smiles, lots of waves, i miss that.
I have bought as 1957 2CV4 for restoration. One owner Aix-en-Provence car with just 51,000 kms from new.
Sorry, off topic again!
Edited by CorvetteConvert on Tuesday 13th October 11:34
R6VED said:
I have been on the receiving end of a "wrong wayer" and it was pretty scary - all I saw as the car flashed past at what must have been 60mph was grey hair - I had just pulled back into lane 1 after an overtake and if it had been a few seconds later it could have been a different story.
We phoned the police to advise and checked the internet afterwards, but there were no stories, which hopefully equals no accidents.
PHEW!We phoned the police to advise and checked the internet afterwards, but there were no stories, which hopefully equals no accidents.
0000 said:
Wait, you mean, no one concluded that once a glass was dropped by an old person and it wasn't only 90 year olds that had to have plastic glasses? That sounds like it's probably effective in eliminating all glass accidents and not just discriminatory, perhaps you should look to their example!
Missing the point entirely once again.0000. Age isn't the issue? What a ridiculous statement.
So the fact my father in law cannot see very well now he's 89, but was fine until about 75-80, plus the same for his poor hearing now and his hesitancy when he drives and the fact he can barely walk now and his decision making in an emergency being poor compared to what it was, etc etc etc is NOTHING to do with the ageing process? Get real.
Well my doctor disagrees with you, his consultants both disagree with you and so do i.
He like most of his Bridge pals all have medical problems and they are all told it is down to old age essentially. It's not ageist to admit the truth FGS!
I miss my mum every single day bless her, but i am the first to admit her driving was awful when she was in her 80s. Terrible.
Let's hope a 90 year old doesn't perform heart surgery on any of your family any time soon, eg.
So the fact my father in law cannot see very well now he's 89, but was fine until about 75-80, plus the same for his poor hearing now and his hesitancy when he drives and the fact he can barely walk now and his decision making in an emergency being poor compared to what it was, etc etc etc is NOTHING to do with the ageing process? Get real.
Well my doctor disagrees with you, his consultants both disagree with you and so do i.
He like most of his Bridge pals all have medical problems and they are all told it is down to old age essentially. It's not ageist to admit the truth FGS!
I miss my mum every single day bless her, but i am the first to admit her driving was awful when she was in her 80s. Terrible.
Let's hope a 90 year old doesn't perform heart surgery on any of your family any time soon, eg.
Ali_T said:
An age limit would be pointless and arbitrary. Ask Stirling Moss, he's the same age as the man in the OP's post. But it's time to stop allowing people to self certify their own health.
Then let's get the testing started, thousands of very old drivers are a liability amongst us. 90 imo should be the end of anyone's driving.The other thing people are doing i see is saying Stirling Moss or other ex-Formula 1 drivers would be faster than say, me, or safer, or whatever.
The ageing process is not kinder to race drivers than it is to fire fighters or chocolate testers. There is nothing to say an ex-racer will make a great street driver at 80 or 90.
And yes, actually, i will happily sit in an identical car round Donington with any 85 year old and i will put my money on the table winner takes all quite happily and even more so on a motorcycle like mine. In fact i would put my house on the outcome of a bike race tomorrow on a circuit with an 85 year old ex bike racer. That would be fun.
CorvetteConvert said:
0000. Age isn't the issue? What a ridiculous statement.
So the fact my father in law cannot see very well now he's 89, but was fine until about 75-80, plus the same for his poor hearing now and his hesitancy when he drives and the fact he can barely walk now and his decision making in an emergency being poor compared to what it was, etc etc etc is NOTHING to do with the ageing process? Get real.
Well my doctor disagrees with you, his consultants both disagree with you and so do i.
He like most of his Bridge pals all have medical problems and they are all told it is down to old age essentially. It's not ageist to admit the truth FGS!
I miss my mum every single day bless her, but i am the first to admit her driving was awful when she was in her 80s. Terrible.
Let's hope a 90 year old doesn't perform heart surgery on any of your family any time soon, eg.
No. That's not what he is saying at all. So the fact my father in law cannot see very well now he's 89, but was fine until about 75-80, plus the same for his poor hearing now and his hesitancy when he drives and the fact he can barely walk now and his decision making in an emergency being poor compared to what it was, etc etc etc is NOTHING to do with the ageing process? Get real.
Well my doctor disagrees with you, his consultants both disagree with you and so do i.
He like most of his Bridge pals all have medical problems and they are all told it is down to old age essentially. It's not ageist to admit the truth FGS!
I miss my mum every single day bless her, but i am the first to admit her driving was awful when she was in her 80s. Terrible.
Let's hope a 90 year old doesn't perform heart surgery on any of your family any time soon, eg.
To put things in your terms, are you saying that every single 89 year-old person in the world has the same degree of eyesight as your father? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. So in the same way, age is not an automatic indicator of impairment. Yes, of course the likelihood increases as you get older, but it is ridiculous to say that the moment you reach a certain age then you are unfit to drive. It's like saying that at 70 mph you are as safe as houses but at 71 mph you are a child-killing maniac who should be thrown into jail. Although if you talk to some people, they seem to believe that too.
CorvetteConvert said:
So the fact my father in law cannot see very well now he's 89, but was fine until about 75-80, plus the same for his poor hearing now and his hesitancy when he drives and the fact he can barely walk now and his decision making in an emergency being poor compared to what it was, etc etc etc is NOTHING to do with the ageing process? Get real.
That's not what I said.I said his age has nothing to do with his ability to drive. His particular age-related complications might do, but his won't apply to the next person or he wouldn't need to see a doctor and we could just send everyone out the same pack of medical information on a given date to everyone, who'd all die at the same age of the same medical condition. I've no issue with someone suggesting eyesight tests for everyone every x years but to just take a license away from someone purely on the basis of their age is discriminatory.
CorvetteConvert said:
Age isn't the issue? What a ridiculous statement.
Not at all. His numeric age is not the issue. His health IS the issue.CorvetteConvert said:
So the fact my father in law cannot see very well now he's 89, but was fine until about 75-80, plus the same for his poor hearing now and his hesitancy when he drives and the fact he can barely walk now and his decision making in an emergency being poor compared to what it was, etc etc etc is NOTHING to do with the ageing process?
Of course it is. But - it still isn't the numeric age that's the issue, it's his health.CorvetteConvert said:
Let's hope a 90 year old doesn't perform heart surgery on any of your family any time soon, eg.
I'd rather not have heart surgery at all, but if I was going to - I'd far rather a perfectly competent and alert highly-skilled and experienced 90yo do it than a 40yo with the shakes, poor sight, and no clue what they're doing. You are, of course, welcome to think differently.I've knew a female driver well into her 80's that was a regular driver and very good at it.
I've been in a car with a female driver aged 57 who pulled out on someone bearing down on us at 70mph. It was so frightening that my wife won't get back in the car with her again.
My late father gave up driving aged about 82 - after a young girl failed to see him and drove into the back of his car.
There have been a number of cases where drivers in the mid years, following a satnav have driven onto the off slip of a motorway, onto the motorway in he wrong direction and died with the occupants of the vehicle they hit.
I regularly follow cars around here that won't exceed 30 in an NSL area.
There used to be a bloke across the road who needed help to reverse his car out of the drive and often ended up on the lawn but he was late 80's.
It's not age persay, every person is different, some are unsafe at any age others good until their 90's.
I've been in a car with a female driver aged 57 who pulled out on someone bearing down on us at 70mph. It was so frightening that my wife won't get back in the car with her again.
My late father gave up driving aged about 82 - after a young girl failed to see him and drove into the back of his car.
There have been a number of cases where drivers in the mid years, following a satnav have driven onto the off slip of a motorway, onto the motorway in he wrong direction and died with the occupants of the vehicle they hit.
I regularly follow cars around here that won't exceed 30 in an NSL area.
There used to be a bloke across the road who needed help to reverse his car out of the drive and often ended up on the lawn but he was late 80's.
It's not age persay, every person is different, some are unsafe at any age others good until their 90's.
If the above was true why are their age limits for safety-related jobs, i.e. maximum ages for people applying for them? Hmmm?
I will tell you and as an ex-employer i did the same myself. It's because their abilities in many areas deteriorate as one gets older. It's simple medical fact, as agreed by my father in law's doctor and both his consultants. The age limits are there because things like eyesight and awareness DO deteriorate with age.
His rheumatologist in June this year said ''that he was in fine shape generally for 89 but sadly he has age-related problems, it happens to all of his some time''.
My point exactly.
I will tell you and as an ex-employer i did the same myself. It's because their abilities in many areas deteriorate as one gets older. It's simple medical fact, as agreed by my father in law's doctor and both his consultants. The age limits are there because things like eyesight and awareness DO deteriorate with age.
His rheumatologist in June this year said ''that he was in fine shape generally for 89 but sadly he has age-related problems, it happens to all of his some time''.
My point exactly.
CorvetteConvert said:
If the above was true why are their age limits for safety-related jobs, i.e. maximum ages for people applying for them? Hmmm?
I will tell you and as an ex-employer i did the same myself. It's because their abilities in many areas deteriorate as one gets older. It's simple medical fact, as agreed by my father in law's doctor and both his consultants. The age limits are there because things like eyesight and awareness DO deteriorate with age.
His rheumatologist in June this year said ''that he was in fine shape generally for 89 but sadly he has age-related problems, it happens to all of his some time''.
My point exactly.
You are missing a very key and fundamental point here, and you are muddling up cause with effect. Nobody is debating that eyesight (for example) deteriorates with age. However, you stop doing a job that needs good eyesight because your eyesight isn't good enough any more. The fact that it has deteriorated due to age is completely irrelevant, it is the fact that it isn't good enough that is the important thing. Or are you saying that someone who fails an eyesight test but is only 50 is ok, and someone who passes the test but is 80 is not ok? I will tell you and as an ex-employer i did the same myself. It's because their abilities in many areas deteriorate as one gets older. It's simple medical fact, as agreed by my father in law's doctor and both his consultants. The age limits are there because things like eyesight and awareness DO deteriorate with age.
His rheumatologist in June this year said ''that he was in fine shape generally for 89 but sadly he has age-related problems, it happens to all of his some time''.
My point exactly.
You are effectively saying that a 50 year-old blind man is ok to direct traffic because he is not 80!!!
CorvetteConvert said:
If the above was true why are their age limits for safety-related jobs, i.e. maximum ages for people applying for them? Hmmm?
Perhaps you'd like to give us an example...?CorvetteConvert said:
I will tell you and as an ex-employer i did the same myself.
I think you've just admitted to breaking the Equality Act 2010.JonRB said:
CorvetteConvert said:
If the above was true why are their age limits for safety-related jobs, i.e. maximum ages for people applying for them? Hmmm?
I will tell you and as an ex-employer i did the same myself. It's because their abilities in many areas deteriorate as one gets older. It's simple medical fact, as agreed by my father in law's doctor and both his consultants. The age limits are there because things like eyesight and awareness DO deteriorate with age.
His rheumatologist in June this year said ''that he was in fine shape generally for 89 but sadly he has age-related problems, it happens to all of his some time''.
My point exactly.
You are missing a very key and fundamental point here, and you are muddling up cause with effect. Nobody is debating that eyesight (for example) deteriorates with age. However, you stop doing a job that needs good eyesight because your eyesight isn't good enough any more. The fact that it has deteriorated due to age is completely irrelevant, it is the fact that it isn't good enough that is the important thing. Or are you saying that someone who fails an eyesight test but is only 50 is ok, and someone who passes the test but is 80 is not ok? I will tell you and as an ex-employer i did the same myself. It's because their abilities in many areas deteriorate as one gets older. It's simple medical fact, as agreed by my father in law's doctor and both his consultants. The age limits are there because things like eyesight and awareness DO deteriorate with age.
His rheumatologist in June this year said ''that he was in fine shape generally for 89 but sadly he has age-related problems, it happens to all of his some time''.
My point exactly.
You are effectively saying that a 50 year-old blind man is ok to direct traffic because he is not 80!!!
We all decay at a varying rate, it's not how old you are, it's if you're still competent and safe to drive. I'd be in favour of a re-test every ten years till retirement then more frequently the older you get. As an aside, I think driving standards would increase if everyone knew they had to keep their standards up for life.We had a wrong-wayer yesterday, she must have travelled a considerable distance to get to the point of impact
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/travel/lat...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff