should we retest the elderly as a requirement for a drivers license?

[jims69camaro]

i've been wrestling with this question in my head for days, now. since i posted up about the guy who was killed on his harley by an 84 year old woman who lost consciousness while driving, i haven't been able to get it out of my mind.

so what do you guys think? please elaborate on your answers. let's discuss this one, because no matter which side of the argument you fall on, one day (if it is made law) it will affect you.

i'm feeling that testing should be done, like every five years after reaching age 50, or after having an accident (regardless of age), and then every two years thereafter.

[Tsar]

every year. why do we have to wait for them to get into an accident and kill someone? after all driving is NOT a right, so they should deal with it or not drive at all.

[j0n]

Originally Posted by Tsar

every year. why do we have to wait for them to get into an accident and kill someone? after all driving is NOT a right, so they should deal with it or not drive at all.

Agreed 110% pretty much exactly what i was going to say

[79T/A]

Not only that, they should also only be allowed to drive small Mr. Bean type cars made entirely of Nerf.

[BonzoHansen]

Originally Posted by Tsar

every year. why do we have to wait for them to get into an accident and kill someone? after all driving is NOT a right, so they should deal with it or not drive at all.

I agree, except the logistics and cost of annual testing would make it impossible. Plus the AARP would fight it to the death. How long is a license renewal period – 5 years, 4 years?? Retest them every renewal.

I’m not sure if it needs to be a standard test like new drivers get. I’d be more concerned with vision & reaction time/reflexes.

[iamsickofitall]

with all the terrible drivers on the road, i wouldn't mind EVERYONE being tested again every time they bring their car in for inspection. i know this would be a huge inconvenience and would result in a gianormous tax increase, but it should weed out those that "squeaked by" on their first test and never improved or went really far downhill with their driving "skill".

but yes, old people should be tested annually

[procamaroz28]

Originally Posted by 79T/A

Not only that, they should also only be allowed to drive small Mr. Bean type cars made entirely of Nerf.

lol hell yea

[qwikz28]

instead of annually, how about every 3-5 years? including vision, stimulus response and so forth....

[NJSPEEDER]

i personally believe everyone should be retested every so any years. it isn't just the elderly that are bad drivers, there are pennsylvanians, people from south jersey, and teeny boppers in daddy's beemer to watch out for too.

[bokey]

I think the best solution for this is to get tested every 3-5 years from the first day you get your license ... the fact remains that there are some 80 year olds that drive better then some 20 year olds

[edit] damnit speeder, as soon as I posted, your post came up... haha

[Tsar]

Originally Posted by BonzoHansen

I agree, except the logistics and cost of annual testing would make it impossible. Plus the AARP would fight it to the death. How long is a license renewal period – 5 years, 4 years?? Retest them every renewal.

I’m not sure if it needs to be a standard test like new drivers get. I’d be more concerned with vision & reaction time/reflexes.

I think standard test sucks ass. I think it should be made more strict not just for old people but for everyone. When i was getting my license all i had to do is drive around a parking lot, back up, make a K turn and parallel park. How is this a test? it's laughable at best... FAA flight test was way harder

Back on the subject of old people; 5 years is too long. I work at a rehab/nursing home, and old people go down the crapper REALLY quick, so by the time 5 years has passed it might be too late. Not saying that everyone is like that but a lot of them are. And yes it would cost a lot, however the financial issue was not introduced at the beginning of the discussion. I just think they should be tested more often and a their standards be higher.

[BonzoHansen]

Originally Posted by Tsar

...5 years is too long. I work at a rehab/nursing home, and old people go down the crapper REALLY quick, so by the time 5 years has passed it might be too late. Not saying that everyone is like that but a lot of them are. And yes it would cost a lot, however the financial issue was not introduced at the beginning of the discussion. I just think they should be tested more often and a their standards be higher.

I agree totally. It is just financially and politically infeasible. Too bad, too.

[Savage_Messiah]

I voted for certain age then annually... but then again, look what happened when South Park took away all the old people's licenses

[NJSPEEDER]

tsar, doesn't the FAA require a paper test recert every few years or something like that? regardless of age/hours/flight record?
i seem to remember reading somewhere that they require some sort of training/cert hours every 2 or 3 years or something like that. i jsut don't feel like looking for the info right now.

[deadtrend1]

Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER

it isn't just the elderly that are bad drivers, there are pennsylvanians, people from south jersey, and teeny boppers in daddy's beemer to watch out for too.

Define "south jersey"!

I used to think that the state issued crown victorias and caprice classics to everyone over 65 yrs old

[NJSPEEDER]

well, i have seen you drive. so i am guessing south jersey starts somewhere near where you live and goes to the bottom of the map

[johnjzjz]

to fly you need a doctor to clear you no matter how old you are -- its always an issue for some to want things some dont untill they shair the same reason -- old is around the corner carefull what you wish for -- jz

[jola]

The only 2 downsides I can see to yearly testing is more people at the DMV and hurt egos. The upsides are saved lives, less accidents, and less people on the road.

EDIT: Also the elderly who fail would have to find some other means of transportation. Too bad senior citizens rock the vote.

[Blacdout96]

well if we got our youthfull asses to the voting booths that wouldnt be a problem. Its funny to think that kids that havea big life ahead of them, that dont get the privalege of owning a f body, drive like an acura RSX or a honda or Hyundai, small, light cars that would crumble like tin foil,and zip around as if they are invinsible, and yet old peopel, who are gonna be pickign up their get out of life free card sometime soon drive these big ass crown vics and lincolns, which got some power behind them wiht those 4.6's n such, and cruise ever so slowly in them, but would be able to survive a damn crash thru a wall.

[foff667]

I definitly think so. I have not a clue how they would get around but my grandfather took off his side view mirror pulling into his garage 3 times in 2 years

[WildBillyT]

I think they should retest everyone at license renewal. With a real road test.

Testing the elderly seems like a good idea but what about the people that have no other way to get around? How are they supposed to get to the doctor, supermarket/food store and places like that?

[Blacdout96]

Originally Posted by WildBillyT

I think they should retest everyone at license renewal. With a real road test.

Testing the elderly seems like a good idea but what about the people that have no other way to get around? How are they supposed to get to the doctor, supermarket/food store and places like that?

yeah that testthey give you is ass, they should take you on the highway, and into a parking lot, not jsut around the corner. I think the elderly would push it as being biast, or racist to age, and would fight it tooth and nail, so its better off we do test about every 5 years or so, money should never be an issue when it comes to safety, but its sad to see our government would rather savea penny then a life.

[WildBillyT]

Originally Posted by Blacdout96

yeah that testthey give you is ass, they should take you on the highway, and into a parking lot, not jsut around the corner. I think the elderly would push it as being biast, or racist to age, and would fight it tooth and nail, so its better off we do test about every 5 years or so, money should never be an issue when it comes to safety, but its sad to see our government would rather savea penny then a life.

Racist to age? I believe you mean age discrimination?

And that really is what it is. When you are young and reliant on your parents you don't need transportation as badly as you do when you are older. I think retesting for everyone and maybe a restricted license if you are elderly might be a good solution.

[NJSPEEDER]

Originally Posted by johnjzjz

old is around the corner carefull what you wish for -- jz

i would wish for it jsut for the sake of my insurance. think about it, if you force people to prove they still know how to drive every few years, you are eliminating one fo the billion excuses the insurance companies use to jack up all of our rates.

the drivers test is garbage. it teaches you more about what to do to not get a ticket than how to actually drive.

[Teds89IROC]

I can't stand old people doing 25 in a 40, backing up into parked cars, sideswiping parked cars/people...so my vote is to be retested at a certain age then tested every 5 years...but now that I think about it more, I wish to change my vote to option #1 lol