Is it time to make people resit driving test after a period of time?

ANXIOUS · 31-01-2018 11:58pm

With the exception of teen drivers, seniors have the highest crash death rate per mile driven, even though they drive fewer miles than younger people.

Although Americans are healthier and living longer than ever before, seniors are outliving their ability to drive safely by an average of 7 to 10 years. Most older drivers recognize and avoid situations where their limitations put them at risk. They drive less after dark, during rush hour or in bad weather, and avoid difficult roads such as highways and intersections.

https://seniordriving.aaa.com/resources-family-friends/conversations-about-driving/facts-research/

Sue Pa Key Pa · 31-01-2018 11:59pm

ANXIOUS wrote:

In your opinion when do you think it's most likely the 65+ age group are on the road?

When they need to go somewhere

ANXIOUS · 01-02-2018 12:00am

Cason Powerful Skateboard wrote: »

The age of the deceased is pointless. Something like 12% will be children under 16, so will you maintain they were driving? Elderly people may well be killed more in accidents (I think it's something like 33% over 60 and 33% for under 30s) but cause of the accident is the only true message. Insurance companies are usually quite up to par on these things and are not loading the premiums on middle aged to elderly drivers.

That's incorrect they break it down to drivers, passengers, other road users.

I've linked to some stuff from America. Very interesting reading.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 01-02-2018 12:01am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

In your opinion when do you think it's most likely the 65+ age group are on the road?

You want me to guess as well? Ok, I'm about more than you during the day I'd imagine and I'd say, with as much merit or scientific strength as your own assumptions, that it's 9 to 11 am for mass, daily paper, library, doctor etc.
But it's still proof of nothing if they are the victims of road accidents and nt the cause.

ANXIOUS · 01-02-2018 12:01am

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

When they need to go somewhere

Yes which generally wouldn't be work so you can take out rush hours, or nightclubing so you can take out late nights and wee morning. And what are you left with...

ANXIOUS · 01-02-2018 12:03am

It's fine that if I had of replaced elderly drivers with drink drivers I'd have got a 100 thanks and thread would have been dead after a page.

Dev84 · 01-02-2018 12:04am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

It's fine that if I had of replaced elderly drivers with drink drivers I'd have got a 100 thanks and thread would have been dead after a page.

At least the elderly got their full license.

Fann Linn · 01-02-2018 12:05am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

Yes which generally wouldn't be work so you can take out rush hours, or nightclubing so you can take out late nights and wee morning. And what are you left with...

Plenty of OAPs quite partial to nights at the theatre, cinema, restaurant etc. Not everyone goes to bed with cocoa at 10.00.

Sue Pa Key Pa · 01-02-2018 12:06am

ANXIOUS wrote:

Yes which generally wouldn't be work so you can take out rush hours, or nightclubing so you can take out late nights and wee morning. And what are you left with...

I would guess anywhere between 9 and 6.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 01-02-2018 12:06am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

That's incorrect they break it down to drivers, passengers, other road users.

I've linked to some stuff from America. Very interesting reading.

You don't drive do you?

They still don't detail it by cause, do they? No.

Again, will you maintain under 16 year olds in the stats were driving and responsible for the accident?

America has no bearing whatsoever. It is the least acceptable country to compare with for motoring issues.

I'll ask again, as you have ignored others asking the same question.
How long have you held a full driving licence.

Edit. And I'll ask you another question you are ignoring, Do you ting Insurance Companies have got it wrong with their premiums??

gozunda · 01-02-2018 12:07am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

https://seniordriving.aaa.com/resources-family-friends/conversations-about-driving/facts-research/

But that's data from the USA! I think you might be better of gathering relevant data from the RSA!

The US has very different tests / medical and driving conditions compared to here - so no not applicable to your Shane Ross story whatsoever.

To undertake a study - best practice is first to set out your thesis. Do a review of the relevant literature. Select a study area. Gather your data. Test your data. Check your findings. Write up your results and present the conclusions.

It is not good practice to make wild claims and then gather random data.

Dev84 · 01-02-2018 12:08am

Cason Powerful Skateboard wrote: »

You don't drive do you?

They still don't detail it by cause, do they? No.

Again, will you maintain under 16 year olds in the stats were driving and responsible for the accident?

America has no bearing whatsoever. It is the least acceptable country to compare with for motoring issues.

I'll ask again, as you have ignored others asking the same question.
How long have you held a full driving licence.

He dont have a licence. He is bitter.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 01-02-2018 12:13am

Dev84 wrote: »

He dont have a licence. He is bitter.

I've just seen a thread where a young driver a few years back had a puncture, with a flat spare, out of petrol and a flat battery. He shouldn't have been on the road with such a death trap and such poor preparation before taking to the roads.

Guess who it was?

Dev84 · 01-02-2018 12:15am

Cason Powerful Skateboard wrote: »

I've just seen a thread where a young driver a few years back had a puncture, with a flat spare, out of petrol and a flat battery. He shouldn't have been on the road with such a death trap and such poor preparation before taking to the roads.

Guess who it was?

Enlighten me.....

gozunda · 01-02-2018 12:15am

Cason Powerful Skateboard wrote: »

I've just seen a thread where a young driver a few years back had a puncture, with a flat spare, out of petrol and a flat battery. He shouldn't have been on the road with such a death trap and such poor preparation before taking to the roads.

Guess who it was?

Shane Ross?

scamalert · 01-02-2018 12:20am

yes lets give goverment another tax initiative to rip people off as is on the roads.

Now i get OPs point, in most cases if accident happens and you have 50-70aged person involved pay outs go trough the roof, claims drag on for years, since because of age they will have dozen conditions as is, which to say the least medical assessments are decades away to rule out and will gladly make it stick.

thou rule of thumb from seeing people on the road its mostly young 20- upwards that are usually the ones to cause the accident, young and stupid is true, as elderly will be more slow and they to take caution - well at least those that arent some alcos or just rooted back to times when road rules didn't exist.

re-sitting test would make it a ton harder as it is now, so only exception i see unless ones medical condition has changed, or they have accidents that result in injuries etc that could be the spin off to implement such rule, otherwise it would cause more anger then any good as insurance companies are mobed up comfy as is, road tax, nct make a killing as well its joe that gets screwed here.

Dev84 · 01-02-2018 12:21am

scamalert wrote: »

yes lets give goverment another tax initiative to rip people off as is on the roads.

Now i get OPs point, in most cases if accident happens and you have 50-70aged person involved pay outs go trough the roof, claims drag on for years, since because of age they will have dozen conditions as is, which to say the least medical assessments are decades away to rule out and will gladly make it stick.

thou rule of thumb from seeing people on the road its mostly young 20- upwards that are usually the ones to cause the accident, young and stupid is true, as elderly will be more slow and they to take caution - well at least those that arent some alcos or just rooted back to times when road rules didn't exist.

re-setting test would make it a ton harder as it is now, so only exception i see unless ones medical condition has changed, or they have accidents that result in injuries etc that could be the spin off to implement such rule, otherwise it would cause more anger then any good as insurance companies are mobed up comfy as is, road tax, nct make a killing as well its joe that gets screwed here.

Thread is dead since the op's true motives were uncovered.

ANXIOUS · 01-02-2018 12:24am

Dev84 wrote: »

Thread is dead since the op's true motives were uncovered.

What are you talking about? This isn't about me and if you'd care to take a leaf out of sareems book you'd see for yourself.

Dev84 · 01-02-2018 12:26am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

What are you talking about? This isn't about me and if you'd care to take a leaf out of sareems book you'd see for yourself.

Earn your own licence and come back to us.

ANXIOUS · 01-02-2018 12:26am

Cason Powerful Skateboard wrote: »

I've just seen a thread where a young driver a few years back had a puncture, with a flat spare, out of petrol and a flat battery. He shouldn't have been on the road with such a death trap and such poor preparation before taking to the roads.

Guess who it was?

