Should elderly people have their licenses revoked?

[Howl]

Well VengefulRonin kind of mentioned this in another thread, but I didn't want to stray off topic. So...what do you guys think about elderly drivers? Including handicapped drivers, hearing impaired drivers, and elderly drivers who may have slower reflexes than younger people.
We've all been stuck in traffic behind one of those old folks that goes 25 mph under the speed limit...on the freeway, and driving too slow is just as hazardous to others as driving too fast!

Do you guys think that elderly people should have to take routine tests to ensure that they are safe enough drivers? Should all people have routine driving tests?

 

[Bei Bei]

This is a really big fear of mine while driving. I was driving with my boyfriends grandma and I feared for my life. She didn't seem aware of anything else going on around her.

I have noticed elderly drivers are most responsible for running over pedestrians, and just because you got your license 50 years ago doesn't mean you can still drive like you used to. You can always spot an elderly on the road too just because the way they drive, and I try to stay clear of them.

 

[Warbsywoo]

That's more of a generalization. I, on the other hand, know tons of elderly drivers who know what it means to be 'safe' on the road. Take a look at stats and see how many casualties elderly drivers take and create. They are mostly way better than we teenagers when it comes to driving.

I don't know if you guys have considered this, but maybe elderly drivers know what speeding can actually do to you, perhaps?

In regards to elderly drivers being erratic, that's a minority. I wouldn't support giving elderly people tests for driving because I think it's unfair, and besides, think of what you're saying here.

If elderly people today get driving tests, and by apparent teenage reasoning, that they might fail and get off the road completely, then think about what happens when you're in that stage of life and, circumstances permit, you cannot drive because your license was revoked.

 

[Scarlet]

Uhh, yes! Definitely! Even some states are already enforcing this issue. I believe old people should be tested at a certain age, such as 65+? They should be tested regularly for reflexes, eye sight, hearing, and more. Also old people have a higher risk of getting a heart attack, fall asleep easily, stroke, etc. An old person driving on a 55MPH highway and all of a sudden they go unconscious. Nice huge accident there, could kill a few innocent people. Not to mention we hear often on the new on how some old person drove into a building. (Remember that old lady who drove into a super market? =P)

Actually a few incidents happened around me involving old drivers...A year ago a 25 year old pregnant woman died because an old lady pulled out in front of her on a 60MPH road. There were also other car accidents that happened because of old people well....Being old, having bad timing and reflexes.

Old people are at high risk now by the way. They're right below teenagers. Not to mention, during rush hour on a busy, packed two-three lane highway...If you're not going the same speed as everyone else, you're putting yourself in a risky situation. It is MUCH better to follow the speed as everyone else is.

 

[Rydia]

At the age of 65, people should start being tested if they are fit to drive. They should have their eye site and a cognitive assessment. If they pass them both, then they should still be able to drive. If they do not pass, then either their driver's liceness need to be limited or it should be revoked.

 

[Rockman X]

I don't know if you guys have considered this, but maybe elderly drivers know what speeding can actually do to you, perhaps?

First off, this issue isn't just about speeding. Have you ever woken up late and had to rush off to work, only to be slowed down by some twat driving 10 miles below the speed limit and you can't pass them, even if you blare your horn and tail them? It's happened to me countless times. I don't know if you've considered this (old people certainly don't), but people DO have places to go, be it work or doctor appointments or a work interview, not everyone is just driving for the sake of getting to the mall. By going so slow, you prevent people from getting to important destinations. Not to mention I'm fairly certain it's ILLEGAL to drive 10 miles below the speed limit.

Hell, on several occasions when I've ridden with my grandparents and my grandpa will actually go below the speed limit ON PURPOSE to piss off the other drivers. Now I'm not saying all old people do that, but they don't consider the possibilities of WHY someone needs to get somewhere.

In regards to elderly drivers being erratic, that's a minority. I wouldn't support giving elderly people tests for driving because I think it's unfair, and besides, think of what you're saying here.

No, it isn't a minority. I don't know what the town you live in is like, but around here there are alot of old people, and I've been driving for 5 years now so I can say without a doubt that most old people are horrid drivers. I'm pretty sure most people here who have been driving for a while can attest to that.

If elderly people today get driving tests, and by apparent teenage reasoning, that they might fail and get off the road completely, then think about what happens when you're in that stage of life and, circumstances permit, you cannot drive because your license was revoked.

That very thinking about what happens in that stage of life is WHY states have decided to test old people! Vision and reflexes deteriorate, even if you are a smart, fully sane person...once you hit that stage it is DANGEROUS to be on the road, not just for yourself but for others. Testing determines whether you have the physical capabilities to still be considered safe for driving. If they fail it's for a very good reason.

For 10+ years before she died, my aunt would always get her drivers license renewed by mail. You know what? For those 10+ years her sight kept deteriorating from cataracts till she was legally blind, yet she still drove. That is a prime example as to why old people need to be tested! I'm sorry, but if you can't see that then either the elderly people you know are perfect human beings or you don't do much driving.

 

[Warbsywoo]

Actually, it's both VR. All the elderly people I know are actually quite capable drivers and their ages are far beyond 65.
And yes, I barely drive, but my conclusions on the subject are just based on that.

You guys bring up good points, but I just disagree with it.

 

[Rockman X]

Actually, it's both VR. All the elderly people I know are actually quite capable drivers and their ages are far beyond 65.

Wow, so you know perfect human beings? Care to share their secret on how to do it? And please take note, we are not saying old people shouldn't be allowed to drive. We're saying they should be TESTED. If the old people you know are perfectly capable drivers then they should pass the tests fine and you have no reason to complain.

And yes, I barely drive, but my conclusions on the subject are just based on that.

You guys bring up good points, but I just disagree with it.

You just killed your entire credibility in this thread by saying that. You have barely any driving experience, admit we make good points, yet continue to hold to your bias? Real smart.

 

[Warbsywoo]

1.) What were we talking about again? Perfect people, or perfect drivers?

2.) Who cares about credibility? I just posted my opinion and I stand by it.
EDIT: And what bias are you talking about?

 

[Rockman X]

1.) What were we talking about again? Perfect people, or perfect drivers?

Well, I said:

I'm sorry, but if you can't see that then either the elderly people you know are perfect human beings or you don't do much driving.

And then you said:

Actually, it's both VR. All the elderly people I know are actually quite capable drivers and their ages are far beyond 65.

So it looked to me like you meant you know people who were both perfect and don't do much driving.

2.) Who cares about credibility? I just posted my opinion and I stand by it.

Well...let's look at it another way: we have experience in driving and you don't. You would probably change your mind if you'd been driving for as long as some of us have, but to stand by an opinion when the evidence and experience others bring forth is what kills your credibility in the matter, i.e. makes your opinion look very silly, to say the least.

Plus, all we are saying is we want old people tested to see whether they are fit to drive. It's not encroaching on anyone's rights anymore than wearing a seatbelt is. It's to make the road a safer place. I don't see why you think it's so unfair. Can you honestly say it's a smart idea to not determine who is safe and who's dangerous? Those who are still capable of driving will pass, therefore have no reason to be concerned. Those who fail are risks to themselves and other drivers, therefore it is safer with them off the road.

 

[Warbsywoo]

Well...let's look at it another way: we have experience in driving and you don't. You would probably change your mind if you'd been driving for as long as some of us have, but to stand by an opinion when the evidence and experience others bring forth is what kills your credibility in the matter, i.e. makes your opinion look very silly, to say the least.

IMO, it makes little difference to me whether I have no experience driving and you guys do, that's just the way I see things and I don't I'll change views on that at all. But whatever, I see what you're saying.

But... [/quote]

Plus, all we are saying is we want old people tested to see whether they are fit to drive. It's not encroaching on anyone's rights anymore than wearing a seatbelt is. It's to make the road a safer place. I don't see why you think it's so unfair. Can you honestly say it's a smart idea to not determine who is safe and who's dangerous? Those who are still capable of driving will pass, therefore have no reason to be concerned. Those who fail are risks to themselves and other drivers, therefore it is safer with them off the road.

All right, you got me there. But there are still those variables that such a test that you are proposing might not cover. How is the state or whoever is put in charge of this process supposed to determine the 'danger level' of the elderly accurately? As far as I'm concerned, it's the mental level that you should be looking at and not the physical, because 9 times out of 10 accidents are caused by pure mental mistakes.
So the mention of eye exams and stuff like that I consider irrelevant.

EDIT: And besides lol, the title was revoking licenses completely, and I was responding to that question and not to any other posts made before my first.

 

[captainbill47]

My stance on Elderly Drivers is this: Automatic test required at age 60. Eye and driving test required every 5 years until 80. Eye and driving test required each year thereafter....

 

[Rockman X]

All right, you got me there. But there are still those variables that such a test that you are proposing might not cover. How is the state or whoever is put in charge of this process supposed to determine the 'danger level' of the elderly accurately? As far as I'm concerned, it's the mental level that you should be looking at and not the physical, because 9 times out of 10 accidents are caused by pure mental mistakes.
So the mention of eye exams and stuff like that I consider irrelevant.

EDIT: And besides lol, the title was revoking licenses completely, and I was responding to that question and not to any other posts made before my first.

Oh come on man, you can't be serious. It IS about physical level, don't you understand what happens when you get old and the processes that occur when you drive? Eye exams would determine loss of vision or color. That means you would have trouble even determining what color the light was, or reading road signs. Testing would determine just how much or how little your body had worn down and whether or not you were fit to drive. Licenses would be revoked for the ones who performed badly.

Nerves and reflexes degrade. Now, for the hell of it, lets assume you can see fine. It won't matter, because if you can't react quickly enough, you'll cause an accident (or in the very least, back up traffic which leads me back to one of my original points on how they make people late). When driving, you have to be able to react quickly, whether you're looking for a street sign (because half the time they put them so far back you can't see till you're nearly beside the street) to find someone's house, or if you suddenly have to break because a dog runs across the road. It doesn't matter if you can see fine, if you're reflexes aren't working you will be slower. It is COMPLETELY physical ability that matters in elderly drivers.

To put it in very simple terms:

Teenage testing = mental capacity
Elderly testing = physical capacity

 

[Warbsywoo]

Even still, they could be issued glasses before that drastic an action should be taken. If they fail in that aspect, then you're right, the license should be revoked, but as long as there's a way to amend their faults...

As for the reflexes part, they drive slower. But unless we're talking about completely debilitated people who can't stand under their own power...

 

[Rockman X]

Even still, they could be issued glasses before that drastic an action should be taken. If they fail in that aspect, then you're right, the license should be revoked, but as long as there's a way to amend their faults...

Which brings mental condition into the issue. What happens if they forget their glasses? If kids in highschool can forget to bring their glasses, I'm fairly certain it would happen alot more to the elderly, because memory tends to decay when you get old.

As for the reflexes part, they drive slower. But unless we're talking about completely debilitated people who can't stand under their own power...

You don't get it do you? It's NOT just about driving slower. Lets say the color changes at a traffic light. They know what it's changed to, but their body takes longer to react. Depending on the color of the light, this could either lead to traffic being backed up OR a wreck. Going by my last post's example, lets say a dog crosses the road. They see the dog, but can't react fast enough, so now the dog is dead and they're possibly in the ditch because of jerky reactions. It's not that hard to understand.

 

[Scarlet]

Even still, they could be issued glasses before that drastic an action should be taken. If they fail in that aspect, then you're right, the license should be revoked, but as long as there's a way to amend their faults...

As for the reflexes part, they drive slower. But unless we're talking about completely debilitated people who can't stand under their own power...

There is a speed limit for a reason. No excuse to go -10 or more under. A police can give you a ticket for that by the way, and holding up traffic. =P

Edit: That's why some highways have a minimal speed limit to avoid such accidents. As I said before, going slow isn't necessarily always safe. I have dealt with rush hour very often, as well as bumper to bumper traffic. It's SAFER to go to same speed as everyone else on the lane your traveling on. Going slower than everyone else can cause rear-end collisions.

Umm it's not just they drive slow they're prone to do dangerous things. As I said before, they have bad reflexes because they're old. I've seen old people make left turns when there are five signs pointing: NO LEFT TURN. I've nearly got merged into because some old person didn't see me. I had to quickly drive over to the side and pass them. It's not only their eyesight and reflexes and what not...It's that they're simply old. An old person can suddenly have a heart attack, faint, whatever. Sure, healthy people can suddenly pass out but it's more likely to happen to old people.

My dad does work for a condominium community where old people retire there. Erythritol and I are scared to drive around there. I hear so many damn stories of old people going through stop signs, nearly hitting other drivers, driving in the middle of the road, accidents etc. It's not just old people driving slow it's old people who have bad reflexes, and are not aware of their surroundings.

Teenagers tend to be bad drivers. They speed, and have a large risk in getting into a car accident. That's because they believe they're invincible and speeding is awesome! Yes, I was one of those teenagers who speed and cut in front of people. I have nearly got into a car accident but I, a young person, have a good reflex and I quickly got out of the situation. You can't really blame them because they're new drivers and they don't know better.

As for old drivers, yes they're old, but they should know better about the surroundings around them. You're driving a LETHAL weapon, you should ALWAYS be aware. Old people are and will continue to be a hazard on the road. Not all, but accident and insurance rates have increased for them. The US is aware of this issue which is why some states already are testing old people to see if they're still capable of driving.

 

[Ilyena]

I agree with most here who suggest that elderly people should start getting tested after a certain age, and that should definitely include a road test. I do know a few elderly people who are very good drivers; my grandfather is one of them. Still, I've been driving for around 8 years now and I can honestly say that most elderly people I've seen are absolutely horrid drivers.

For one, they tend to drive far below the speed limit. Like others have mentioned here, it's not just an annoyance, it's also very dangerous. I've been on the freeway many times and seen elderly drivers merrily driving along at 45 miles per hour. People get on the freeway to avoid things like this. It causes frustration and usually ends up with people making a lot of dangerous maneuvers just to get around them.

And, like VR stated, eyesight and reflexes are very important to driving. As people get older, their vision deteriorates and their reflexes tend to be slower. I do think it's a good idea that their capability in these areas be tested on a regular basis.

I also think that they should be tested on their knowledge of road rules as well; truthfully, I think this should go for just about everyone but we're talking about the elderly here. No, you cannot make a right hand turn from the left lane. No, you cannot merge if there is someone in the lane right beside you. No, you cannot drive 35mph in a 55mph zone. And for fuck's sake, No you can't park in the middle of the street. Of course, this doesn't cover everything I see elderly people do on a regular basis but it's a good example.

So yeah, I do think they should regularly be tested and if they fail, their licenses should be revoked. I know the DMV in NC is very lenient on elderly drivers. In fact, my grandfather has been driving without a license since 1978, yet he's never had any trouble purchasing a car or registering it at the DMV. He's a very capable driver but it is still a huge failure on the DMV's part, IMO.

 

[F. F. Fan]

I know how you feel, I've been behind plenty of them day in and day out. >.<

I fully agree that all people who are driving over the age of 65 should be fully retested every year... eyesight, hearing as well as reflexes.

I myself have seen way too many accidents caused by the elderly with a condition that in my opinion, could have been avoided had they been tested instead of just being handed a drivers license. I know the argument can be made that young drivers aren't any better or cause more accidents, but in the case with the elderly, I feel it can be easily eliminated through proper testing.

On the flip side of the argument, it's really hard to revoke them of that privilege given this country fails miserably when it comes to public transportation. Most elderly, like my 85 year old grandmother have no one to transport them to and from everyday things that we take for granted and her driving is getting bad. If she lost her drivers license, she would be forced to sell her home and move in with my parents or assisted living.

I don't know, I'm all for yanking the license when the driving abilities start to go, but then that creates a whole new set of problems in its own.

 

[StrifeC]

Not all of them should lose the ability to drive. I think that there should be an extensive test though to see if they should keep it or not.

There have been quite a few times when I had the right of way or the green light and an old person flew around the corner still driving like they are 18 years old. Or some that run the red light and think that they are doing the right thing.

So yes an extensive test should be created.

 

[Maximus]

along with StrifeC, i don't think that they hould lose the ability to drive but i think that they should have group tests like tests for people in the 20's, 30's, etc. just to see if they've lost anything over time.