:shout: I SAID!
Discussion
At what age do you think pensioners should be taken off the road :discuss:
Drive ban for deaf OAP, 88
A deaf pensioner who almost crashed into a police car because he could not hear warnings from officers has been banned from driving.
Herbert Jackson, 88, admitted he was too old to drive when he appeared before Worthing magistrates yesterday.
He said he would not be taking to the road again and has got rid of his car.
The court heard Jackson, of Littlehampton Road, Ferring, was seen by police as he tried to park outside the Londis shop in Ferring Street, Ferring, on December 21 last year.
Catherine Davies, prosecuting, said: "Police decided to follow him because he was travelling so slowly. They stopped about five to six feet behind his car but he started to reverse, despite the presence of the police car. Officers sounded their horn but Mr Jackson didn't hear it."
Jackson, who pleaded guilty to careless driving, was ordered not to drive until he had taken another test.
I personally don't think it should be anything to do with age, should be down to ability 
Don't people over a certain age have to re-apply for their license every year or so, a letter from their Doctor stating their "fitness to drive" accompanying the application?
I thought this was the case anyhow
Alan
>> Edited by AlanN on Wednesday 12th February 13:03
Don't people over a certain age have to re-apply for their license every year or so, a letter from their Doctor stating their "fitness to drive" accompanying the application?
I thought this was the case anyhow
Alan
>> Edited by AlanN on Wednesday 12th February 13:03
My Dad has been almost deaf since his mid 40's. He is now 77 and still a reasonably good driver although his current car does not have a rev counter and he does tend to over rev at times. I cannot remember him ever having an accident that was his fault. Just because someone is deaf does not mean that they should be off the road. He is assessed by his doctor on a regular basis.
Far worse are the mobile discos driven by mindless morons who have the ability to hear but prefer to deafen themselves with some inane noise they think is music.
Far worse are the mobile discos driven by mindless morons who have the ability to hear but prefer to deafen themselves with some inane noise they think is music.
i also don't agree with compulsary retesting after 65, my great uncle was driving up until the day he died... quite literally!!! on the morning he died he took his new honda blackbird up to 160mph on the bedford bypass!!! (this was not the cause of his death by the way)
he used to have a toyota previa and a blackbird for summer (new every year) and another bike he used in the winter... he was a good driver, nothing was wrong with his driving despite his age...
yet, you see old people who can't drive, those SHOULD be retested every year!!!
i rember seeing a program once about 2 old drivers being retested to see if they were fit for driving, both were male, one was about 60 (+ish) and still drove everyday, i believe his car was Pug 405... lots of mileage competant driver etc... he passed.
the other was nearly 80, infirm, doddled his metro to the shops once a week, bouncing off kerbs, his garage the rev-limiter in 1st etc... didn't have a clue... he failed quite obviously.
yeah it was sad they took his license away he had had since he was 17, but it was inevitable the outcome from the begining of the program, the man was unsafe... yet the first guy was just old, nothing wrong with his driving.
he used to have a toyota previa and a blackbird for summer (new every year) and another bike he used in the winter... he was a good driver, nothing was wrong with his driving despite his age...
yet, you see old people who can't drive, those SHOULD be retested every year!!!
i rember seeing a program once about 2 old drivers being retested to see if they were fit for driving, both were male, one was about 60 (+ish) and still drove everyday, i believe his car was Pug 405... lots of mileage competant driver etc... he passed.
the other was nearly 80, infirm, doddled his metro to the shops once a week, bouncing off kerbs, his garage the rev-limiter in 1st etc... didn't have a clue... he failed quite obviously.
yeah it was sad they took his license away he had had since he was 17, but it was inevitable the outcome from the begining of the program, the man was unsafe... yet the first guy was just old, nothing wrong with his driving.
What is the difference between a deaf driver and a driver with a cranked up 100W stereo?
I'd suggest that all drivers should have a bi-annual medical but I don't think the NHS could cope so lets live with the current system but increase the range of conditions that DVLA should be informed of.
I'd suggest that all drivers should have a bi-annual medical but I don't think the NHS could cope so lets live with the current system but increase the range of conditions that DVLA should be informed of.
All people over 70 (I think - isnt' this the age your license is valid until?) have to have a (annual?) medical certificate to enable them to keep driving. However, most doctors will not sign them as incapable. We used to have a neighbour who had spine/neck problems due to age related arthritis and couldn't turn his head to look behind him for reversing etc. The doctor still signed him fit to drive every year until he died.
AlunR said:
littlegearl said:[/iyet, you see old people who can't drive, those SHOULD be retested every year!!!
You also see alot of young people who can't drive either but they seem to get away with it!
in an ideal world, once you've paid +passed your test, you should have a free annual re-test (or something similar) that conforms to similar lines as your original test (but concentrates more on driving, rather than parking manouvers)...
but this ain't gonna happen, and no one would pay for an annual retest...
perhaps using todays 'big brother' style world we live in they could covertly observe bad peoples driving and make them retake the test...
oh, i don't know... none of my proposals are gonna work and will never be introduced...
perhaps this is why i'm sitting at my computer and not in government...
but i believe something should be done about bad driving "on a whole" but how do you single it out? and how do you "police" it? and how...
grr... [twitch, twitch]
:askingguybehinddesktoretrievemycoatnow:
Both my grandparents were 80 last year, and neither of them hang around behind the wheel. Both very safe drivers, although they do admit they avoid long journeys. Anything over 3h and they stop off at friends/family and set off the next day.
Fair play to them I say, at least they know there limits.
I know the sort you mean though, nissan micra. Can barely see over the wheel let alone see past the end of the bonnet. Reactions of a dead fly probably, usually seen on there way to sainsburys maxing out at 25mph in a 60
Fair play to them I say, at least they know there limits.
I know the sort you mean though, nissan micra. Can barely see over the wheel let alone see past the end of the bonnet. Reactions of a dead fly probably, usually seen on there way to sainsburys maxing out at 25mph in a 60
Well if you listen to the gvmnt SPEED CAMERAS.
littlegearl said:
but i believe something should be done about bad driving "on a whole" but how do you single it out? and how do you "police" it? and how...
If you have a real world view then you are correct. Nothing will be done as the real answer is compulsory advanced training and re-tests every 5(or whatever number makes you happy) years. Paid for by the drivers themselves. I personally would be happy to pay this to improve the standards on the roads and reduce the risk of being killed.
You then need more traffic police to keep an eye on those idiots who decide that they know best and drive like t**sers anyway. Or those that drive without licenses/insurance etc
Current cost of a test is £38 I think. About the price of a tank of petrol. Not a lot I don't think to be asked to pay every few years to prove you're still competent. Everyone should be retested, maybe more frequently once over a certain age (pick a number).
My grandfather still drives, he's 88 and never sat a test. There are a lot worse than him, a lot younger, although he won't go a long distance either. Since I persuaded him to get an auto anyway 'cos he was cr@p at changing gear!
My grandfather still drives, he's 88 and never sat a test. There are a lot worse than him, a lot younger, although he won't go a long distance either. Since I persuaded him to get an auto anyway 'cos he was cr@p at changing gear!
Controversial, but I think we should all be tested every 2 years!
It would remove those incapable of driving, test our eyesight and make everyone think a little once every couple of years.
I know the arguments about too many tests and too often, but if we really are good drivers, then proving it to get the tossers off the road won't hurt us?
T-J-K
It would remove those incapable of driving, test our eyesight and make everyone think a little once every couple of years.
I know the arguments about too many tests and too often, but if we really are good drivers, then proving it to get the tossers off the road won't hurt us?
T-J-K
icamm said:Well if you listen to the gvmnt SPEED CAMERAS.
littlegearl said:
but i believe something should be done about bad driving "on a whole" but how do you single it out? and how do you "police" it? and how...
If you have a real world view then you are correct. Nothing will be done as the real answer is compulsory advanced training and re-tests every 5(or whatever number makes you happy) years. Paid for by the drivers themselves. I personally would be happy to pay this to improve the standards on the roads and reduce the risk of being killed.
You then need more traffic police to keep an eye on those idiots who decide that they know best and drive like t**sers anyway. Or those that drive without licenses/insurance etc
the thing thats wrong with the governments idea is speed cameras doesn't stop some blind old (wo)man doing 25mph everywhere bashing into cars and driving off... weaving across the road... braking everytime they see another car... cutting roundabouts etc...
but a police man will see bad driving, not just speeding!!!
the retesting every 5 years is ok, because although retesting every year/2 years would be a good idea no one would want to pay it!!! but 5 years is more managable...
markda: i'm 18 and driving for 3 hours is about my limit!!! not without a good break would i want to do any more!!!
icamm said: All people over 70 (I think - isnt' this the age your license is valid until?) have to have a (annual?) medical certificate to enable them to keep driving. However, most doctors will not sign them as incapable. We used to have a neighbour who had spine/neck problems due to age related arthritis and couldn't turn his head to look behind him for reversing etc. The doctor still signed him fit to drive every year until he died.
You're probably right about this guy, but not being able to turn round to reverse doesn't mean you can't drive safely. I drive a modified vehicle and reverse using the mirrors.
The answer is regular testing. The driving test sets the standard to be achieved regardless of physical condition and/or vehicle adaptions. I know it's a crap test, but it's all we have
Forums | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff