U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-30-2011, 12:05 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,497,588 times
Reputation: 29076

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
Is anyone listening to me, the Original Poster??? I said very elderly, as in OVER 80. I am not talking about people as young a s 65 or 70!!!! Why does everyone keep going on about younger older folks??

I was implying in my posts that there are risk categories--heart disease, vision problems, mobility challenges, and AGE. It is AGE (as in very, very old) that my question addresses, otherwise I would have created the OP in a general forum on "Driving."

Can we just discuss "very old" as a possible (or not) risk group that might mandate not only vision testing but regular road testing?
Nope 'cause you're not listening to yourself. Your OP was titled "Very old folks" yet the stats you cited began at age 65. You connect the dots. Here's a refresher for ya:

Quote:
- 37 million people will be over the age of 65 by 2020.
- 90% will be driving.
- 3 million drivers are over age 85 now.
- One guy interview on PBS Newshour has just had a license renewed that is good till he is age 100.
- Only Illinois requires seniors to take a road test.

1. Is it a “dangerous luxury” for old people to operate road vehicles?
(No matter how safely the old folks think they drive, do they still pose a high potential danger?)

2. At what age do you think you’ll stop driving and why? How will you get around?
You asked a question about when WE might think we'd stop driving then began a demand for additional testing and over the course of this thread made a number of pejorative remarks about the elderly and their abilities.

Let's just say "obsession and credibility deficit!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:08 PM
 
8,204 posts, read 11,921,160 times
Reputation: 18020
Quote:
Originally Posted by lenora View Post
I'm not talking about "senior status", where the judge is available for recall. The latter is discretionary and subject to the whims of the court. Do you have a link that states otherwise? Thanks.
Lenora, I worked for the federal judiciary for almost 25 years, including actually writing implementing regulations for judicial retirement for bankrupcty and magistrate judges (since superceded). Trust me, I know what I'm talking about.

By the way, you misunderstand "senior status." First of all, it is not a recall situation. Secondly, it is not subject to the whims of the court; it is actually subject to the whims of the judge. It is completely voluntary on the part of the judge when he or she reaches a certain combination of age and years of service. It allows the judge to take a reduced caseload if he or she wants, but more importantly, even if a full caseload is maintained, it allows the President to appoint another active judge to the district.

The statutory provisions for judicial retirement are delineated in Title 28 of the United States Code. If you want more info on any matter pertaining to judges or the federal courts in general, you can find it at the judiciary's main portal, www.uscourts.gov.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:18 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas
13,890 posts, read 25,335,938 times
Reputation: 26388
I've been pondering this question.

Why not require a complete test(including driving test) for anyone needing to renew a license who has been involved in an accident or has received a moving violation during the term of their previous license? Seems to be more fair than just picking an age and punishing those in that group.

It has occurred to me that any state wanting to make a lot of money fast could easily work on getting unlicensed/uninsured drivers off the road. They know where you live and what you look like. How hard would it be to wait for you to drive out of the garage onto the street? Law enforcement has all the court records, they know who has lost their license. They know where you live and probably where you work as well. They cruise that parking lot and check for your car. Then come back at quitting time. We are creatures of habit and it would be like shooting ducks in a barrel. It would allow police depts. to put more officers on the streets. In Nevada, where I live, it would be a gold mine. Insurance is very high here. And very few people are going to wait at a bus stop when temps are over 110 when there's a nice car with AC in the driveway.

Fines? Let's make them excessive to make more money. $500 plus 40 hours of community service, 1st offense. 2nd offense $1000 plus 80 hours community service. 3rd offense, the county seizes your car and sells it at auction plus you get 30 days at the workhouse. Profits fund the police dept that does this specific work and the rest goes to improve public transportation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 18,985,208 times
Reputation: 15649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Nope 'cause you're not listening to yourself. Your OP was titled "Very old folks" yet the stats you cited began at age 65. You connect the dots. Here's a refresher for ya:

You asked a question about when WE might think we'd stop driving then began a demand for additional testing and over the course of this thread made a number of pejorative remarks about the elderly and their abilities.

Let's just say "obsession and credibility deficit!"
I wanted to start a discussion, not simply assert my personal view, which like all the others here is fairly strong. I'm still mulling over the point that Zarathu brought up about discrimination, it is an excellent point for debate and not one that anyone should take lightly. I value all comments even though I may not agree with them, they add a great deal to the very complex issue.

For the record, in case I myself was not clear as you point out, I do mean "very old folks." But that keeps getting ploughed under anyway so I'm not sure there is ever a definitive answer to my OP, much like most great debate issues.

I am also interested in knowing, as in my OP, what people here would do if they did have to give up driving at any age within the senior years. What is Plan B?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 18,985,208 times
Reputation: 15649
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda View Post
Lenora, I worked for the federal judiciary for almost 25 years, including actually writing implementing regulations for judicial retirement for bankrupcty and magistrate judges (since superceded). Trust me, I know what I'm talking about.

By the way, you misunderstand "senior status." First of all, it is not a recall situation. Secondly, it is not subject to the whims of the court; it is actually subject to the whims of the judge. It is completely voluntary on the part of the judge when he or she reaches a certain combination of age and years of service. It allows the judge to take a reduced caseload if he or she wants, but more importantly, even if a full caseload is maintained, it allows the President to appoint another active judge to the district.

The statutory provisions for judicial retirement are delineated in Title 28 of the United States Code. If you want more info on any matter pertaining to judges or the federal courts in general, you can find it at the judiciary's main portal, www.uscourts.gov.
While this is all very interesting for some, it is definitely off topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:23 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 18,985,208 times
Reputation: 15649
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowsnow View Post
I've been pondering this question.

Why not require a complete test(including driving test) for anyone needing to renew a license who has been involved in an accident or has received a moving violation during the term of their previous license? Seems to be more fair than just picking an age and punishing those in that group.

It has occurred to me that any state wanting to make a lot of money fast could easily work on getting unlicensed/uninsured drivers off the road. They know where you live and what you look like. How hard would it be to wait for you to drive out of the garage onto the street? Law enforcement has all the court records, they know who has lost their license. They know where you live and probably where you work as well. They cruise that parking lot and check for your car. Then come back at quitting time. We are creatures of habit and it would be like shooting ducks in a barrel. It would allow police depts. to put more officers on the streets. In Nevada, where I live, it would be a gold mine. Insurance is very high here. And very few people are going to wait at a bus stop when temps are over 110 when there's a nice car with AC in the driveway.

Fines? Let's make them excessive to make more money. $500 plus 40 hours of community service, 1st offense. 2nd offense $1000 plus 80 hours community service. 3rd offense, the county seizes your car and sells it at auction plus you get 30 days at the workhouse. Profits fund the police dept that does this specific work and the rest goes to improve public transportation.
Interesting thoughts, all. But with the logistics I doubt it could work. I like the idea of the excessive fines, but then we are discriminating against the poor. I do like anything that contributes to the police force, however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:36 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,497,588 times
Reputation: 29076
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
I wanted to start a discussion, not simply assert my personal view, which like all the others here is fairly strong. I'm still mulling over the point that Zarathu brought up about discrimination, it is an excellent point for debate and not one that anyone should take lightly. I value all comments even though I may not agree with them, they add a great deal to the very complex issue.

For the record, in case I myself was not clear as you point out, I do mean "very old folks." But that keeps getting ploughed under anyway so I'm not sure there is ever a definitive answer to my OP, much like most great debate issues.

I am also interested in knowing, as in my OP, what people here would do if they did have to give up driving at any age within the senior years. What is Plan B?
Plan B! Sell our house in a decidedly rural area 18 miles from the nearest grocery store and downsize to something affordable and urban with decent public transportation. Children need not be involved nor inconvenienced.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas
13,890 posts, read 25,335,938 times
Reputation: 26388
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
Interesting thoughts, all. But with the logistics I doubt it could work. I like the idea of the excessive fines, but then we are discriminating against the poor. I do like anything that contributes to the police force, however.
All transgressions of the law that include a fine discriminate against the poor. But we have plenty of fines so I guess that's actually OK. As long as the fine is the same for everyone and the law is equally enforced. You would have to document every attempt you make. After all, you knew there was a penalty when you broke the law. PDs have been seizing property from people involved with drugs for quite a while now and it has been very profitable.

Just trying to think outside the box. Hey, part of the profits could be used to fund those driving tests for everyone who got a ticket or had an accident!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 01:40 PM
 
Location: earth?
7,288 posts, read 10,862,561 times
Reputation: 8956
I am for yearly testing from ages 16-20, then 65-120 . . . I have had experiences in my family with entitled oldsters who insist on their "RIGHT TO DRIVE," come Hell or high water . . .

The first was my mother who had passed out in the beauty shop and was hospitalized. No cause was discovered, and the hospital automatically informs the DMV of the incident and the person has to be retested . . . I forget the details (!), but the keys eventually had to be wrestled away from her - she literally did not care if she wiped out an entire family, as long as SHE got to drive . . . If we asked, "How would you feel if you hurt someone innocent," she actually said she did not care.

My father, called me one day and asked me if you use your right or left foot to brake!!! I had no idea there were any issues with his driving. He eventually got sick and just had to stop driving so we didn't have to confront him, but in the meantime, I was worried sick and trying to figure out what to do.

My uncle is just like my mom - is blind in one eye and can't see out of the other, yet insists on his "RIGHT" to drive . . . lost his license, then hired someone to coach him and actually got it back. I am sick over this (he's in his late eighties).

I think AARP is wrong on this issue and I am disappointed in their stance.

As for myself, I know it will be inconvenient, but when the time comes, I will either hire someone to drive me around or stay home and hope someone is around when I need them. I don't believe my rights supercede the safety of others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 02:07 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,164 posts, read 13,438,598 times
Reputation: 20600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Plan B! Sell our house in a decidedly rural area 18 miles from the nearest grocery store and downsize to something affordable and urban with decent public transportation. Children need not be involved nor inconvenienced.
But what about my pets? What happens to them? This is what I worry about.

In fact, at 58, I have made a conscious decision that the batch of pets I have now should be my last.....as I want to outlive them. I have made arrangements with friends to care for them if I die.....but then....they are as old as I am.

If I had to give up my pets to move into town.....that would be THE END for me.....so I won't be needing a driver's license anyway. LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top