I wasn't on the road it was in an underground car park, but good story.

I can't belive how people are so against thinking elderly people are more of a risk on the road.

Junkyard Tom · 01-02-2018 12:26am

No. Getting a full licence isn't a certificate of excellence - it's a certificate of meeting the minimum standards for driving unaccompanied. Driving is a life-skill that we should, ideally, be constantly improving.

ANXIOUS · 01-02-2018 12:27am

Dev84 wrote: »

Earn your own licence and come back to us.

OK, I've done that a few years ago im back now.

Dev84 · 01-02-2018 12:27am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

OK, I've done that a few years ago im back now.

Dead thread. Im out.

ANXIOUS · 01-02-2018 12:31am

Dev84 wrote: »

Dead thread. Im out.

Incredible contribution, ask me multiple times if I've a license and then I answer and you're out :pac:

gozunda · 01-02-2018 12:33am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I wasn't on the road it was in an underground car park, but good story.

I can't belive how people are so against thinking elderly people are more of a risk on the road.

I can't believe how you came up with an assumption that goes against the findings of the Irish Road Safety Authority and you've done your best to put forward your own bias as plausible!

Get away out of it...!

Edit: Provisionally I dont agree with your assumption that "elderly people are more of a risk on the road" for the following reasons:

* Defining 'elderly' as anything between 65-80 represents too large of a difference in a single grouping. Many 65 plus individuals are fit healthy and active due to improved diet fitness medical care etc etc

* Older drivers are generally more experienced with regards to hazards and road conditions and many have a wealth of driving experience

* Older drivers are less likley to drive at high speeds and engage in risky manoeuvres or road racing etc etc

* Older drivers have more medical and optical tests to ensure fitness to drive

* There are always exceptions and outliers such as the sad story of the individual with dementia who took his sons jeep.

Disclaimer: The above does not mean that I believe older drivers are the best* drivers either however going by the findings of the RSA they are less at risk on the road compared to some other groups...

Buford T. Justice XIX · 01-02-2018 1:41am

gozunda wrote: »

But that's data from the USA! I think you might be better of gathering relevant data from the RSA!

The US has very different tests / medical and driving conditions compared to here - so no not applicable to your Shane Ross story whatsoever.

To undertake a study - best practice is first to set out your thesis. Do a review of the relevant literature. Select a study area. Gather your data. Test your data. Check your findings. Write up your results and present the conclusions.

It is not good practice to make wild claims and then gather random data.[

Are you trying to close After Hours?:P

gozunda · 01-02-2018 9:54am

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Are you trying to close After Hours?:P

Erhhh ya sorry boss - mea culpa*

*takes myself off to have a good talking too ....

BattleCorp · 01-02-2018 10:54am

I reckon that a huge amount of people (myself included) would probably fail the driving test if they had to sit it again.

You'd have thousands of people who have been driving for years put off the road.

There would be huge social consequences if that was the case. Something like that would crash the economy.

Lux23 · 01-02-2018 10:56am

Most would fail because the driving test is ridiculous.

suicide_circus · 01-02-2018 10:58am

BattleCorp wrote: »

I reckon that a huge amount of people (myself included) would probably fail the driving test if they had to sit it again.

You'd have thousands of people who have been driving for years put off the road.

There would be huge social consequences if that was the case. Something like that would crash the economy.

Why do you think you'd fail?

cajonlardo · 01-02-2018 11:26am

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I can't belive how people are so against thinking elderly people are more of a risk on the road.

Hi,
What driving experience are you basing your belief on?

I am driving in professional capacities since the late 70's. Including emergency services and other performance related driving occupations.

Honestly, I am hard put to isolate any single group of road users as being specifically dangerous. I've seen allegations that certain marques of cars are dangerously driven, the young are dangerous or the elderly are too befuddled to be allowed drive.
Sorry, I just don't see this carry into real life.

P.S just thinking on all the road traffic accidents I've attended and with honesty I cannot say there was a noticable bigger amount of any age group involved.

FishOnABike · 01-02-2018 11:40am

Dev84 wrote: »

At least the elderly got their full license.

As the driving test was only introduced in 1954, a substantial number of drivers 70+ would never have had to sit a driving test. You just went in to the motor tax office, paid your fee and walked out with your licence. I think my father got his licence before he ever sat in a car.

BattleCorp · 01-02-2018 11:42am

suicide_circus wrote: »

Why do you think you'd fail?

To be honest, I wouldn't class myself as a world beater when it comes to driving. I'd class myself as ok. It took me four attempts before I passed my driving test years ago.

I freely acknowledge that I would have picked up some bad habits in the years since. Not necessarily bad habits that make me an unsafe driver, just things that are frowned upon in a test.

I see the logic in people upskilling or doing some sort of refresher class every 10 years, but I think it isn't practical to have everybody resit their driving test at regular intervals.

Wanderer78 · 01-02-2018 11:47am

BattleCorp wrote:

To be honest, I wouldn't class myself as a world beater when it comes to driving. I'd class myself as ok. It took me four attempts before I passed my driving test years ago.

I'd fail myself as well, but I got it first time around. We regularly should be 'checked' but in a less stressful way as the original test. I do think you d be right about the negative effects of a major change to the testing system on the economy

jmayo · 01-02-2018 12:05pm

ANXIOUS wrote: »

This is something that I have been thinking about for a while and just haven't had the time to pull off the numbers and analyze them.

Basically I think everyone should have to resit the driving test after say 10years of initially passing it and then ever 5 years from 65-80 and after that on a yearly basis.

The data I need is age profile for crashes, cliams and deaths, as I believe I think there is a direct link with elderly drivers.

With Shane Ross's militant view on drink drivers I think this is the next natural step. The below cases got me thinking of it today.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/man-84-did-uturn-at-toll-plaza-and-drove-3km-the-wrong-way-on-motorway-before-being-killed-36551795.html

You want to turn it into a pilots license. :rolleyes:
And you use one case to suit your argument.

What about the politician that drove for miles down the wrong side of Naas dual carriageway a number of years back?
Should we bring in a rule for politicians ?
Granted he was drunk as well.

ANXIOUS wrote: »

First Stat, in 2016&2017 (combined) people over the age of 65 account for the largest portion of road deaths 77 out of 344

How many of them are at fault for these accidents.
What about 66 year old Donegal man Hugh Friel who whilst on his way home from bingo was ploughed into by a car driven by 26 year old
Shaun Kelly.

BTW the other 7 guys in Shaun Kelly's car were also killed.

Is Hugh Friel part of your stats ?

Fann Linn wrote: »

Does not necessarilly mean that age group were at fault just because they died.

Exactly.
Sometimes they are passengers in cars.
Last Nov an elderly woman from Wicklow died after being in a car crash in Northern Ireland.
She was passenger in the car and mother-in-law of driver.

Widdershins · 01-02-2018 1:04pm

If they did make people re-sit it, it should not cost anything. Too many things that look suspiciously like money rackets and safety related things shouldn't be like that. Especially with the scandalous cost of insurance etc.
Incidentally I paid my premium yesterday and it is now 3 x what it was three years ago. Never had a claim or conviction.

BattleCorp · 01-02-2018 1:14pm

Widdershins wrote: »

If they did make people re-sit it, it should not cost anything. Too many things that look suspiciously like money rackets and safety related things shouldn't be like that. Especially with the scandalous cost of insurance etc.
Incidentally I paid my premium yesterday and it is now 3 x what it was three years ago. Never had a claim or conviction.

It's not just the cost of the re-sit. It's what happens to people who re-sit and fail? Do we put them off the road until they re-sit again and pass?

Who drives the ambulance in the meantime when the driver is off the road? Who drives the trucks? Who brings granny to the hospital? How do I get to work? Etc. Etc. Etc.

It would be an absolute economic disaster.

Hector Savage · 01-02-2018 1:22pm

F*ck that ! It's allready a total racket as it is !!
Why should someone have to resit the test if they are continuously driving over all these years ?

BattleCorp · 01-02-2018 1:29pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

F*ck that ! It's allready a total racket as it is !!
Why should someone have to resit the test if they are continuously driving over all these years ?

I'm totally against the re-sit idea, but there is a little bit of logic in it (even though it would be totally impractical to implement).

If you are in a workplace and drive a forklift, you have to do refresher training every three years. If you are a truck driver you need to do CPC training, which includes one classroom module every year.

lalababa · 01-02-2018 1:32pm

ANXIOUS wrote: »

This is something that I have been thinking about for a while and just haven't had the time to pull off the numbers and analyze them.

Basically I think everyone should have to resit the driving test after say 10years of initially passing it and then ever 5 years from 65-80 and after that on a yearly basis.

The data I need is age profile for crashes, cliams and deaths, as I believe I think there is a direct link with elderly drivers.

With Shane Ross's militant view on drink drivers I think this is the next natural step. The below cases got me thinking of it today.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/man-84-did-uturn-at-toll-plaza-and-drove-3km-the-wrong-way-on-motorway-before-being-killed-36551795.html

Education and exams are certainly a decent way of upskilling, like the cpc for truckers. It would keep people a little bit more on the ball if they had a few mandatory lessons and a test every 10 years as you say especially for older folks. There are alot of elderly drivers that shouldn't be out on the roads. The car had to be sold out from under my father, and many friends of mine have similar experiences. Most of the old folks just don't know when to quit. That said we need enforcement of the current laws which is not happening. Take the non enforcement of fog lights as an example.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 01-02-2018 1:39pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

F*ck that ! It's allready a total racket as it is !!
Why should someone have to resit the test if they are continuously driving over all these years ?

I can fire a gun but it doesn't mean I know how to do it safely.

There should be a rules of the road test at the very least before every new licence is issued. I'd support a driving test as well with a temporary licence to continue driving for 6 months until a failed test is passed similar to the current NCT system where you can test early and continue to drive it, unless the car is unsafe, subject to the car passing the NCT again.

Watching people driving around roundabouts leaves me with nightmares, especially older drivers who have never been told what they are supposed to do on a roundabout.

lalababa · 01-02-2018 1:41pm

myshirt wrote: »

Yes, we should repeat the test. The only thing that puts me off is the lack of governance and fairness in the testing at the moment. A lot of kids getting f#cked over. Just smells of a money spinning scam.

The driving test fee is 85 euro. It costs the rsa over 100 euro (don't ask me how as testers only get base 15.68 an hour) . Driving instructor s charge average 35 / hr. With similar expenses as taxi car. How much would a taxi cost for an hour? Plus you have to teach the learner and not crash.

soups05 · 01-02-2018 2:06pm

I think the op maybe on to something here....
ban the over 65s...they are old and slow and prob never sat a test cos they got the licence in the 70s
ban the under 25s...sure they are all mad boy racer types who only hoon around doing da doughnuts and crashing like
ban the wimins..sure the school run time is full of these ejits in big jeeps who can't drive or park, get em off the road
ban the taxi men, cos they park anywhere, jump red lights and generally drive like they own the road
ban the truckers/bus drivers...they take up far too much space on the road
ban the foreiners like, they never sat a real test, twas only bareback on a zebra to get there piece of paper

get them all off the road and leave it for the calm, sensible guys like me, 46, white,male, full licence...sure am just perfect so i am.

:P

in case there is any doubt, the above is all sarcasm and the opening post(not poster, just post) is wrong.

when you get to 65 you will regret wanting the old drivers banned, so don't do it to them now.

Fann Linn · 01-02-2018 2:08pm

lalababa wrote: »

Education and exams are certainly a decent way of upskilling, like the cpc for truckers. It would keep people a little bit more on the ball if they had a few mandatory lessons and a test every 10 years as you say especially for older folks. There are alot of elderly drivers that shouldn't be out on the roads. The car had to be sold out from under my father, and many friends of mine have similar experiences. Most of the old folks just don't know when to quit. That said we need enforcement of the current laws which is not happening. Take the non enforcement of fog lights as an example.

CPC is a scam. Should be filed away with manual handling and safepass.

MOH · 01-02-2018 2:12pm

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I'm happy to correct that at a later date, I've already covered off that I feel their personal GP is way too close to be making that decision.

Also I'll take age action quotes with a pinch of salt when the topic of removing some of them from the road is being discussed.

There's no point doing this if you're starting with a conclusion and cherrypicking the information which supports that, based on your own opinions. Get the data and draw your conclusions from that, not the other way around.

lalababa · 01-02-2018 2:14pm

Fann Linn wrote: »

CPC is a scam. Should be filed away with manual handling and safepass.

Cpc is too expensive and does not deliver enough I agree. It should have been implemented differently. But it does drive home safety. Alas it is just another expense which the already on near minimum wage truckers do not get recompense.

andekwarhola · 01-02-2018 2:16pm

Mooooo wrote: »

No doubt would turn into a money making racket if done, any other countries doing it and it improving the road safety figures? Simple enough to pass a test on the day anyway and people would go back to habits then

While there's some truth in what you say re: making it too expensive (although it has to be funded somehow, unless you believe in the Magic Money Tree) I wish every single initiative to improve road safety wasn't automatically branded a racket and usually by the very people that make it necessary so they can ignore it 'on principle'.

knipex · 01-02-2018 2:20pm

ANXIOUS wrote: »

First Stat, in 2016&2017 (combined) people over the age of 65 account for the largest portion of road deaths 77 out of 344

So more old people were killed on the roads, probably by other drivers so they are the most unsafe drivers ??

How many of that 77 were pedestrians ??

Go on its in there.. What percentage of the 77 who died due to their bad driving were actually even in a car..??

Then look at the deaths or 16 to 25 year old's..

ANXIOUS wrote: »

Another statistic, the most common time for a driver to be killed on the roads is between 12-4pm. Personally I would've thought this would've been midnight and 4 am with drink driving g.

Also I would say 12-4pm is the most common time for elderly drivers to be on the road.

Really ? nothing to do with rush hour or school run ???

Hotblack Desiato · 01-02-2018 2:23pm

Dev84 wrote: »

At least the elderly got their full license.

Yeah, by filling in a form! The driving test was only introduced in the early 60s* so still plenty of drivers around who got their full licence by just going to the post office and paying the fee.

Then there were all the 'dog licences' handed out to learner drivers in the late 70s. Most of them will be still driving.

* March 18th 1964 to be precise.

CelticRambler · 01-02-2018 2:25pm

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Certainly you should be made repeat the theory test every 10 years.

Probably no point in doing that because ...

suicide_circus wrote: »

Surely most crashes are caused by people doing things they know damn well not to do and that any learner driver would know is dangerous.

There's a system in France whereby you can recover the points you've lost (here, you start with 12 points and lose them for traffic offences) by doing a sort of "theory" test - more of a "do you know what an idiot you've been?" weekend. It's a great money-spinner for the agencies offering the courses; road accident statistics suggest it doesn't make any difference.

I'd be of the same opinion. I thought my B test was the most stressful exam I'd ever done, but passed it on the first go. Ten years later, I trained for a C-licence, and it was about as nerve-wracking as doing the B! :eek: But I got that on the first go too. Doing the theory and practical for the second was a great way to revise what I'd learnt as a twenty-something car driver and correct the bad habits that I'd developped in the meantime, so I can see the value in issuing a first licence as more of an extended "provisional" licence rather than a "forever" permit.

However, I think the arrival of driverless cars will quickly remove the need to bring in this kind of measure. Any serious offence (drunk/drug driving) or repeat offence (speeding) will result in a loss of licence, The End. No more "but I need my car for work" excuses because everyone will have access to a driverless car in one form or another. Getting - and keeping - a licence will be something that only seriously motivated drivers will care about.

Is it time to make people resit driving test after a period of time?

Comments