What are your views on this

jjblondie

Judi wrote: »

My StepFather drove longer than even he thought was probably wise due to the pressure he had from my Mother who didnt want to lose the independance of having a car and she didnt drive.

My nan has the same problem withmy overbearing grandad. She really isn't safe and she knows it - she drove me home a few months ago (2 miles) and it was terrifying. I considered offering to drive myself but decided that, not being insured on it, it would also not have been a great idea. She is desperate to give it up and she wants to give it to me, or any family member, to get rid of it with an excuse, but unfortunately I just don't want to insure a car for over a grand when I don't need one (I have a bicycle :T) and no-one else can take it. I really hope grandad lets her sell it as when you can't move your head, your eyesight is bad, and you have shaking arms, you just shouldn't drive.

harrys_nan

I agree with all the above comments but would also like to see an eye test being part of the driving exam and perhaps regular eye tests being compulsory as so many people drive with bad eye sight sometimes not even realising

LandyAndy

cutestkids wrote: »

A full retest every two years from age 70 to drive a car.

A test to drive a mobility scooter before using and then at least every 5 years after that.

Putting aside the logistical problem of having sufficient examiners, if you really wanted to improve driving it might be more appropriate to retest everyone periodically, say every 5 or 10 years. I suspect poor driving by people under 70 is a much greater hazard than poor driving by the elderly.

elvis86

jjblondie wrote: »

My nan has the same problem withmy overbearing grandad. She really isn't safe and she knows it - she drove me home a few months ago (2 miles) and it was terrifying. I considered offering to drive myself but decided that, not being insured on it, it would also not have been a great idea. She is desperate to give it up and she wants to give it to me, or any family member, to get rid of it with an excuse, but unfortunately I just don't want to insure a car for over a grand when I don't need one (I have a bicycle :T) and no-one else can take it. I really hope grandad lets her sell it as when you can't move your head, your eyesight is bad, and you have shaking arms, you just shouldn't drive.

I bet you and your family will feel just great when she kills herself and/or your grandfather and/or an innocent child or other pedestrian.

For God's sake, why doesn't someone say something?!

How would any of you live with yourselves if something happened to them? Or more to the point, how would you feel if your child was knocked down by a partially sighted old woman who's family knew she wasn't safe to drive but said nothing because they were "scared of granddad"??

Shocking. I despair.:(

For everyone calling for a retest, how many of you would pass a driving test X years after your initial one? I doubt that I would. My driving instructor always said that rather than teaching me to be a perfect driver, his job was to coach me to pass a test, and that you learn to drive over the following years.

I think I'm a good driver (no accidents - tocuhwood), but I doubt that I would pass a driving test.

A more effective way of removing some of the unsafe elderly drivers from our roads would be for their loved ones to grow a pair and make them give it up, rather than acknowledging that they're a danger to themselves and others and ignoring the fact for an easy life and so as not to upset granddad.:cool:

SmallL

I honestly think there needs to be some sort of test/scheme for drivers who admit/have been found they were at fault for an accident-something like it exists for speeding for young offenders i think?

A couple of years ago my OH (then 17) was driving his car up a dual carriageway, indicated to turn right through a gap in the central reservation in order to get across the other side. Then a motorbike plowed into the side of us, he was gong at LEAST 70 mph due to the damage to our car and his bike.
Totally his fault as he went straight over chevrons.
But we still had a middle aged man who arrived at the accident shouting and swearing at me and my OH that we would go to prison for 'what we did'. purely because we were young drivers and the motorcyclist was over 40.
I was too naive to realize he was just being a total idiot and was hysterically crying at the prospect of my OH being sent to prison. I wish i could go back and sock him one!!!

Grrr rant over

neneromanova

ViolaLass wrote: »

What I don't understand is this: if you somehow found yourself driving the wrong way up the motorway, wouldn't you turn round and head for the nearest junction (where you could cross safely to the other side)?

I read in the paper that the reason she didn't turn around was because she didn't want to go the other way so carried going the way she needed to.

LandyAndy

elvis86 wrote: »

For everyone calling for a retest, how many of you would pass a driving test X years after your initial one? I doubt that I would. My driving instructor always said that rather than teaching me to be a perfect driver, his job was to coach me to pass a test, and that you learn to drive over the following years.

I think I'm a good driver (no accidents - tocuhwood), but I doubt that I would pass a driving test.

.:cool:

One of the reasons many drivers wouldn't pass a retest is because they know they won't have to.

I think a retest would have to be different in extent and content to the initial 'driving test'.

fluffnutter

LandyAndy wrote: »

Putting aside the logistical problem of having sufficient examiners, if you really wanted to improve driving it might be more appropriate to retest everyone periodically, say every 5 or 10 years. I suspect poor driving by people under 70 is a much greater hazard than poor driving by the elderly.

It's an often suggested idea. I think there are a few problems with it; 1) the expense, although this would fall primarily to each individual and would hence be diluted 2) we'd need a lot more driving examiners! (but more jobs perhaps?) 3) many accidents are caused by driver inexperience, either because someone has only recently passed their test or because they drive infrequently. It's not bad habits that cause accidents (apart from excessive speed), so it's not clear whether getting people to repeat their test will make much difference. For me the jury's still out on whether regular tests will save lives.

In terms of which age groups are the most hazardous on the roads, that accolade goes inevitably to young men (17 - 24). Following that, however, are older women (65+). It's thought to be due to the fact that for the majority of their lives they've driven very infrequently as that's the 'man's job'. Then their husband dies or becomes infirm and, so as not to lose independence, the wife gets behind the wheel. She's timid, she's out of practice, she's old herself. It's an accident waiting to happen.

Another thing worth considering... Britain's roads are still among the safest in the world. In terms of how busy our roads are, how many people drive and how small the country is, we have relatively few deaths/serious accidents.

fluffnutter

LandyAndy wrote: »

I think a retest would have to be different in extent and content to the initial 'driving test'.

I really agree with this.

LandyAndy

fluffnutter wrote: »

I really agree with this.

That's really nice of you. Thank you;):).