Compulsory annual driving skills tests for the over 70's

ICBM

jpfamps said:

It would seem to me that two problem areas are inexperienced drivers and older drivers.

From my own perspective I felt I became a much safer driver after the first year or so after passing my test, and, not withstanding typical teenage testosterone fuelled boy racers, I suspect that's true of most drivers.

Yes, and I think the apparent rise in the death rate from teenagers to the 20s decade in the chart above is simply due to there being many more drivers who don't start until their twenties, so again the statistic of deaths per million *population* is misleading.

Personally, I started driving at 29 - until then I lived in the centre of a city where car ownership was fairly impractical - and I had a minor crash in my first year which probably taught me a lot about driving more safely.

crunchman

I wonder whether making drivers over 75 have a medical every couple of years would be a feasible option.  It would be cheaper to administer than making them resit tests.

You could test eyesight and reaction times relatively easily and cheaply.  I'd keep it independent of GPs as well.   

skullfunkerry

Lots in here that I agree with about retesting, regular checks for everyone etc.

If you think about it, cars are just mad, aren't they? Imagine going on Dragon's Den

"So. my invention is called the 'car'. It's for getting around, for up to 4 or maybe 5 people. Basically, it's a big metal box with windows - you sit inside it, and drive at speeds of up to 70 miles per hour, on roads"

"And these roads are straight?"

"No, they'll have bends and corners. There's a device in the car to steer it"

"But what if you steer it incorrectly?"

"Then you crash"

"And what if you want to come home again?"

"You use the same road"

"The same road? So there are people piloting these 'cars' in the opposite direction at the same time as you?"

"Yes"

I can't imagine Richard Jones investing in that...

crunchman

skullfunkerry said:

Lots in here that I agree with about retesting, regular checks for everyone etc.

If you think about it, cars are just mad, aren't they? Imagine going on Dragon's Den

"So. my invention is called the 'car'. It's for getting around, for up to 4 or maybe 5 people. Basically, it's a big metal box with windows - you sit inside it, and drive at speeds of up to 70 miles per hour, on roads"

"And these roads are straight?"

"No, they'll have bends and corners. There's a device in the car to steer it"

"But what if you steer it incorrectly?"

"Then you crash"

"And what if you want to come home again?"

"You use the same road"

"The same road? So there are people piloting these 'cars' in the opposite direction at the same time as you?"

"Yes"

I can't imagine Richard Jones investing in that...

If you go back 100 years though, they were probably safer than what was around at the time.  How many people died falling off horses?  How many accidents were there with horse drawn vehicles?  A modern car is far safer.

JohnnyPlectrum

A car? Well, it’s a huge metal box with windows. I sit in it and drive it, and its four empty seats, into work most days and then battle with other similar people to find a place to leave it for the day.

The evening? Yes, we all drive them home again and I battle with other similar people trying to find a space to leave it for the night.

Wouldn’t it be easier if it was smaller and had fewer seats? Well, we need those in the summer when we drive the family to the airport in it and leave it there for the week instead.

Dominic

thecolourbox said:

ToneControl said:

phil_b said:

 

by ICBM's logic, no one should be allowed to drive until they are 30

Not the same logic. The reasons for 80+ drivers having accidents is very different than for under 30s

Has anybody considered that the stats are for deaths......maybe the Octogenarian spike is partially because they can't sustain a bit of a bump so robustly !!
(although they probably cause them )

Rocker

I would support the suggestion by @ICBM that nobody over the age of 80 should be allowed to drive.  Rather than have mandatory driver assessments every so many years, it would be better if mandatory IQ tests were carried out, at least before issuing the first driving license.  The number of stupid bastards driving cars is a national disgrace, how some of those guys passed the theory test is beyond me.

On a serious note, some kind of recording system [recording speed, acceleration etc.] should be fitted to every car.  At least in the event of an accident we are not left depending on witness statements and/or dashcam footage.

Bidley

Having to be retested every 5/10 years is all well and good, but nobody is going to want to pay the £100s that's going to cost (because it'll be another form of legal extortion). So people will skip it and end up driving illegally. How would you even police that? For the amount of drivers on the road you'd never conjure up the infrastructure.

Every 20/25 years would probably be more feasible. The roads are a lot different now to what they were in 1994, but not a great deal has changed since 2014.

TheOtherDennis

I'm 59 and I passed my test at the fourth attempt at 29. I've since driven for 30 years, averaging between 20-24,000 miles a year.

I now drive for a living, though only part-time, and just last week I was tested by DriveTech and assessed as a low-medium risk. I also have to pass an internal assessment every single year, and if I have more than two 'incidents' a year, I am automatically referred for another assessment. (Having said that, in my job more than 85% of damage caused by drivers is low speed manouevring in customers' driveways, trying to turn the van around.)

As for doctors being forced to alert the DVLA about patients with problems they should own up to, doctors already are forced to - I have obstructive sleep apnoea, for which I use a CPAP machine. I have to be assessed for my sleep status every year, and the assessment is automatically sent to the DVLA. If I ever fail to come up to scratch, my licence will be automatically revoked. Same for anyone with a notifiable medical condition.

I also drive a Honda Civic, so fuck you.

Having said all that, I do think it would be a good idea for people over a certain age to be retested now and again. What that age should be, or how the test would work, I have no idea, it's something I think might be helpful in some way.

But if you think driving round here is scary, try driving in Italy. Their Highway Code appears to consist of the following, in its entirety -

Rule 1: Don't kill anyone.
Rule 2: Seriously? You need a rule 2? What are you, a fucking maniac? Refer to rule 1. Jesus.

ToneControl

BeardyAndy said:

boogieman said:

Octafish said:

LastMantra said:

I think the test should be much harder to begin with. 

Yep and limited to how many times you take it. If it takes you more than 3 or 4 attempts you likely to always be a bit crap at driving and just relying on chance to pass.

My ex wife took 9 attempts to pass her test. Even then I’m not sure how she passed, she’s quite possibly the worst driver I’ve met. Even my kids refused to get in her car once they were old enough to realise how shit she was.  “Err, no thanks, we’ll wait for dad to take us”. 

I used to be in a relationship with a Chinese girl (well she was English but both her parents were from Hong Kong) and i'm convinced she took her sisters test for her. She told me once she was going to and if the instructor question the photo on the license she'd pull the race card "all you Chinese look alike" etc... so I wen't off on in a huge rant over it and I thought it'd done the trick, however the 1 time I got in a car with her sister I changed my mind!!

According to a guy I know who worked on police computer systems, there is one minority in which borrowing licences is much more common than with any other group.

thecolourbox

TheOtherDennis said:

But if you think driving round here is scary, try driving in Italy. Their Highway Code appears to consist of the following, in its entirety -

Rule 1: Don't kill anyone.
Rule 2: Seriously? You need a rule 2? What are you, a fucking maniac? Refer to rule 1. Jesus.

I had the pleasure of driving around Napoli and the Amalfi coast this summer. It felt a little bit like being shoved down a hill in a shopping trolley with 100s of other people also being pushed in trolleys at the same time, then everybody trying to steer out of the way of each other.

The pedestrians are bad enough let alone the drivers/moped riders!

stickyfiddle

jpfamps said:

...

Maybe this could be addressed by making "P" plates compulsory.

...

I've often wondered about this. As it is, they're almost counter-productive, because their being optional means the only people who have them are those who want to signal to the world that they aren't really ready for driving on their own and might still fuck up. Frankly I was a hair away from passing my first test - only failing at the very end at the penultimate junction, but obviously wasn't really ready. My second test a couple of months later was a breeze and I was obviously massively more competent, but a different examiner might've passed me. 

A mandatory year of P plates with a requirement to complete the "advanced driving course" or whatever it's called now (motorway, rain/snow, maybe even a skid pad session) within that year might go a long way to helping those new drivers get that experience early and force them to engage with things like motorways in a more controlled way, rather than just let them go straight onto the M25 the day after they get their licence. 

PolarityMan

I think at this point bringing in a policy like this is a bit late as we're so close to driverless anyway. 

MattBanshee

thecolourbox said:

TheOtherDennis said:

But if you think driving round here is scary, try driving in Italy. Their Highway Code appears to consist of the following, in its entirety -

Rule 1: Don't kill anyone.
Rule 2: Seriously? You need a rule 2? What are you, a fucking maniac? Refer to rule 1. Jesus.

I had the pleasure of driving around Napoli and the Amalfi coast this summer. It felt a little bit like being shoved down a hill in a shopping trolley with 100s of other people also being pushed in trolleys at the same time, then everybody trying to steer out of the way of each other.

The pedestrians are bad enough let alone the drivers/moped riders!

I have just returned from a week in Rome, staying with friends. I didn't drive (I'm not insane), but as a passenger, I think I was involved in more minor collisions during that week than the rest of my life. "Oh don't worry, we just call that a kiss"

ICBM

PolarityMan said:

I think at this point bringing in a policy like this is a bit late as we're so close to driverless anyway. 

I really don't think so. Automatic control on motorways or possibly normal main roads is feasible in the not too distant future, but 100% driverless is not yet foreseeable I don't think - as in no manual option at all, which is what's needed when someone who can't drive is on board. I don't think that's going to be possible for a very long time - just imagine driving in a city centre now and think of all the hazards and decision-making there is in a typical journey.

crunchman

ICBM said:

PolarityMan said:

I think at this point bringing in a policy like this is a bit late as we're so close to driverless anyway. 

I really don't think so. Automatic control on motorways or possibly normal main roads is feasible in the not too distant future, but 100% driverless is not yet foreseeable I don't think - as in no manual option at all, which is what's needed when someone who can't drive is on board. I don't think that's going to be possible for a very long time - just imagine driving in a city centre now and think of all the hazards and decision-making there is in a typical journey.

From what I've read, the cities are easier than the out of town driving.  At 70mph, you need to be able to see further ahead. They are right at the limit of being able to detect things at a far enough range at higher speeds, and then they have less time to process that data.

Wolfetone

I'm sixty and I have certainly noticed a decline in my spacial awareness. Judging distances when parking is an issue and I find that to be safe, I leave too much room at the front although my parallel parking is awesome even though I say so myself.

Whilst I don't agree with a full test for the oldies, I do agree that there should be a bi-yearly competence test coupled with a health check and eyesight test. I don't think the ability to park is a threat to life but certainly your ability to turn your head to see what's coming is.

BigLicks67

I think we are asking the wrong question. We should send the future transport minister to Utrecht and copy their transport model. The majority of short journeys in cars could be replaced very easily by either a bike or by walking and if you are old and a bit tired an ebike. The end result may be a fitter older population with more longevity in future years.

PolarityMan

ICBM said:

PolarityMan said:

I think at this point bringing in a policy like this is a bit late as we're so close to driverless anyway. 

I really don't think so. Automatic control on motorways or possibly normal main roads is feasible in the not too distant future, but 100% driverless is not yet foreseeable I don't think - as in no manual option at all, which is what's needed when someone who can't drive is on board. I don't think that's going to be possible for a very long time - just imagine driving in a city centre now and think of all the hazards and decision-making there is in a typical journey.

I suspect technology is a few years off at most and maybe a decade or so for social acceptance.

skullfunkerry

PolarityMan said:

ICBM said:

PolarityMan said:

I think at this point bringing in a policy like this is a bit late as we're so close to driverless anyway. 

I really don't think so. Automatic control on motorways or possibly normal main roads is feasible in the not too distant future, but 100% driverless is not yet foreseeable I don't think - as in no manual option at all, which is what's needed when someone who can't drive is on board. I don't think that's going to be possible for a very long time - just imagine driving in a city centre now and think of all the hazards and decision-making there is in a typical journey.

I suspect technology is a few years off at most and maybe a decade or so for social acceptance.

The point that I think driverless cars have completely missed is that some people actually *like* driving: I've spent whole weekends pretending to drive before, with an Xbox and a force feedback steering wheel... if someone told me tomorrow that all cars would be driverless and I couldn't drive any more, I'd be really disappointed. I know it won't happen like that, it'll be gradual - but it will be a shame if "real" driving becomes a thing of the past.

To clarify: I'm not against driverless cars, I totally get the benefits in fuel efficiency and safety: I hope that normal cars don't die out completely though