fasterfaller 0 #26 July 17, 2003 I think that when you prove to be a hazard to others on the road then you should be tested and if need be banned frrom driving .. There are some old farts in my car club driving 7 second cars down the road that are way better drivers than those punks in their hondas with loud exhausts . One of these guys races every wekend and cut unreal reaction times . He is 72 . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #27 July 17, 2003 Sure, BUT how do we know that an elderly person is a hazard on the road until something happens? That something could kill a family, a person, or cause a lot of damage. I'm sure the old guy that plowed through the market "wasn't a hazard" either, ya know...--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meathorse 0 #28 July 17, 2003 QuoteOne of these guys races every wekend and cut unreal reaction times . He is 72 And so he'd pass the test.... Personally I've seen more elderly people doing overly stupid things in traffic than I have punk ass kids. I said yes on CNN and I say yes here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites txblondie 0 #29 July 17, 2003 QuoteSure, BUT how do we know that an elderly person is a hazard on the road until something happens? Agreed. Of course, that's the case in SEVERAL situations in life, not only this one... ***************************************** Blondes do have more fun! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites txblondie 0 #30 July 17, 2003 If you speed, you are part of the problem. Remember that driving too slow for the flow of traffic is just as dangerous... ***************************************** Blondes do have more fun! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
txblondie 0 #29 July 17, 2003 QuoteSure, BUT how do we know that an elderly person is a hazard on the road until something happens? Agreed. Of course, that's the case in SEVERAL situations in life, not only this one... ***************************************** Blondes do have more fun! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
txblondie 0 #30 July 17, 2003 If you speed, you are part of the problem. Remember that driving too slow for the flow of traffic is just as dangerous... ***************************************** Blondes do have more fun! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #31 July 17, 2003 YES YES YES!!!!!!!!!!! At age 65 it should be YEARLY. Too many OLD people getting into accidents. They are a higher risk than younger people as far as I am concerned. I have seen 3 motorcyclist die from old people pulling in front of them not paying attention. THE GOVERNMENT WILL NEVER DO THIS. Because they will have to pick up the tab. Once you are deemed unfit to drive public transportation SHOULD be free. It should be a benefit to growing old in this country. But that costs money. Money we don't have. And old folks will consider it their RIGHT to drive. They should have the right IF they can pass a reflex test and a driving test. Hell for that matter make EVERY motorist take the test every 5-10 years until they are 65 so the old folks don't feel TOO singled out. Good post Dave. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #32 July 17, 2003 QuoteOnce you are deemed unfit to drive public transportation SHOULD be free. It should be a benefit to growing old in this country The government would have no responsibility to provide free transportation. Remember, driving is a PRIVLAGE, not a right! If it was a right, then yes, but otherwise, no.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #33 July 17, 2003 QuoteI do. We discriminate on the basis of their age. WRONG!! Not descrimination.. Public safety. Why wait until 65 for us to get Social Security? Are we young people being descriminated against? lol Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #34 July 17, 2003 QuoteThe government would have no responsibility to provide free transportation. Remember, driving is a PRIVLAGE, not a right! I know what you mean.. But it should be free if they are deemed unfit. They have a right to a life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freakydiver 0 #35 July 17, 2003 DWI? Going to jail Speeding? Expensive ticket, possibly jail Reckless driving? Expensive ticket, possibly jail All could result in death just as easily as the incident in cally tho... -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #36 July 17, 2003 QuoteOnce you are deemed unfit to drive public transportation SHOULD be free. It should be a benefit to growing old in this country Sure it could, BUT the point is there are laws there to try to prevent it from happening. Are there laws in place to check the ability of elderly people's driving skills? Nope, there are currently no checks for this. See my point?--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MuffDiver 0 #37 July 17, 2003 I voted no. However, I do think that they (and everyone else) should be tested periodically(just not every year). I think that if the tests were every 3-5 years it would help get rid of some of the people that shouldn't be on the road. __________________________________________________ Don't take life too seriously. You'll never get out alive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasterfaller 0 #38 July 17, 2003 QuoteQuoteOne of these guys races every wekend and cut unreal reaction times . He is 72 And so he'd pass the test.... Personally I've seen more elderly people doing overly stupid things in traffic than I have punk ass kids. I said yes on CNN and I say yes here You want to see stupid ass shit on the roads by young punks , come to Phoenix for a friday night . As far as my 72 year old friend goes , he still has great vision and passed his last driving test with no problems . Please see attached photo of an example of a stupid young driver in the phoenix area that is 18 and this happened the day he got this car . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rgoper 0 #39 July 17, 2003 i voted "YES" as well. if i have to have an eye exam, and a hearing test every 4 years to get my driver's license renewed, why shouldn't the elderly? or am i to believe our eyesight and hearing improve with age? my mother who will be way old in august gets her driver's license renewed through the mail every 4 years, wuz up? (and she's stone cold deaf)--Richard-- "We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chopchop 0 #40 July 17, 2003 I voted yes but I think annual is too often. Maybe every 3 years starting at 60 would be enough. Most people decline in senses and reaction times slowly, a sudden decrease in one year would be the result of a traumatic illness or accident. chopchop gotta go... Plaything needs a spanking.. Lotsa Pictures Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #41 July 17, 2003 Quote I know what you mean.. But it should be free if they are deemed unfit. They have a right to a life. More then the cost of providing it free, is that in so may American cities public transit sucks to the point where it is completely unusable. If a larger portion of the population were forced to depend on it for complete mobility, it would become evident how under-built the system is. Subways would need to be built, thousands of busses bought, etc. In most American cities, public transit does pretty good at getting commuters to work, but fall short of being a complete transit solution. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #42 July 18, 2003 I agree with you Andy.. If the old folks Taxi bill went to Uncle Sam then Uncle Sam would be FORCED to revamp public transportation wouldn't he Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuteless 1 #43 July 18, 2003 do you really think that "some" of them would not continue to drive even if their licence was suspended ( me included. I'd tell them to put their test where the sun doesnt shine.maybe no insurance, but at that age, what are they going to do, hang me? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #44 July 18, 2003 QuoteQuote I know what you mean.. But it should be free if they are deemed unfit. They have a right to a life. More then the cost of providing it free, is that in so may American cities public transit sucks to the point where it is completely unusable. If a larger portion of the population were forced to depend on it for complete mobility, it would become evident how under-built the system is. Subways would need to be built, thousands of busses bought, etc. In most American cities, public transit does pretty good at getting commuters to work, but fall short of being a complete transit solution. _Am You can thank Henry Ford and the rest of the automakers for working to make sure there was no real public transit system. -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #45 July 18, 2003 Put a tire lock on your car, in storage, or sell it for you until you either pass the test or not..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #46 July 18, 2003 Sorta like those things they put on cars that are parked illegally...you have to go pay to get it off your tire. Well, either way, thank god I'm in a big truck, they can hit me if they want, but they better have DAMNED good insurance...--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
w4p2 0 #47 July 18, 2003 Yeas, no doubt about it. I have two examples: Last time I was ashore I visited this small fishing village (on an island) with very narrow roads. I was warned about a slowly moving car, that would have white sticks poking out of driver and passenger windows. The explanation was that a pair of very old brothers lived in the village. Their vision was so poor that they were using the white stick when walking, but because their knees were also weak, they were still using a car to drive around the village and were using the white sticks to keep on the road. An other one was my grandfather. His driving became rather erratic with age and we started wondering about his aey sight. Our doubts were confirmed, when one day he was driving around my cousin, who stated asking him if he sees the traffic signs. Yeas he answered, no problem. Then he was asked what is that sign... and the answer was : Slow down, danger ahead... and the explanation was same for every sign on the road. Needless to say, that was his last drive. So.... checks strongly recommended. Cheers: JL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nathaniel 0 #48 July 18, 2003 In Illinois, Quote Drivers age 81 through 86 are issued licenses good for two years. Drivers age 87 and older must renew their licenses each year. and All persons age 75 and over must take a driving test [when renewing]. It's a start... nathanielMy advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Unstable 8 #49 July 18, 2003 I think it is needed. I know the counter arguments- how it impedes our elders mobility and makes them more dependant, but on the motorway, we need to put safety first. It scares me to think that there are people out there driving like my bosses mom, - 91, bearly able to open a door by herself. She is a danger to herself and other motorists.=========Shaun ========== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Push 0 #50 July 18, 2003 QuoteWRONG!! Not descrimination.. Public safety. That was exactly my point. I hear the word "discrimination" being used on American media as if it was a curse. It's not. It means to make a selection based on a factor. If that factor is justified, then discrimination is not Discrimination, if you know what I mean. Justified factors include young/old age and mental conditions. Unjustified factors include race and color. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
nathaniel 0 #48 July 18, 2003 In Illinois, Quote Drivers age 81 through 86 are issued licenses good for two years. Drivers age 87 and older must renew their licenses each year. and All persons age 75 and over must take a driving test [when renewing]. It's a start... nathanielMy advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Unstable 8 #49 July 18, 2003 I think it is needed. I know the counter arguments- how it impedes our elders mobility and makes them more dependant, but on the motorway, we need to put safety first. It scares me to think that there are people out there driving like my bosses mom, - 91, bearly able to open a door by herself. She is a danger to herself and other motorists.=========Shaun ========== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #50 July 18, 2003 QuoteWRONG!! Not descrimination.. Public safety. That was exactly my point. I hear the word "discrimination" being used on American media as if it was a curse. It's not. It means to make a selection based on a factor. If that factor is justified, then discrimination is not Discrimination, if you know what I mean. Justified factors include young/old age and mental conditions. Unjustified factors include race and color. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
