L
lenshack
Guest
Pure guesswork as you don’t have the full facts.
I’m sure the insurance companies will base their premiums on the complete facts and their prices speak for themselves.
Three dead after caravan travels wrong way
- Thread starter jayjaysafc
- Start date
- Status
Pure guesswork as you don’t have the full facts.
I’m sure the insurance companies will base their premiums on the complete facts and their prices speak for themselves.
Not IMO.
One case of a senile old tw@t driving headlong into traffic is hardly representative of elderly drivers on the whole.
Tests for reaction times and senility etc. fine. Once you reach, say, 70, be obliged to get a doctor’s certificate of mental fitness. Doctors should be obligated to pass on medical info that may disqualify drivers.
That said, I was passing Morrison’s petrol station at the Board Inn yesterday, coming from the roundabout, and an old bloke pulled out the forecourt, almost into the side of me. Closest shave I’ve had in years. I had to brake hard and steer round him, and we ended up parallel to each other. Daft get drives off like nowt happened, doing about 15mph in front of me till he turned off...
A retest for him would’ve been the least I’d have recommended!
Mackemansj1
Striker
Those saying old folk shouldn’t be retested more remind me of those American gun owners who don’t want safer gun control, it makes nee sense at all surely everyone wants safer roads and if it means testing drivers over say 70 more that’s a good thing for all no?.
Very forward thinking of you to agree that women are clearly the best, safest drivers on the road then.
It's amusing the only - very defensive - response on this seems to be 'well young kids are the worst drivers'. Yes, they are. But that doesn't mean that a significant number of elderly drivers aren't worse than the average too, and some kind of retest is sensible given significant declines in reaction time, vision etc as we age.
The facts according to what was posted was that drivers over eighty kill a third of the number of people as drivers in their twenties do. If you want to call it pure guesswork to conclude that's disproportionate given how few over-80 drivers there will be, that's getting pretty desperate, tbh.
My dad was like some of the people on this thread - stubbornly insistent that he could drive as well as he could when younger, not wanting to listen to his family's concerns, pointing to a lifetime without accidents, and moaning about how terrible the young people were on the roads. Right up until the day he wrote his car off in an inevitable accident, and thankfully didn't hurt anyone other than himself and my mam wasn't in the car.
little e
Striker
Ah, a reasoned response includes using a search engine and then cutting a pasting the parts of the text that suit your point of view.You want sensible and well reasoned? Well why didn't just say so!
Ok, well seeing as there are a lot more under 60 drivers on the road than over 60's, statistics alone won't cut it, so let's look at the facts of getting old..
Eyesight
For every decade past age 25, drivers need twice the brightness to see properly, therefore by age 75 some drivers may need 32 times the brightness they did at age 25. Older drivers are also more susceptible to glare and take longer to recover from being dazzled. Recovery time from glare increases from average two seconds at age 15 to nine seconds at age 65.
Hearing
Hearing begins to deteriorate slightly from age 30-40, and the rate of deterioration increases as you get older. By the age of 80 most people have significant hearing problems.
Movement
Older people often suffer joint and muscle stiffness, which may affect how easily they can turn their head and body to look round when reversing or checking blind spots.
General Health
Drivers with certain chronic illnesses, such as diabetes and heart disease, are at higher risk of causing crashes. These illnesses are more common in older people. Older people are also more at risk from dementia, which severely impairs driving as the disease progresses, although driving impairment may not be apparent in the early stages.
Medicines
As various health conditions become more prevalent with age, many older drivers will be taking over-the-counter or prescription medication. Many medications can impair driving, for example by causing drowsiness and affecting concentration
Older drivers are over-represented in crashes at junctions, and more likely to be involved in “failed to look” crashes. This is thought to be because older drivers are less able to judge the speed of oncoming vehicles, and may also be due to problems with eyesight and reduced visual field.
Source
Older drivers - Brake the road safety charity
Now, obviously, this isn't indicative of all drivers. Some people are just shit drivers and stupid, regardless of age. But, take a shit stupid driver and add 60 years to the kernt and you have a timebomb waiting to blow up on some poor fucker like the fella in the OP.
Perhaps if you'd actually read what it says you would have also realised that:
Research shows that drivers aged 60 or over are no more likely to be involved in crashes than other drivers, although crash involvement rates increase from age 80. Drivers aged 60-69 actually have less than half the crash rate than drivers aged 20-29. This is likely to be because older drivers tend to be far less likely to take risks such as driving too fast or while distracted. This helps to compensate for any deterioration in health and driving performance, such as slower reaction times.
It's what it says in your quoted source, so it must be gospel.
It goes on to say that it is compulsory to renew your driving licence every 3 years from the age of 70. A very sensible idea and one that I wholeheartedly support, I would go further and say that in my opinion this should include both a medical check and some form of driving test, maybe even starting at a slightly younger age.
Perhaps when you grow up you'll realise that older people can, in fact, read and can assimilate the contents of research. By the way if you add 60 years to the kernt (sic) you'll have someone who is at least 77 years old so again that doesn't really support your argument either.
You're going to have to do a lot better than that but don't worry about replying, I won't read it anyway as I'm partially sighted, almost deaf and so raddled with illness that switching on a phone or computer is something that is almost beyond me
richyrich
Full Back
You obviously don't understand how statistics work, or the point of my post, not surprising. You're probably at an age where your brain is at 50%.
L
lenshack
Guest
I think you really mean statistics, statistics and downright lies.
little e
Striker
Wrong again. I used an extract from the same source that you provided . It doesn't mention statistics it says "Research shows", it's your source why would it be wrong?
I do understand how statistics work, in fact statistically speaking 47.83% of all statistics are made up.
The point of your post was to support your statement that all drivers over 60 should be banned. You failed.
It would appear that the 50% you mentioned is considerably better than whatever you're using.
End of discussion, hopefully.
Agree, stats are 'interpretable' imo.
Some bits and bobs from the latest Govt. stats published May 2018..
In 2016 older people accounted for around 12 per cent of all full car driving licence holders in Great Britain. Young people aged between 17 and 24, account for around 7 per cent of all full car driving licence holders in Great Britain.
Older car drivers (70+) have a slightly lower casualty rate given distance travelled compared to all car drivers.
In 2016, there were 292 older car driver casualties per billion vehicle miles travelled in England, compared to 306 for all car drivers.
In recent years the distance driven by older people in England has risen markedly (by 28 per cent) from 1,593 in 2002 to 2,045 in 2016 miles per person per year.
Some bits and bobs from the latest Govt. stats published May 2018..
In 2016 older people accounted for around 12 per cent of all full car driving licence holders in Great Britain. Young people aged between 17 and 24, account for around 7 per cent of all full car driving licence holders in Great Britain.
Older car drivers (70+) have a slightly lower casualty rate given distance travelled compared to all car drivers.
In 2016, there were 292 older car driver casualties per billion vehicle miles travelled in England, compared to 306 for all car drivers.
In recent years the distance driven by older people in England has risen markedly (by 28 per cent) from 1,593 in 2002 to 2,045 in 2016 miles per person per year.
It’s looking like this accident wasn’t really an accident at all.
Pure speculation on my part, but I wonder if he lost his rag at the prospect of losing his licence. He’d had an accident just days before and apparently the police were taking an interest in him.
If this was a deliberate act, what an evil bastard. However, I’m not condemning him just yet. We may never know what really happened, but how on earth could you accidentally drive on the wrong side of a motorway at high speed into traffic in the outside lane for seven miles?! Even if he was completely out of it, surely his wife would’ve been screaming at him to stop? The likelihood of them both being equally incapacitated is practically nil.
Poor bloke he killed had just finalised a house purchase with his GF that day. It’s f***ing heartbreaking.
Pure speculation on my part, but I wonder if he lost his rag at the prospect of losing his licence. He’d had an accident just days before and apparently the police were taking an interest in him.
If this was a deliberate act, what an evil bastard. However, I’m not condemning him just yet. We may never know what really happened, but how on earth could you accidentally drive on the wrong side of a motorway at high speed into traffic in the outside lane for seven miles?! Even if he was completely out of it, surely his wife would’ve been screaming at him to stop? The likelihood of them both being equally incapacitated is practically nil.
Poor bloke he killed had just finalised a house purchase with his GF that day. It’s f***ing heartbreaking.
