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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-27-2011, 07:34 AM
 
Location: Prosper
6,268 posts, read 12,915,585 times
Reputation: 9377

Advertisements

Eventually, the elderly need to have their keys taken away. Some seniors can still function/drive normally, but there are many who can't. I think after the age of 60-65 or so, the drivers license should only last for 2 years instead of 8-10. A person's health can change dramatically within 2 years at that age, and if they were required to go in to renew, it might help catch the bad elderly drivers before they cause an accident.

My Grandmother had to have her keys taken away, after we started noticing scrapes and dings on her bumpers and marks on the side of the garage... which she never even knew she had gotten.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-27-2011, 07:35 AM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 18,978,143 times
Reputation: 15649
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
If you remove the crash prone people from the roads then the rest of the drivers would not have to worry so much about collisions.
I think the insurance industry still ranks those under 25 as the most crash prone.

So who do you stop from driving, the older drivers with good driving records or the youngster with bad driving records?
I do believe every driver over 65 should get a vision test before every renewal.

Again, I'm not asking about the 25 and under drivers! We all know about them. I am asking about very old people on the roads....just them. Illinois is the only state that requires seniors to take a road test. What good does a simple vision test do? It's not only vision but sharp awareness and ability for quick defensive responses that matter.

A person with very good vision may have general spatial cognition problems as s/he ages. This is the case with my 85 year old friend Mae, who has never worn glasses (perfect vision) but who told me that she often perceives cars on the road as farther away than they are and this has gotten worse as she has aged. I took a day trip with her last year--she drove--at one point she took a really sloppy turn around a corner that unnerved me. I've been going places with her for almost 10 years and never has that happened before, she was always sharp as a tack. Now you could say this happens all the time with drivers of any age, but with her it seems age-related. She has also had back and hip surgery and can barely turn her head around or even sideways to check for oncoming cars when she changes lanes. I've declined her invitations except for when I can drive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 07:58 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,218,356 times
Reputation: 6866
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
If you remove the crash prone people from the roads then the rest of the drivers would not have to worry so much about collisions.
I think the insurance industry still ranks those under 25 as the most crash prone.

So who do you stop from driving, the older drivers with good driving records or the youngster with bad driving records?
I do believe every driver over 65 should get a vision test before every renewal.
Neither. You are presenting a false dichotomy. In general, the youngster will mature and gain good driving skills. OTOH, the older driver with a good driving record will continue to deteriorate both mentally and physically, albeit at different degrees. It is the latter that needs to be monitored.

I'm not as concerned about vision changes that accompany old age as I am about cognitive decline.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 08:03 AM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,487,261 times
Reputation: 29071
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJacket View Post
Driving or waiting for the mail to come?
LOL! Having coffe, then breakfast, reading the news then maybe driving. Mail comes at about 9:30 but usually isn't much in this age of electronic communications. Receive and pay my bills by computer. That generally leaves weekly ads and monthly or quarterly magazines so nothing to get excited about or wait for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 08:44 AM
PDD
 
Location: The Sand Hills of NC
8,774 posts, read 14,871,850 times
Reputation: 11886
Quote:
Originally Posted by lenora View Post
Neither. You are presenting a false dichotomy. In general, the youngster will mature and gain good driving skills. OTOH, the older driver with a good driving record will continue to deteriorate both mentally and physically, albeit at different degrees. It is the latter that needs to be monitored.

I'm not as concerned about vision changes that accompany old age as I am about cognitive decline.
So you are saying we should allow younger but bad drivers to continue to drive but the old folks should be taken off the road because their skills might be deteriorating

How about this solution,
If you have a bad driving record which includes traffic tickets and or crashes then you must be tested every renewal period.
Doesn't matter if you are 22 or 72 if you are a bad driver you should be tested.

