English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I just read a news article regarding an 84 year old woman who ran her car through an elememtary school cafeteria and killed an 8 year old boy. This story really disturbs me. I feel horrible for the parents. Even though the elderly woman is to blame, I feel that the state should be just as responsible. I'm sure this woman within the past few years renewed her license simply by just doing an eye exam. Never not once does the state take into consideration that the drivers exam she took in 1949 is outdated. Or that her health is not good enough to handle a vehicle. A couple of years back my family had to take my 79 year old grandfathers vehicle away. After 3 accidents (within a month) and sending 4 people to the hospital, one was a baby, the family agreed it was best. It was a fight but had to be done for his own safety. I understand that retesting is costly and bothersome, but if it saves lives. I don't know, I just feel that this accident could/should have been avoided.

2007-01-30 07:28:32 · 9 answers · asked by zero 3 in Cars & Transportation Safety

9 answers

You are right. The state should take some responsibility. A person can be any age and still have health problems, vision problems, mental problems that can affect operation of equipment, including cars.

I think that someone should not be driving while under the influence of drugs that may affect their reflexes negatively. Many older people need medicines such as these, and younger people as well.

There definitely should be some kind of regular testing to determine someone's driving capabilities, but even them, it would not cover variables. They might be fine on a test, but have a problem the next day.

I figure, if you can't get through a simple obstacle course while running, you have no business driving a car.

2007-01-30 07:46:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

In the US, even if they passed the written test again, this means next to nothing. The last time I renewed (within the last 12 months), I felt like MANY questions had to do with legal outcomes of DUI, which I knew nothing about. I still obtained 100% correct. Those tests are a joke and the centers operate like they have an imperative to licensure as many people as humanly possible. This, of course, would completely defeat the purpose of the licensing process in the first place.

For some reason, after a certain age (say 25-30) we don't want to be bothered with accreditation again until we are retiring (say 65)... and when we're in that age group (that makes most decisions in the US) we feel "bad" about any decisions that go against the ederly. I really don't think it is due to a level of respect for our elders (as is the case in some Asian cultures). I think it has more to do with how we can be more harsh on those younger than us because we will never be that age again (in this lifetime at least, okay?). But (if we're lucky enough to live that long) we *will* be older than we are now. We shudder to think of our rights and abilities being taken away from us without our consent. So we let grandma continue to kill innocent bystanders because we wouldn't want to hurt her fragile little psyche. ...Even though she is senile and can't remember what you just said 5 minutes ago.

Obviously, the other major problem is that older Americans exercise their right to vote more than those younger than them. So local politicians are concerned about not being elected if they do not appease them. With the baby boomers reaching retirement age, our appeasement of seniors will most likely *increase* instead of decreasing like it should.

2007-02-02 06:49:49 · answer #2 · answered by CoolFin69 2 · 0 0

Nope, don't think an age limit is appropriate. My dad is almost 80 and does just fine. Very careful at intersections and cruises the speed limit most of the time. My nephew is 21 and thinks he's the best thing on 4 wheels. Scares the crap out of me any time I ride with him. Jams the gas the instant the light changes, always 10 to 15 above the limits, and never wears his seat belt. Yaks on the phone, fiddles with the stereo. Terrible driver.

2007-01-31 14:51:19 · answer #3 · answered by mark56649 2 · 0 0

there shouldnt be a legal limit, but past a certain age you should have to pass a qualification test every 3-5 years or so (past lets say 60). There are many 70 and 80 year olds that are also fine drivers. Heck there was a 77 year old guy at my last race school, and he was damned amazing!

2007-01-30 07:46:55 · answer #4 · answered by Kyle M 6 · 0 0

A lot of people say that old people should stop driving since they could be a moving accident. But I think as long as they can still see and have pretty good reflexes they should be able to drive. For your grandmother, she should get off the road before she endangers other people's lives.

2016-03-29 10:09:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You should be able to be 172384972130984 years old and still drive... as long as you are capable. If you are 20 and incapable, your license should be taken away. Age has nothing to do it, it has to do with your health and your capability, which varies from everyone to everyone.

2007-01-30 07:35:40 · answer #6 · answered by tolwc123ag 3 · 2 0

70 years old should be the limit

2007-01-30 07:34:22 · answer #7 · answered by 1978nevaeh 3 · 0 0

why is there accident in the frist place if they dont now to drive a car why do they have driver lisinzens. i hate it when people die i accidents.

2007-02-01 13:10:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

in my opinion i say about 65 years

2007-01-30 08:54:20 · answer #9 · answered by solanor2003 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers