RE: OAP drivers: a liability?
Discussion
mikeyv said:
toppstuff said:
I do not agree with the central thrust of this argument. Essentially, we are asking the wrong question.
What group of drivers represents the largest section of motorists that get involved in accidents?
Is it:
A) People over 65
B) People under 30
C) Anyone called Nigel.
Now the simple, unequivocal, impossible to deny fact is that it is young people who are involved in more accidents per capita.
Before we focus on improving driving standards among the elderly, we should focus on improving driving standards among the group most likely to be in an accident. And that ain't the olds among us.
All the other debate here seems to revolve around a combination of ageism , youthful arrogance, naivety and apocryphal stories rather than the simple facts of the matter.
Right on the money, thanks for saving me all that typing.What group of drivers represents the largest section of motorists that get involved in accidents?
Is it:
A) People over 65
B) People under 30
C) Anyone called Nigel.
Now the simple, unequivocal, impossible to deny fact is that it is young people who are involved in more accidents per capita.
Before we focus on improving driving standards among the elderly, we should focus on improving driving standards among the group most likely to be in an accident. And that ain't the olds among us.
All the other debate here seems to revolve around a combination of ageism , youthful arrogance, naivety and apocryphal stories rather than the simple facts of the matter.
Quoting examples of "old duffers" getting it wrong is pointless when the stats suggest I could probably answer each one with ten examples of young drivers causing carnage.
Some of the very worst driving is by uninsured kids and holders of mickey mouse foreign licences.
I'm sure that will offend many, though few seem to object to rampant ageism.
This might generate a few soundbites and headlines as i'm sure we've all got the sterotype of the old granny driving blindly along the road unaware of anyone else in our mind , and it is indeed a popular sterotype, but stastics tell a different tale
If the Govt wanted to make a real difference they would start there, but much easier when your on one of these gravy train committee's to simply hash out some old sterotype, have the papers in a waggle about it, you look like your doing something, generate some headlines and that's job done, you can go home now
No factual substance here what so ever
Will7 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Errr..and where do you think the statistics come from. What happens on the road! Real life.
Yes, I agree with you entirely. So why do you not see that better training/education to help reduce the ability and therefore amount of accidents which young drivers are involved in would help? It's all well and good to point the finger, but something needs to be done. I believe that periodical testing should be put in place for drivers of all ages, the intervals of which would be smaller at younger age (statistically more likely to cause accidents), and also at the older end of the age structure.Also, from your posts, you clearly did not take your test until you were at least 30, however if you did not, would you like to have been deprived of your licence for several extra years?
2. No, would not liked to have had to wait to 25
I wasn't suggesting that. I said that raising the minimum driving age would save many more lives than lowerering the maximum. But I don't support either. All I was saying is that if we are going to pick on any section of the motoring population to try and improve safety on our roads, pick on the ones with the worst statistics...which is the young.
ruffstuff said:
I absolutly agree that OAPs should be tested at least every 3 years max. I live in North Norfolk & we are inundated with wrinklies behind the wheel - some are a bloody pain. Thay will not drive up to limit even if the conditions are perfect & theres no other traffic about, sometimes as much as 20-30 below on a 60mph road! I have even seen a couple of cars doing no more than 15-20 on A roads. A classic happened a few months ago that was reported in the local rag about some old twerp creeping along a main A road, eventually turning off after causing a considerable back-log. Sitting behind was an off duty cop who was p****d off with it & followed the old man to his house. The cop went up to the guy & said that he had called an officer to come & talk to him. Turned out the old man was 90 plus & had failing eyesight. He had his license taken away. The laws are just too lax when it comes to old drivers; retests & health exams should be done for over 65 let alone 70. These should be at least £200 to cover the costs of employing testers & make people think twice about driving. Think of the jobs it would create.
I don't understand your this logic at all. On the one hand you moan about useless older drivers, and then when I driver has the good sense to drive well below the speed limit because they know their abilities aren't what they should be, you moan about that!I wonder how many teenagers drive at half the speed limit because they realise they lack maturity and talent. Maybe if more of them did we might have less carnage on the roads. Old people driving slowly doesn't cause accidents. Impatient morons behind them do!!
One comment - how are they going to get around without a car?
- Buses don't run that frequently outside of cities (and many OAPs either live in or have retired to towns and villages...cities tend to be the preserve of the young and the immigrant, as that's where lots of jobs are).
- Bus routes have been cut, so there might be a long walk to a bus-stop - how well can your grandparents walk?
- Families aren't as 'close' as they used to be (geographically and emotionally) - OAPs can no longer rely on them for as much assistance
- People are living longer, but not necessarily with the same quality / mobility. So this issue, as stated, will grow.
Finally, and importantly, a car gives a feeling of independence to a lot of people. Take the car away from the OAP and what does that do to them???
Not a reason for someone dangerous to keep driving, but worth thinking about before throwing generalisations around like confetti...
- Buses don't run that frequently outside of cities (and many OAPs either live in or have retired to towns and villages...cities tend to be the preserve of the young and the immigrant, as that's where lots of jobs are).
- Bus routes have been cut, so there might be a long walk to a bus-stop - how well can your grandparents walk?
- Families aren't as 'close' as they used to be (geographically and emotionally) - OAPs can no longer rely on them for as much assistance
- People are living longer, but not necessarily with the same quality / mobility. So this issue, as stated, will grow.
Finally, and importantly, a car gives a feeling of independence to a lot of people. Take the car away from the OAP and what does that do to them???
Not a reason for someone dangerous to keep driving, but worth thinking about before throwing generalisations around like confetti...
TwigtheWonderkid said:
ruffstuff said:
I absolutly agree that OAPs should be tested at least every 3 years max. I live in North Norfolk & we are inundated with wrinklies behind the wheel - some are a bloody pain. Thay will not drive up to limit even if the conditions are perfect & theres no other traffic about, sometimes as much as 20-30 below on a 60mph road! I have even seen a couple of cars doing no more than 15-20 on A roads. A classic happened a few months ago that was reported in the local rag about some old twerp creeping along a main A road, eventually turning off after causing a considerable back-log. Sitting behind was an off duty cop who was p****d off with it & followed the old man to his house. The cop went up to the guy & said that he had called an officer to come & talk to him. Turned out the old man was 90 plus & had failing eyesight. He had his license taken away. The laws are just too lax when it comes to old drivers; retests & health exams should be done for over 65 let alone 70. These should be at least £200 to cover the costs of employing testers & make people think twice about driving. Think of the jobs it would create.
I don't understand your this logic at all. On the one hand you moan about useless older drivers, and then when I driver has the good sense to drive well below the speed limit because they know their abilities aren't what they should be, you moan about that!I wonder how many teenagers drive at half the speed limit because they realise they lack maturity and talent. Maybe if more of them did we might have less carnage on the roads. Old people driving slowly doesn't cause accidents. Impatient morons behind them do!!
Anyway, whether or not we all agree there is a problem with old folk on the roads, if action is taken to remove them you have to consider how they live their daily lives. Much like the who Green Debate and getting people to do less miles in the car, what is the alternative for the people who have no alternative? My suggestion for old people, made up now, drink in hand, is to permit older folk to drive only during certain hours so they don't affect the rush hour traffic for example?
InfoRetrieval said:
Of particular note for older drivers, my optician told me he finds lots of people who drive have sub standard eyesight refuse to get glasses, yet he cannot report them and is prevented from doing so by the Data Protection Act.
Perhaps on renewing a photocard license you should have to submit a certificate from an optician showing that you have adequate vision?
Only problem is that there is no guarantee that they will wear them. My mother's sort-of-boyfriend (sounds a bit ridiculous for someone in their seventies) has glasses but is too vain to wear them! Perhaps on renewing a photocard license you should have to submit a certificate from an optician showing that you have adequate vision?
I'm sure there are old people driving that shouldn't be. But there are lots of younger ones too that are dangerous for various reasons. Re-testing might be taking it too far but perhaps everyone should have to have a medical exam and eye-sight test every ten years, dropping to every five after 65. That would probably weed out a significant number without costing too much.
JohneeBoy said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
ruffstuff said:
I absolutly agree that OAPs should be tested at least every 3 years max. I live in North Norfolk & we are inundated with wrinklies behind the wheel - some are a bloody pain. Thay will not drive up to limit even if the conditions are perfect & theres no other traffic about, sometimes as much as 20-30 below on a 60mph road! I have even seen a couple of cars doing no more than 15-20 on A roads. A classic happened a few months ago that was reported in the local rag about some old twerp creeping along a main A road, eventually turning off after causing a considerable back-log. Sitting behind was an off duty cop who was p****d off with it & followed the old man to his house. The cop went up to the guy & said that he had called an officer to come & talk to him. Turned out the old man was 90 plus & had failing eyesight. He had his license taken away. The laws are just too lax when it comes to old drivers; retests & health exams should be done for over 65 let alone 70. These should be at least £200 to cover the costs of employing testers & make people think twice about driving. Think of the jobs it would create.
I don't understand your this logic at all. On the one hand you moan about useless older drivers, and then when I driver has the good sense to drive well below the speed limit because they know their abilities aren't what they should be, you moan about that!I wonder how many teenagers drive at half the speed limit because they realise they lack maturity and talent. Maybe if more of them did we might have less carnage on the roads. Old people driving slowly doesn't cause accidents. Impatient morons behind them do!!
Anyway, whether or not we all agree there is a problem with old folk on the roads, if action is taken to remove them you have to consider how they live their daily lives. Much like the who Green Debate and getting people to do less miles in the car, what is the alternative for the people who have no alternative? My suggestion for old people, made up now, drink in hand, is to permit older folk to drive only during certain hours so they don't affect the rush hour traffic for example?
epetition on improving Police powers for instances like this
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/21244
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/21244
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I wonder how many teenagers drive at half the speed limit because they realise they lack maturity and talent. Maybe if more of them did we might have less carnage on the roads. Old people driving slowly doesn't cause accidents. Impatient morons behind them do!!
This is what I don't get, ANY responsible driver should ensure their own driving does not cause anyone to become impatient and take risks!!!Human nature can't be helped, so when you get up on your soap box saying they shouldn't be impatient, your actually talking out of your a55.
If I walk up to a bloody big dog and repeatedly kick it in the nuts, it's going to f**king bite me.... Would anyone here blame the dog????? Didn't think so!
If you drive around in the knowledge that your actions are p!ssing people off, you can't blame them when they finally snap!! But you'll try to!
This is trait of many late middle aged to elderly drivers, they've lost all control in their lives, they have nothing, not even control of their own bladder. So what do they do? They go around p!ssing people off, because in the safety of their own metal cage, they feel they have something they can control, other peoples emotions..... And then they just sit back and watch as their latest victim ploughs into an innocent family on the way to Alton towers, killing 2 adults and 4 children, as they sail past muttering "it's not a race" or "didn't get you very far" or "it's a limit, not a target".
It makes my blood boil, people need to be held accountable when their actions cause another driver to "red mist".
If everyone drove at or near the speed limit when conditions allow, we'd see a 99% reduction in impatient drivers and therefore accidents caused by.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Learn to deal with it....and leave earlier so you have more time for your journey.
Yep that's yet another one liner, like "it's not a race" and "it's a limit not a target". One liners are generally intended to stop a conversation dead, because there's no immediate response to such a stupid statement.However i've had time to think on this one... You see when I leave for work in the morning I have a 10 min time window in which I need to leave, too early and I hit local traffic, too late and I hit traffic near to work, both of which turn a 30min drive into a 1hr - 1.5hr fiasco.
So I leave here at 7:45am, it's 16 miles to work and I start at 8:30, on a good day it's a 25min drive, I get to work early, I make a cup of tea, I have some breakfast and I settle down at my desk. But when I come across some doddery old fool on my route, it's 55mins+ and I know im going to be late....
Leave early? Yeah, great idea because traffic + old fool would see me at work in nearly 2 hours....
Edited by lyonspride on Wednesday 14th March 02:21
I'm abroad for work at the moment and I have a semi-colleague with me who's in his 70's (experimental physicists never really retire). I've come over in a van with some kit, he flew out to meet me and sorted out a hire car. I have to say I wasn't at all looking forward to him driving me around. Turns out he's an excellent driver and I've since found out that he has an STI impreza as his daily driver back home because he 'likes something with a bit of poke'. So they're not all doddering about at 15mph!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
It think the key word in speed limit is LIMIT. It's a maximum, not a compulsory requirement. If someone wants to do 30 in a 60, because they're knocking on a bit and feel more comfortable at that speed, good luck to them. Learn to deal with it....and leave earlier so you have more time for your journey.
How very narrow minded. So if I wish to drive at 15mph on a busy twisty road during rush hour that would be acceptable and safe? No, of course it wouldn't. For a start you'll be in the way and frustrate those behind you. If a lorry joins your little "safety convoy" then it's near impossible to overtake; I've seen people try though and come close to a nasty head on. If you do it on a motorway or dual carriageway the speed differential is unsafe too. When will people understand that, like it or not, driving slow can sometimes be dangerous!I think it's a BIT unfair to target people purely on their age - because the things which tend to deteriorate most with age can often be a problem on MUCH younger people.
Eyesight is the biggest issue really - and it's generally held that EVERYONE needs some form of corrective vision by the time they pass 40 and yet nowhere near that many people bother with it. Night blindness is also a big issue which is largely untested for in any way and yet it leaves people driving 'blind' in some cases.
Distraction and confusion are not unique to the elderly either - goto any supermarket carpark and watch parents as they attempt to keep an eye on junior(s) and not crash at the same time!!
Bottom line - I think mandatory sight tests and some retesting for both awareness of changes to driving law and your general ability to drive would be a good idea for just about everyone tbh
p.s. I also think that in order to drive kids you should have to pass the test WITH kids in the car - that'll teach the b
ds 
Eyesight is the biggest issue really - and it's generally held that EVERYONE needs some form of corrective vision by the time they pass 40 and yet nowhere near that many people bother with it. Night blindness is also a big issue which is largely untested for in any way and yet it leaves people driving 'blind' in some cases.
Distraction and confusion are not unique to the elderly either - goto any supermarket carpark and watch parents as they attempt to keep an eye on junior(s) and not crash at the same time!!
Bottom line - I think mandatory sight tests and some retesting for both awareness of changes to driving law and your general ability to drive would be a good idea for just about everyone tbh
p.s. I also think that in order to drive kids you should have to pass the test WITH kids in the car - that'll teach the b
ds Edited by johnpeat on Wednesday 14th March 00:40
TwigtheWonderkid said:
It think the key word in speed limit is LIMIT. It's a maximum, not a compulsory requirement. If someone wants to do 30 in a 60, because they're knocking on a bit and feel more comfortable at that speed, good luck to them. Learn to deal with it....and leave earlier so you have more time for your journey.
Not quite.If driving conditions allow it,you are expected to be on or very close to the speed limit.If you decide to swan about at well below the posted limits in good driving conditions during a driving test,you will fail.
I agree, lazy populist stereotyping.
Most of the obnoxiously, needlessly aggressive and downright dangerous driving is from non-pensioners.
http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/conferences/congre...
Why commission it and then not read or action it?
Surely there are enough RoSPA members that retake their test to work out if regular retesting for everyone is the answer?
Most of the obnoxiously, needlessly aggressive and downright dangerous driving is from non-pensioners.
http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/conferences/congre...
Why commission it and then not read or action it?
Surely there are enough RoSPA members that retake their test to work out if regular retesting for everyone is the answer?
Panda76 said:
Not quite.If driving conditions allow it,you are expected to be on or very close to the speed limit.
If you decide to swan about at well below the posted limits in good driving conditions during a driving test,you will fail.
The first part is certainly true of 30 and 40 limits - perhaps a bit less so with 50 and 60 limits but certainly you're required to "keep up" with other traffic and failing to do so is driving without due care and attention.If you decide to swan about at well below the posted limits in good driving conditions during a driving test,you will fail.
It's also true that driving too slowly can fail your test - I know 2 people who failed for exactly that!!
I thought that driving too slowly could get you charged with obstruction? I don't subscribe to the view that people are doing the right thing by driving within their abilities - their abilities should be reasonable.
My late mother was really quite frightening and would pull out in front of cars she hadn't seen forcing them to do emergency stops. My wife's mother's car has a scrape on every corner; the classic being she borrowed our MPV, parked it in our driveway, got into her car and reversed it straight into the MPV she'd just parked. My wife's grandfather also had a ding on each corner and also pulled out in front of a car he didn't see with bent metal consequences.
I also find the elderly also tend to make up most of the 40mph anywhere brigade. 40 in a NSL in good conditions, 40 in a 20 past a primary school with children and distracted parents and car doors flying open everywhere.
My late mother was really quite frightening and would pull out in front of cars she hadn't seen forcing them to do emergency stops. My wife's mother's car has a scrape on every corner; the classic being she borrowed our MPV, parked it in our driveway, got into her car and reversed it straight into the MPV she'd just parked. My wife's grandfather also had a ding on each corner and also pulled out in front of a car he didn't see with bent metal consequences.
I also find the elderly also tend to make up most of the 40mph anywhere brigade. 40 in a NSL in good conditions, 40 in a 20 past a primary school with children and distracted parents and car doors flying open everywhere.
I find, out here in the country, the only oldies holding me up very often, are those towing a caravan. Obviously city slickers, out of their depth.
The worst offenders in the slow stakes are tradesmen in utilities or vans, [usually overloaded], & young mothers with a couple of kids in the back. The oldies out here are used to driving at moderately fast speeds, & don't muck around.
If you drive slowly in our area, expect me to come roaring past, usually in second or third gear in the S2000, or the TR8.
Still for all the kids on here, running off at the mouth, I promise to give up my licence when my son, & all his mates can beat me around the go kart track.
By the way, my son is 26, & I'm 72. Bit of a late started, don't you know.
The worst offenders in the slow stakes are tradesmen in utilities or vans, [usually overloaded], & young mothers with a couple of kids in the back. The oldies out here are used to driving at moderately fast speeds, & don't muck around.
If you drive slowly in our area, expect me to come roaring past, usually in second or third gear in the S2000, or the TR8.
Still for all the kids on here, running off at the mouth, I promise to give up my licence when my son, & all his mates can beat me around the go kart track.
By the way, my son is 26, & I'm 72. Bit of a late started, don't you know.
Here we go again...."do gooders/busy bodies" dreaming up further obstructions to extract more cash from the motorist, as we all know what happens to such scams. (Remember the property HIPs designed to get some people off the dole leaving property sellers to pay their wages).
I have driven cars and ridden motor cycles all my life without a blameworthy accident, or conviction (although good luck maybe responsible for the latter!)which I am happy about especially as my car test was a short run with an examiner - never driven one before - based on my having a motor cycle licence and driving off-road an agricultural tractor. I then had a spell as a very successful bike and car driving instructor.
Seems I'm wrong to be safely driving my Ferrari and Alfa Romeo without more meddling and whilst I confess a 220 mile non stop drive is now sufficient especially when partly at night, who wants to put me, at 78 years of age, off the road? Busy bodies better employed by campaigning for removal of uninsured drivers who should, without exception, have their cars crushed. ... but then the "plod" too busy catching 'evil' speeders with their "scarecrow with hair dryer" acts. Cynical me? Yes..........
I have driven cars and ridden motor cycles all my life without a blameworthy accident, or conviction (although good luck maybe responsible for the latter!)which I am happy about especially as my car test was a short run with an examiner - never driven one before - based on my having a motor cycle licence and driving off-road an agricultural tractor. I then had a spell as a very successful bike and car driving instructor.
Seems I'm wrong to be safely driving my Ferrari and Alfa Romeo without more meddling and whilst I confess a 220 mile non stop drive is now sufficient especially when partly at night, who wants to put me, at 78 years of age, off the road? Busy bodies better employed by campaigning for removal of uninsured drivers who should, without exception, have their cars crushed. ... but then the "plod" too busy catching 'evil' speeders with their "scarecrow with hair dryer" acts. Cynical me? Yes..........
Point missed, I think. It's obvious that as we get older our abilities decrease. Some more than others. There's a guy near us who is nearly 90 whose driving is impeccable. There are people near us in their 60s whose driving is awful. It's not unreasonable to admit that as people age their abilities decline in some respects and we should check to see who has the requisite skills to drive a 1 ton+ car. A computer based test is not expensive, in fact way less than a tank of fuel. I think the poster above doth protesteth too much.
As a general rule I find those that claim to have driven for the past 100 years without ever having had so much as a bump are the worse drivers by far and should have been removed from the roads decades ago. How the fk they've managed to have gone so long without hitting anything or being hit is a complete mystery, I can only guess that lady luck has been watching over them. It was only last year that I had a "I've been driving for 50 years and never had an accident" woman come at me driving the wrong way round the roundabout at J25 on the M62 at 1130pm.
Compulsory retest every 10 years reducing to every 3 years once you reach 60, for everyone. If they had that in now I reckon at least a third of the entire UK driving driving population would be gone overnight, mainly the elderly.
Oh and the driving test itself needs to be at least 10x more difficult to pass than it is now. If anyone can't pass it on the first go then you should realise that you are not cut out to be a driver, period. It's an absolute doddle. And if you fail it twice in a row then you are not allowed to sit another one for a minimum of 5 years. This is root of the problem when it boils down to it.
k they've managed to have gone so long without hitting anything or being hit is a complete mystery, I can only guess that lady luck has been watching over them. It was only last year that I had a "I've been driving for 50 years and never had an accident" woman come at me driving the wrong way round the roundabout at J25 on the M62 at 1130pm.Compulsory retest every 10 years reducing to every 3 years once you reach 60, for everyone. If they had that in now I reckon at least a third of the entire UK driving driving population would be gone overnight, mainly the elderly.
Oh and the driving test itself needs to be at least 10x more difficult to pass than it is now. If anyone can't pass it on the first go then you should realise that you are not cut out to be a driver, period. It's an absolute doddle. And if you fail it twice in a row then you are not allowed to sit another one for a minimum of 5 years. This is root of the problem when it boils down to it.
Edited by All that jazz on Wednesday 14th March 05:59
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff