84 yr old wrong way on motorway

SailorSam

molerat wrote: »

So at what age are we going to start re testing ?

Maybe it would be a good idea if nobody was allowed to drive before they were 50. And if the Op thinks re-tests should be taken at 60. Think how quiet and safe the roads would be for the mature drivers.

takman

molerat wrote: »

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/londoner-arrested-after-cannabis-car-driven-wrong-way-up-m6-motorway-for-five-miles-a3310436.html
Age 27

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/woman-tells-how-cheated-death-8246121 Age 29

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/687655/JAILED-Motorist-driver-police-110mph-driving-WRONG-way-motorway Age 34

http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/latest/Motorist-drove-wrong-way-down-motorway-in-Cumbria-934ede93-57e1-435f-9f8e-d345e2fa9638-ds Age 43

http://www.solihullupdates.com/burglary-suspect-arrested-despite-wrong-way-escape-bid/ Age 32

So at what age are we going to start re testing ?

Obviously their are different reasons for why people drive dangerously. Younger drivers tend to drive dangerously because they choose to drive like it. Older drivers tend to drive dangerously due to medical deteriation.

Personally as a 26 year old I would want everyone to have a retest every 10 years, possibly every 5 for under 30s and over 70s. This would remove a lot of bad drivers from the road and make them a lot safer.

bigadaj

takman wrote: »

Obviously their are different reasons for why people drive dangerously. Younger drivers tend to drive dangerously because they choose to drive like it. Older drivers tend to drive dangerously due to medical deteriation.

Personally as a 26 year old I would want everyone to have a retest every 10 years, possibly every 5 for under 30s and over 70s. This would remove a lot of bad drivers from the road and make them a lot safer.

But it's a human right to drive, or so many think....

A._Badger

takman wrote: »

Personally as a 26 year old I would want everyone to have a retest every 10 years, possibly every 5 for under 30s and over 70s. This would remove a lot of bad drivers from the road and make them a lot safer.

Would it? Some of the worst drivers I see on the roads are well within ten years of having taken their tests.

Perhaps we should be looking at the way people are taught to drive and then how they are tested.

Joe_Horner

A._Badger wrote: »

The claim of most road safety advocates is that they wish to reduce the number of deaths and injuries. I am simply pointing out that if this is the case the logical place to start is with the group involved in the most accidents.

The problem with that logic is that, according to this link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/463043/rrcgb2014-02.pdf

tailgating was a factor in 7% of reported accidents, so 93% of accidents involved drivers following at a safe distance.

Apply logic above and, by making everyone tailgate, we'll cut the accident rate by 93%.

A._Badger

Joe_Horner wrote: »

The problem with that logic is that, according to this link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/463043/rrcgb2014-02.pdf

tailgating was a factor in 7% of reported accidents, so 93% of accidents involved drivers following at a safe distance.

Apply logic above and, by making everyone tailgate, we'll cut the accident rate by 93%.

Logical error. The 93 per cent were not involved in accidents.

You start by addressing those that were, not those that were not.

takman

A._Badger wrote: »

Would it? Some of the worst drivers I see on the roads are well within ten years of having taken their tests.

Perhaps we should be looking at the way people are taught to drive and then how they are tested.

I personally see people of all ages with poor driving skills and with poor observation. The worst driving incident i have seen this year was actually a man of at least 50 years old who was in the right hand lane in a roundabout and cut right in front of me to turn left. If i had not been keeping an eye on him due to him changing lanes without looking earlier on i could have easily crashed into him!. So although this made a good dash cam video, he definitely shouldn't be on the road!.

If there was a retest every 5 - 10 years this would mean that people would have to maintain their driving skills. This would also be a good shock to the drivers who think they are doing everything correctly, but actually have many flaws in the way they drive and can then be given tips to improve.

bigadaj

Joe_Horner wrote: »

The problem with that logic is that, according to this link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/463043/rrcgb2014-02.pdf

tailgating was a factor in 7% of reported accidents, so 93% of accidents involved drivers following at a safe distance.

Apply logic above and, by making everyone tailgate, we'll cut the accident rate by 93%.

That is for following too close, but all of e last four are a Effectively for being too close to the car in front, sudden braking, slippery road etc are all not allowing enough room to stop.

This could also apply to other categories as they are a bit non specific as well.

To be honest pretty much every collision with the rear of a vehicle is by following too close, some will be mechanical failure but a tiny amount.

Driving is the one really good example of people over estimating their abilities, everyone claiming they are in the top 10% of drivers.

The reaction to the tesla crash was predictable, it's like people saying that flying or even rail travel is risky when the chances of getting killed or injured on the roads is orders of magnitude higher.

Joe_Horner

A._Badger wrote: »

Logical error. The 93 per cent were not involved in accidents.

You start by addressing those that were, not those that were not.

No, the 93% were the accidents that DID happen but DIDN'T involve tailgaters.

So you get rid of those first.

A._Badger

Joe_Horner wrote: »

No, the 93% were the accidents that DID happen but DIDN'T involve tailgaters.

So you get rid of those first.

Sorry, I misread your original but all it establishes is that 93 per cent of accidents were not related to tailgating, so tailgating is a non sequitur.

It is a fact that motorcycling is dangerous. I am not personally advocating banning it - if people wish to take risks that is up to them. I am saying that people who claim that their aim is the reduction of RTAs would instantly get the best result by getting motorcycling banned. I am going from there to question the areas they actually target, such as older drivers, drivers of certain types of cars and so on.