To suggest that we should allow young drivers to mature at the expense of other drivers is ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 08:52 AM
 
Location: Verde Valley AZ
8,618 posts, read 9,684,845 times
Reputation: 10970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
My license says I must wear corrective lenses and has since I was 63. Makes perfect sense to me as I've worn glasses every waking moment since I neared 50. In two states now, every time I've renewed a license I've had to take a vision test. It's a sensible requirement and certainly no burden or inconvenience.
Same here in AZ. Eye test at every renewal. Although AZ has this weird thing about drivers license NOT having to be renewed all that often. It is issued and then good till you are 62, unless you lose it for some reason. So, a 21 year old would have a license good for 41 years! They do have to get a new license once they turn 21 because it's 'different'. Once you hit 62 it has to be renewed every three years but no written/driving test.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 09:14 AM
 
9,197 posts, read 9,275,870 times
Reputation: 28813
Quote:
Same here in AZ. Eye test at every renewal. Although AZ has this weird thing about drivers license NOT having to be renewed all that often. It is issued and then good till you are 62, unless you lose it for some reason. So, a 21 year old would have a license good for 41 years! They do have to get a new license once they turn 21 because it's 'different'. Once you hit 62 it has to be renewed every three years but no written/driving test.
A lot of people have opined that all drivers should be subject to regular mandatory re-testing for a driver's license. This is fine in theory, but it begs certain realities. These are:

1. States have a limited staff and budget to manage driver licensing. If every driver were subject to re-testing say every 3 years this would necessitate a substantial increase in the staff at DMV offices. Someone has to pay for this. Are we going to raise taxes, increase license fees, or expect the employees to work extra hours for free?

2. The most effective way of testing a bad driver is probably a roadtest. This type of testing is the most expensive because it requires a DMV employee to be present in every vehicle with every applicant being tested. Other types of testing such as a written test may not do the trick. Its one thing to understand the theory of safe driving (what shape is a stop sign?) its another to put those principles into effect.

3. Issuing drivers licenses is done not only for safety purposes, but to raise revenue for government. This seems backwards, but its a fact that one of the purposes of the state issuing driver's license was a simple revenue and taxation reason.

Ideally, it probably would make sense to re-test every driver regularly. However, this can't be done for free and if we want to go this direction, we'd better prepare for substantial increases in licensing fees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 09:31 AM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
22,592 posts, read 39,962,822 times
Reputation: 23726
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
A lot of people have opined that all drivers should be subject to regular mandatory re-testing for a driver's license. This is fine in theory, but it begs certain realities. These are: ...

....
Ideally, it probably would make sense to re-test every driver regularly. However, this can't be done for free and if we want to go this direction, we'd better prepare for substantial increases in licensing fees.
you need to 'think-outside-the-gov-box'.

There are many NON-gov ways to keep the USA working...

Millions of early retirees who could be 'certified' testers, in combination with the existing on-line renewal process = no brainer, little to no cost or hassle to driver OR state gov, Wha - la, a much safer (and less expensive) transportation environment.

Of course there are millions of early retirees who could be managing the state parks they are closing, teaching / mentoring our next generation of leaders , and basically keeping the ship upright.

The Smith Safe Driving course could be administered very EZ, and is quite comprehensive and good. (I keep flash cards for myself and to quiz my kids when they come home and 'escort' me around. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/5_smith_rules_of_driving
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 10:33 AM
 
361 posts, read 621,400 times
Reputation: 496
I am not as young as I used to be...
Since I might could fall over and DIE at any time, perhaps i need to stop driving NOW...
Don't want kill or maim anyone, especially CHILD.
Anyways I seem to drive too fast for some people and too slow for others...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Edina, MN, USA
6,954 posts, read 7,393,688 times
Reputation: 16283
Yesterday I followed an elderly gent - guessing mid to late 80s - for quite a ways. Perfect driver - lots of traffic - kept a normal speed - he got a A+ in my book. Today I followed a neighbor - she's probably late 60s. Swerving all over the road - barely made it to 20MPH. You might have thought she was crocked except she was on her way to work. If I had to guess which driver would be able to react quicker in an emergency, my money would be on the elderly gent. Some people are just bad drivers.
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