90 Year Old Man in Dublin Destruction Derby

cormie

This was captured Thursday 23rd of October 2014 at a shopping centre in Dublin. The driver was a 90 year old male and apparently had a very similar incident two weeks ago. Yet more reason to have drivers re-sit the test after a certain age. Thankfully nobody was injured, this time...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lplR6KCyKQ

Dravokivich

I'm not too sure if something like this could be reason enough for your proposal. The guy had to get there from how far away without being a concern driven wise? We should be thinking why he did what he did before just hanging up the licences of every driver that fits his profile.

Kenny Logins

It's only luck that nobody was injured.

billie1b

Jesus look how close the guy is with his little kid, if the car had turned toward them we'd be looking at a very different video. Very lucky people

porsche959

cormie wrote: »

Yet more reason to have drivers re-sit the test after a certain age.

Interesting how some turn anything into an argument for more government regulation.

Titzon Toast

They need to close the Country kitchen buffet if you ask me.

Damien360

porsche959 wrote: »

Interesting how some turn anything into an argument for more government regulation.

Why do we need someone to get seriously injured before we deal with an obvious problem. Metal only damaged in that video but let's say a kid was hit and needed a wheelchair. Would you be so laid back about it then ?

cormie

Dravokivich wrote: »

I'm not too sure if something like this could be reason enough for your proposal. The guy had to get there from how far away without being a concern driven wise? We should be thinking why he did what he did before just hanging up the licences of every driver that fits his profile.

porsche959 wrote: »

Interesting how some turn anything into an argument for more government regulation.

From what I've seen of motoring incidents in general, age definitely has an influence in the mental and reactionary suitability of drivers. Most, if not all insurance companies allow open drive policies only for drivers between 25 and 70 years of age. These companies will have the most comprehensive statistics and if they are making business decisions based on the information available to them, there's most likely a very good reason.

Dord

Where was this?

cormie

Park Shopping Centre: http://goo.gl/maps/ipXwd

Chris_Heilong

I would say his doctor should have spotted if he had problems driving as they need a medical for the driving license every 2 years.

I dunno.. I think he's more a risk to himself than anything else. Best thing to do is get him into a big 4x4 Land Cruiser or Range Rover, where he's safer... :P

challengemaster

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I would say his doctor should have spotted if he had problems driving as they need a medical for the driving license every 2 years.

I'd be willing to bet there's many a GP receiving €50 for their services despite patients having medical cards.

RobbingBandit

Maybe he was looking for Otto Von Bismarck seeing as it is Prussia Street.

Atlantic Dawn

Nobody hurt except his pride. Strange how quick he got it going forward after it was in reverse

I'm guessing about 10 grands worth of damage, he is probably paying €156 a year fully comp.

arthur daly

I would be in favor of a driving test every 10yrs or so mainly just to see if you can keep with flow of traffic and awareness of surroundings.
It is shocking how poor the driving skills are.

How many times have you been jamming in beakes,swerving just because someone can't be bothered to pay attention.

The phone out checking Facebook texting calls, don't even get me started

Top Dog

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Nobody hurt except his pride. Strange how quick he got it going forward after it was in reverse

I'm guessing about 10 grands worth of damage, he is probably paying €156 a year fully comp.

Automatic transmission maybe? Very easy to swiftly knock the lever from R back to D

porsche959

porsche959 wrote: »

Interesting how some turn anything into an argument for more government regulation.

You're right, why should people even have to get a licence in the first place?

corktina

for every video on youtube of an old fella doing something stupid, I can show you 100 of a younger person doing the same. To suggest all older drivers are a danger is laughable.

cormie

There's no way I'm suggesting that. I'm suggesting that as drivers grow to an age where clarity, response time etc naturally diminish, it would be a good idea that they have to be reassessed on their ability to drive safely and competently.

Younger drivers generally pay a much higher premium as a statistical consequence of their peers causing accidents which are generally of a different nature to the type older drivers would be involved in and have different contributory factors to the cause.

In the same sense, insurance companies restrict open drive policies to anyone below 25 (inexperience - higher risk) or above 70. So why restrict to anyone above 70 if not because of age being a factor?

corktina

cormie wrote: »

There's no way I'm suggesting that. I'm suggesting that as drivers grow to an age where clarity, response time etc naturally diminish, it would be a good idea that they have to be reassessed on their ability to drive safely and competently.

Younger drivers generally pay a much higher premium as a statistical consequence of their peers causing accidents which are generally of a different nature to the type older drivers would be involved in and have different contributory factors to the cause.

In the same sense, insurance companies restrict open drive policies to anyone below 25 (inexperience - higher risk) or above 70. So why restrict to anyone above 70 if not because of age being a factor?

Yes but I can show you loads of drivers young and middle age whose abilities are either diminished or were never there in the first place. It's just that instances like this stand out as they are old boys. This summer twice I have had people run onto the back of me (at the same junction)....both young women who simply weren't looking where they were going.Should we test them too?

cormie

I know, driving incompetence is widespread, especially in this country with the way the test is anyway. It needs serious improvement and if it was a case where it was improved at the expense of every driver having to be retested, I'd be more than happy to spend a few hours and the €100 or whatever it is, if it meant I'd be sharing the road with better drivers. I'd also be happy to have to be tested again every 10-15 years, with shorter re-test periods as I get older.

Outkast_IRE

I know of a 30 year old woman who did something similar damaging my friends car. It can happen to people at any age, in her case it was inexperience and she hit the accelerator harder instead of the brake.

dr.fuzzenstein

corktina wrote: »

for every video on youtube of an old fella doing something stupid, I can show you 100 of a younger person doing the same. To suggest all older drivers are a danger is laughable.

Nobody is suggesting this.
Are you suggesting that every single driver of 90+ is 100% fit to drive and there is absolutely no issue whatsoever, so we should just close this thread and let everyone drive till they drop dead behind the wheel?

dr.fuzzenstein

corktina wrote: »

Yes but I can show you loads of drivers young and middle age whose abilities are either diminished or were never there in the first place. It's just that instances like this stand out as they are old boys. This summer twice I have had people run onto the back of me (at the same junction)....both young women who simply weren't looking where they were going.Should we test them too?

Yes, since they are obviously a menace on the road.
In Germany as a novice driver you will buy yourself a retest for that kind of stuff. Do it often enough, and you will take the bus.

Once again we have arrived at the nub of the problem, people shouting I Am Entitled To Drive!
No you are not. You are allowed to drive as long as you fulfill certain criteria. If you don't, you're not.
My dad had dementia and it was a struggle to get him off the road, I see a lot of people here saying "Ah Shurre be grand, begoshandbegorrah!", no it won't, he would have eventually killed someone and not just himself.
The biggest problem is the entitlement attitude, people need that knocked out of them and failry quick.

What's the difference when I say "I've had a few, I'm good to drive" and "I have Alzheimer's and the doctor says I shouldn't drive, but what does he know?" Will it help when I shout "But I Am Entitled!"

corktina

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Yes, since they are obviously a menace on the road.
In Germany as a novice driver you will buy yourself a retest for that kind of stuff. Do it often enough, and you will take the bus.

Once again we have arrived at the nub of the problem, people shouting I Am Entitled To Drive!
No you are not. You are allowed to drive as long as you fulfill certain criteria. If you don't, you're not.
My dad had dementia and it was a struggle to get him off the road, I see a lot of people here saying "Ah Shurre be grand, begoshandbegorrah!", no it won't, he would have eventually killed someone and not just himself.
The biggest problem is the entitlement attitude, people need that knocked out of them and failry quick.

What's the difference when I say "I've had a few, I'm good to drive" and "I have Alzheimer's and the doctor says I shouldn't drive, but what does he know?" Will it help when I shout "But I Am Entitled!"

Grand so, would you be prepared to submit yourself for retest along Cormie's lines? Or are you just targeting old persons, most of whom are perfectly able to drive?

wendell borton

porsche959 wrote: »

Interesting how some turn anything into an argument for more government regulation.

It seems to be the default action in this country, screw everyone while a small minority are at fault. Older drivers have to apply every two years, the real problem is doctors rubber stamping applications without doing a check up.

dr.fuzzenstein

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Once again we have arrived at the nub of the problem, people shouting I Am Entitled To Drive!

I hate when people talk about driving like its a luxury its a 100% necessity for an awful lot of people.

Personally I'd be strongly against any move to introduce retesting etc as for one it will cost money and two it's unfair, if you pass your test that should be it.

dr.fuzzenstein

corktina wrote: »

Grand so, would you be prepared to submit yourself for retest along Cormie's lines? Or are you just targeting old persons, most of whom are perfectly able to drive?

Bring it on, baby!
And I notice the use of the phrase "most of whom", so you are saying that some aren't?
Are you saying that there are no accidents caused by advanced old age and infirmity/medical conditions?
Back to this argument:
Most people are fit to drive, but some are disqualified, drunk, on drugs, medically unfit (regardless of age), dangerous due to mental condition, etc...
Are you happy for those to be on the road? If so, why should it be OK for the above to be on the road simply because they are old?
If I am 20 and unfit to drive, I would be yanked out of the car within 5 minutes, suddenly I'm 90 and it's OK? you're painting yourself into a corner here.
Your argument is that unfit to drive is automatically negated by the fact that the driver is old, yesno?

corktina

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Bring it on, baby!
And I notice the use of the phrase "most of whom", so you are saying that some aren't?
Are you saying that there are no accidents caused by advanced old age and infirmity/medical conditions?
Back to this argument:
Most people are fit to drive, but some are disqualified, drunk, on drugs, medically unfit (regardless of age), dangerous due to mental condition, etc...
Are you happy for those to be on the road? If so, why should it be OK for the above to be on the road simply because they are old?
If I am 20 and unfit to drive, I would be yanked out of the car within 5 minutes, suddenly I'm 90 and it's OK? you're painting yourself into a corner here.
Your argument is that unfit to drive is automatically negated by the fact that the driver is old, yesno?

hold on, isn't it the other way round? You are advocating testing people just because they are 70...I'm not saying in any way that anyone at ANY age is fit or unfit to drive.

dr.fuzzenstein

corktina wrote: »

hold on, isn't it the other way round? You are advocating testing people just because they are 70...I'm not saying in any way that anyone at ANY age is fit or unfit to drive.

Just in case we are unclear:
YES I AM YOU BET YOUR ASS!
It is undeniable that people as they get older have diminished capacity, slower reflexes, eyesight gets a little worse, hearing starts to go, decision making process is not what it used to be, more medication is being taken and age takes its toll on the grey matter.
The same can't be said to the same extend from 20-50, your capacities do not diminish to such a large extend, in fact 50-70 is quite a grace period.
Anyone who is fit will have nothing to worry about.
If it makes you feel any better, if you are worried about medical fitness of people aged between 20 and 70, we'll include them as well with regular checkups and tests.
Should cut down on an awful lot of muppetry on the roads.
Any professional driver will be well used to it and simply won't understand what all the fuss is about.
I keep saying it till I turn blue:
The whole idea of passing a test age 20 and then having a life-long God given entitlement to drive is the worst thing ever. No qualification on earth lasts forever with no retesting, other than a birth cert. No right to drive. Only privilege.
Since I have seen from your previous posts that you are a reasonable poster, but slow to give in when you painted yourself in a corner, I can only assume that you argue to the contrary because, well, eeeh, no I can't think of a reason...unless you simply take up a contrary position that you don't believe in yourself for the sake of argument.
But even playing devil's advocate, there has to be a point where you give in.
I've been in a car with my Dad and he had dementia, I believe passionately in what I say.
The doctor didn't want to take his license away, it was a hard struggle for my mother, but had he failed a retest, there could have been no argument.

corktina

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Just in case we are unclear:
YES I AM YOU BET YOUR ASS!
It is undeniable that people as they get older have diminished capacity, slower reflexes, eyesight gets a little worse, hearing starts to go, decision making process is not what it used to be, more medication is being taken and age takes its toll on the grey matter.
The same can't be said to the same extend from 20-50, your capacities do not diminish to such a large extend, in fact 50-70 is quite a grace period.
Anyone who is fit will have nothing to worry about.
If it makes you feel any better, if you are worried about medical fitness of people aged between 20 and 70, we'll include them as well with regular checkups and tests.
Should cut down on an awful lot of muppetry on the roads.
Any professional driver will be well used to it and simply won't understand what all the fuss is about.
I keep saying it till I turn blue:
The whole idea of passing a test age 20 and then having a life-long God given entitlement to drive is the worst thing ever. No qualification on earth lasts forever with no retesting, other than a birth cert. No right to drive. Only privilege.
Since I have seen from your previous posts that you are a reasonable poster, but slow to give in when you painted yourself in a corner, I can only assume that you argue to the contrary because, well, eeeh, no I can't think of a reason...unless you simply take up a contrary position that you don't believe in yourself for the sake of argument.
But even playing devil's advocate, there has to be a point where you give in.
I've been in a car with my Dad and he had dementia, I believe passionately in what I say.
The doctor didn't want to take his license away, it was a hard struggle for my mother, but had he failed a retest, there could have been no argument.

But that's why I asked if you'd go along with Cormie. There's loads of incompetent drivers of all ages we could do with dumping. Plenty of dangerous 40 somethings out there on a Provo who could never ever pass a test.Lets dump them and any oldies whose health demands they give up on driving

dr.fuzzenstein

corktina wrote: »

But that's why I asked if you'd go along with Cormie. There's loads of incompetent drivers of all ages we could do with dumping. Plenty of dangerous 40 somethings out there on a Provo who could never ever pass a test.Lets dump them and any oldies whose health demands they give up on driving

That's not what he originally suggested.
And I would suggest that from a certain age, tests should be more frequent.
But yes, plenty of drivers of all ages we could do without.

But the main argument is, someone who has been a competent driver all their life can become a danger to other road users and not even know it. hence tests from a certain age.

corktina

He was advocating tests for everyone every ten years iirc with the frequency increasing at some point until it reaches every 2 years at age . (Not just a medical cert from your friendly GP, an actual test or at least a Govt Medical)

dr.fuzzenstein

every 5 should do it, though from age 90 up, who knows...

cormie

corktina wrote: »

He was advocating tests for everyone every ten years iirc with the frequency increasing at some point until it reaches every 2 years at age . (Not just a medical cert from your friendly GP, an actual test or at least a Govt Medical)

To be honest, I don't think a retest under current testing conditions will do anyone much good. I think a new testing regime with motorway driving, emergency car control etc should be introduced for all new drivers and any existing full license holders who haven't taken this should have to apply and pass within 2 years of its introduction (or whatever is realistic to allow for the demand) to be allowed continue to drive. Once you have proven yourself at a proper level, then your license is good for another say 15 years, then refresher retests should be done every 10 years which would account for your level and experience and would cover any new rules, technology etc. As you get older, retest should become more frequent. Every two years might be a bit much depending on the age, I didn't suggest every 2 years, but certainly retests are in my opinion a good idea.

Don't forget, there's drivers out there with full licenses who never passed the test in the first place. I'm not sure exactly the story behind this, but apparently there was such a backlog of applicants for the full test, they just gave everyone a full license without them even taking the test :rolleyes:

colm_mcm

There was no driving test till the mid 60s. The driving licence amnesty was in 1979, if you were on a second provisional licence you were upgraded.

nd

Have not read most of the posts in this thread. But in relation to road safety. Imo the best record of your standard of your road safety is your insurance record + points total..

I wouldn't have a problem with after say 12 points or even maybe 6 you've to reset the driving test.

If your goal is to improve road safety you target the people who have accidents. Not people who are a certain age ect.