Ah OK, fair enough.
L
lenshack
Guest
Some hilarious mishaps on Comedy Extra Sky now.
Hopefully nobody badly hurt.
Hopefully nobody badly hurt.
Keawyeds
Striker
I'm sure there'll be money for this after Brexit...
Think of the extra jobs we'll be making!
D
Deleted member 6694
Guest
Wouldn't a lot of older drivers have not taken such an intensive driving test when they passed if they passed when young. Also given the way traffic has also increased massively since they passed. A 70 year old now could have passed their test in 1968 when traffic, driving behaviour etc was far different.
There should certainly be a retest at some point (simulation even as suggested) as you could pass at 17 and yet 53 years later still be driving when the roads/rules/driving/cars etc have all changed. Some drivers will adapt and mature as time goes by but some won't or their standards will drop simply to old age or both.
Is the average distance driven by someone 10,000 or 12,000 miles per year or is that just insurance jargon when getting quotes? Let's just say it's 10,000 miles then as the distance driven by an older person is 2,000 then that means you should multiply the casualty rate by 5 to get the same casualty rate per 10,000 miles shouldn't it?
Given the figures above, the casually rate for all drivers is 1 per 3,267,973 miles (billion/306). Based on 10,000 miles average per driver then the older driver is 684,931 miles (billion/292*5)
I may be wrong as this is just guestimation and me talking crap but surely you would need the casualty rate per miles driven by older people only and not everyone. If older drivers had 292 casualties per billion miles for all drivers (yet they only drove 1 million miles) and younger drivers had no accidents then this figure of 292 per billion is completely misleading isn't it? Surely it would be 292,000 casualties per billion miles driven by older people.
There should certainly be a retest at some point (simulation even as suggested) as you could pass at 17 and yet 53 years later still be driving when the roads/rules/driving/cars etc have all changed. Some drivers will adapt and mature as time goes by but some won't or their standards will drop simply to old age or both.
It's the casualty rate given distance travelled by older people you need, not all distance travelled by all drivers. What if older drivers only drove 1 million of those miles? That would be 292 casualties per 1,000,000 miles wouldn't it?
Is the average distance driven by someone 10,000 or 12,000 miles per year or is that just insurance jargon when getting quotes? Let's just say it's 10,000 miles then as the distance driven by an older person is 2,000 then that means you should multiply the casualty rate by 5 to get the same casualty rate per 10,000 miles shouldn't it?
Given the figures above, the casually rate for all drivers is 1 per 3,267,973 miles (billion/306). Based on 10,000 miles average per driver then the older driver is 684,931 miles (billion/292*5)
I may be wrong as this is just guestimation and me talking crap
but surely you would need the casualty rate per miles driven by older people only and not everyone. If older drivers had 292 casualties per billion miles for all drivers (yet they only drove 1 million miles) and younger drivers had no accidents then this figure of 292 per billion is completely misleading isn't it? Surely it would be 292,000 casualties per billion miles driven by older people.
Last edited by a moderator:
Al
Striker
But nowadays you don't even have to use hand signals in the driving test like I had to when I did mine (1971 btw). Scandalous! And as for stuff changing since the 60s, some of us had to pass a test in a car with drum brakes, cross ply tyres, nee power steering or power assisted braking or ABS, etc. You could get a right sweat on doing a 3 point turn, and an emergency stop could be an interesting experience. Piece of piss these days man.
D
Deleted member 6694
Guest
Makem57
Central Defender
After driving down the A19 on Friday, it wasn't the 60+ year olds that was tailgating me a 70 when I was overtaking, and then there was the young lass who gave me the finger, because I did give way to here on a roundabout, I was going round and she was joining, as am 60 I have regular eye tests, was never a boy racer even when I was a boy, my wife was rammed by a van whe she was stopped in traffic, he hit her twice as he panicked he was 25, there are bad drivers of all age groups. I hope all these who are saying that 60+ drives should be banned give up their driving licence when they are 60.
zwartekat
Striker
They can't imagine ever being 60.
The figures are for distance travelled by older drivers, they have all been 'normalized' to a figure per billion miles travelled, so comparisons can be made.
It is 292 per billion miles travelled.... the clue is in my post, read it again.
Last edited:
- Status
