Poll of the Day > once you hit 65 years of age you should he required to take the road test again

(+) Yeah! (+)

every 2 years until your death
---

Honestly, fuck that driving privileges gone at 70. Find some other way, your convenience isn't worth lives.

ASlaveObeys posted...

your convenience isn't worth lives.

Prove lethality or fuck off from my rights, innocent until proven guilty.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Prove lethality or fuck off from my rights, innocent until proven guilty.

I didn't know you were 70 years old.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

ASlaveObeys posted...

your convenience isn't worth lives.

Prove lethality or fuck off from my rights, innocent until proven guilty.

No, I'm defense. You prove you're not going to kill someone.
Checkmate atheists

ASlaveObeys posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

ASlaveObeys posted...

your convenience isn't worth lives.

Prove lethality or fuck off from my rights, innocent until proven guilty.

No, I'm defense. You prove you're not going to kill someone.
Checkmate atheists

They would need to drive to prove it...
---

Fuck that. Id be willing to do a required retake of the written test every time you renew.

WastelandCowboy posted...

Fuck that. Id be willing to do a required retake of the written test every time you renew.

I wouldnt. With a CDL, Id have a bunch to take. Even stuff that I dont need to know. And test questions always seem to be in the wrong section. Not to mention, state specific shit... everyone would eventually start going to states where the ID takes much longer to expire...
---

What? The most accidents are caused by 16-35 YO males.

Sure, I'm in favor of tougher driving tests for everyone, especially young men.

I'm 72, drive an E36 BMW and an MA61 Supra, manual transmission. Also student pilot, tournament martial artist, and undoubtedly in better shape than I was at age 30.

In probably a half-million miles or so, zero traffic tickets, my only accident was a few years back, low speed scraping a parked car while backing out of a narrow alley in a thunderstorm.
---

The elderly are just as dangerous as the young and the idiot drivers, so basically, no automatic renewal for any age group. Also, you must be able to pass a depth perception test to continue driving.
---

People really want to take the test constantly? Why? It seems like an inconvience in most places...
---

LinkPizza posted...

People really want to take the test constantly? Why? It seems like an inconvience in most places...

Better than driving with idiots on the road.

Do like aviation: Medical exam, recurrent checkrides including laws and regulations, equipment, proficiency, procedures, emergency maneuvers.

Not that it would do much good. A few years back, in the murder capitol city where I live, they did a few traffic checkpoints for license, insurance, equipment, warrants. More than 1/10 of the drivers they stopped didn't have a valid license. The solution they came to? They stopped doing checkpoints.
---

Yes.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

ASlaveObeys posted...

your convenience isn't worth lives.

Prove lethality or fuck off from my rights, innocent until proven guilty.

Driving isn't a right, it's a privelage.

Dakooder posted...

Driving isn't a right, it's a privelage.

Burden of proof is only on the person making the original claim though.
---

you should have to take another test in order to renew your license when it expires regardless of age
---

You think the lines at the DMV are bad now? Wait until that happens.
---

TheOrangeMisfit posted...

You think the lines at the DMV are bad now? Wait until that happens.

I was thinking about that, as well. I recently had to go a couple of times within the past year. It sucked for everyone there. Lines were always ridiculous. And thats now. If dumb rules like these get added, it would be really, really shitty...
---

dancer62 posted...

I'm 72

I still think a guy of your age posting on a video game website is cool as fuck. Kudos.
---

LinkPizza posted...

I was thinking about that, as well. I recently had to go a couple of times within the past year. It sucked for everyone there. Lines were always ridiculous. And thats now. If dumb rules like these get added, it would be really, really shitty...

They would have to hire more people.
---

that sounds like a terrible idea.

Tell us, what should we do about young reckless drivers then? surely they outnumber all these "old" reckless drivers
---

wwinterj25 posted...

dancer62 posted...

I'm 72

I still think a guy of your age posting on a video game website is cool as fuck. Kudos.

I though Dancer was a female...
---

Revelation34 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

I was thinking about that, as well. I recently had to go a couple of times within the past year. It sucked for everyone there. Lines were always ridiculous. And thats now. If dumb rules like these get added, it would be really, really shitty...

They would have to hire more people.

I dont think that would be enough. Plus, youd need to redo the building. Even when they have a lot of people, they can only do some much. They would need a bigger building, lots more people(more than they can pay, probably), and a larger area to work with for driving. Or we could just not have stupid laws like this...
---

LinkPizza posted...

I though Dancer was a female...

Oh? I've no idea to be honest but if so my mistake.
---

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAzaOZfgf0M" data-time="
---

Judgmenl posted...

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.

That would take a lot and be pretty hard... not to mention, people wouldnt like it much...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Judgmenl posted...

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.

That would take a lot and be pretty hard... not to mention, people wouldnt like it much...

Yea I don't care what you think. Every one of your posts is insufferable but I tolerate them because you haven't called me out yet.
---

Judgmenl posted...

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.

People drive because they want to, and it's deeply inefficient to set up infrastructure for more than the forecast footfall.
---

Judgmenl posted...

Yea I don't care what you think. Every one of your posts is insufferable but I tolerate them because you haven't called me out yet.

https://imgur.com/6hv0uJ3
---

Judgmenl posted...

LinkPizza posted...

Judgmenl posted...

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.

That would take a lot and be pretty hard... not to mention, people wouldnt like it much...

Yea I don't care what you think. Every one of your posts is insufferable but I tolerate them because you haven't called me out yet.

Uh, my posts arent that bad. But I guess if you want to think that, I wont try to change your mind...
---

How about retest everyone every 3 years?
---

slacker03150 posted...

How about retest everyone every 3 years?

Might be worse than the every time you renew. At least testing with renewing means it might be a longer wait. Very long, for some states. 3 years still means a lot. Youd have to schedule you test probably months in advance. Depending on if its computer or driving. I know for getting a CDL, we had to schedule a month out. There was another place where you only had to wait a week, but it was crazy expensive... But they were easier...
---

licence AND voting rights should be lifted at retirement age.

As cruel as it sounds, I'm kind of on board with it. However, the main problem with elderly drivers is just that they're slow and I'm not sure if going a few MPH below counts against you on the test. Plus they could just fake going the speed limit for the test and then slow down when they actually drive on their own, though maybe the kind of person to drive super slow wouldn't think of that.

By the time I'm 65 we'll probably have self-driving cars everywhere anyway. I wonder if that'll still require a license, cause presumably in the near future they will need a manual override, but in nearly 40 years who knows if it'll be fully automated

Chewster posted...

As cruel as it sounds, I'm kind of on board with it. However, the main problem with elderly drivers is just that they're slow and I'm not sure if going a few MPH below counts against you on the test. Plus they could just fake going the speed limit for the test and then slow down when they actually drive on their own, though maybe the kind of person to drive super slow wouldn't think of that.

By the time I'm 65 we'll probably have self-driving cars everywhere anyway. I wonder if that'll still require a license, cause presumably in the near future they will need a manual override, but in nearly 40 years who knows if it'll be fully automated

Itll probably always have the manual override. And I think driving slow would probably count against you. I know it did for a CDL, but that could be different. They literally told me they could have failed me for not going 70 on the highway. I was going 60-65. Because they were doing roadwork and have a concrete barrier on the side. She said she didnt fail me because she said that she figured I was nervous. But they have failed people for it before. Ive met some of them...
---

I mean if you're going 15 in a 30 I'm sure they'd fail you but I don't know about going like 25. I haven't taken a driver's test in over ten years though so I don't remember much

Judgmenl posted...

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.

I'd like for you to take some time and think about exactly what it would take to implement that idea
---

Johnny Eagle posted...

Judgmenl posted...

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.

I'd like for you to take some time and think about exactly what it would take to implement that idea

A complete restructuring of how we live as a people.
It's no more radical than anyone promoting Communism.
---

We are WAY past the point where upgrading our public transportation should have been a priority. In fact, instead of solving the problem with better public transportation things like Uber etc have filled the gaps, but still basically mean cars on the road.

It shouldn't be that hard for a person to get just about anywhere in the US at this point with public transportation. High speed trains from each major city to another should be the norm, with options between taking a train with stops (but takes longer of course) or taking a non-stop train that gets there faster then you could drive.

Meanwhile the bus system should have been drastically upgraded and supported, instead of spending so much money on making it possible for more and more cars to drive everywhere. You should be able to catch a bus just about anywhere in a populated area within 10 minutes, and the cost to ride buses/trains etc should be drastically reduced. It should not be a for profit situation, but again, should be like our roads, taxed enough to pay for it all, so everyone can get around easily.

Add in easily used lanes for scooters and bicycles (max 15 mph), to allow people to easily get around in cities etc, and the number of cars needed, let alone actually being used on a regular basis would plumit.

But that would hut the auto industry which has tons of money and so it will never happen. Even though it would be better for everyone, the environment, cost less money, and drastically reduce deaths each year.

So yeah...forget about having people retake the test, focus on making them NOT NEED TO DRIVE!
---

Just a question. How cheap do you want the bus? Its already pretty cheap?
---

LinkPizza posted...

Just a question. How cheap do you want the bus? Its already pretty cheap?

The price of public transportation is not the problem, the availability of public transportation is the problem.
Also public transportation is not the end all solution, regardless of whether or not more people used it. Anything under a mile and a half is easily walkable, and shopping for even food can be readily done online these days.

Even then I would still promote something like increased consumption of takeout assuming more places get high quality and affordable takeout, more demand for those jobs will also increase the number of jobs.
---

Walkings not bad. But being able to feasibly do that depends on the person, location, and weather conditions.

Shopping online isnt bad, either. Though, I thought it was more expensive.

Having more jobs for people is good. But you still need people to apply for them. Even here, there are plenty of places that need people to work. But no one will take the jobs. Even though there are a lot of people looking for jobs. They just want a specific job. Or they want more money, even though they wont be able to get jobs that pay the amount they want...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Its already pretty cheap?

Public transport is quite pricey over here(unless you have some kind of pass) but not unreasonable I suppose.

LinkPizza posted...

Walkings not bad. But being able to feasibly do that depends on the person, location, and weather conditions.

I can and often do walk in any weather to anywhere I want and back. Some old dear however probably not.

LinkPizza posted...

Shopping online isnt bad, either. Though, I thought it was more expensive.

All I've noticed on that front is there is a delivery charge unless you spend over a certain amount. Personally I prefer getting food myself though as I often find good bargains that I wouldn't have otherwise and I like the exercise coupled with walking most of the time.
---

I guess location will depend on the price. Where I am, its pretty cheap.



Not to mention you can get other passes like a week or a month pass.

Our para transit is a little more expensive. But thats also door to door...
---

wolfy42 posted...

We are WAY past the point where upgrading our public transportation should have been a priority. In fact, instead of solving the problem with better public transportation things like Uber etc have filled the gaps, but still basically mean cars on the road.

It shouldn't be that hard for a person to get just about anywhere in the US at this point with public transportation. High speed trains from each major city to another should be the norm, with options between taking a train with stops (but takes longer of course) or taking a non-stop train that gets there faster then you could drive.

Meanwhile the bus system should have been drastically upgraded and supported, instead of spending so much money on making it possible for more and more cars to drive everywhere. You should be able to catch a bus just about anywhere in a populated area within 10 minutes, and the cost to ride buses/trains etc should be drastically reduced. It should not be a for profit situation, but again, should be like our roads, taxed enough to pay for it all, so everyone can get around easily.

Add in easily used lanes for scooters and bicycles (max 15 mph), to allow people to easily get around in cities etc, and the number of cars needed, let alone actually being used on a regular basis would plumit.

But that would hut the auto industry which has tons of money and so it will never happen. Even though it would be better for everyone, the environment, cost less money, and drastically reduce deaths each year.

So yeah...forget about having people retake the test, focus on making them NOT NEED TO DRIVE!

Most people are not going to take public transportation just because it happens to be there.
---

Revelation34 posted...

Most people are not going to take public transportation just because it happens to be there.

And that's the problem. Cars are used as a social status marker and not simply a way to get places.

Tell someone you don't have a car, many will act as if you're less than them as if not having a car means you're a lesser human.

And yet, so many people are going the same direction and same place, that sharing a transportation vehicle makes the most sense. It's almost like a much needed change in mindset is needed in order for us to survive into the future.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Revelation34 posted...

Most people are not going to take public transportation just because it happens to be there.

And that's the problem. Cars are used as a social status marker and not simply a way to get places.

Tell someone you don't have a car, many will act as if you're less than them as if not having a car means you're a lesser human.

And yet, so many people are going the same direction and same place, that sharing a transportation vehicle makes the most sense. It's almost like a much needed change in mindset is needed in order for us to survive into the future.

Thats not everyone, though. I wouldnt even say most people. People would rather get to a place on time rather than get there 30 minutes early or late. Even the people who are 30 minutes early would rather be 30 minutes early instead of an hour early. And with some places, public transportation may not get you there are a good time. And it also depends on how close they get you. And some place dont have 24/7 transportation, as well. Also, you would need to be able to support a larger amount of people. Were barely able to support the small bus station we have here with enough people. Any larger, and we definitely would have to stop. But people do car pool. Like on base, carpoool saves money. And works out well by switching who drives every week, or even day or month.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Tell someone you don't have a car, many will act as if you're less than them as if not having a car means you're a lesser human.

Must be American thing.
---

Judgmenl posted...

Infrastructure should be set up so that 90% of people do not have a need to drive, and the other 10% are those who live in areas where they need to as a necessity.

You're never going to hit quite those numbers without moving almost everyone into cities, but that is the sort of thing we should be working toward. The individual automobile is a hideously inefficient mode of transportation in terms of space required and energy costs (and, by extension, pollution), to say nothing of the safety aspects. The fact that North America has been designed around it is a terrible mistake that's been hamstringing city planning ever since.

LinkPizza posted...

That would take a lot and be pretty hard... not to mention, people wouldnt like it much...

People have rather latched onto the propaganda from the oil and automotive industries, yes.

wwinterj25 posted...

Must be American thing.

it is. Where so many of Europe's cities predate the commercial availability of the automobile, pro-car attitudes aren't nearly as pervasive over there. Most of North America's growth has happened since then, though, which means cities have been designed around the car, and propaganda campaigns that tout car ownership as a prerequisite for independence managed to take root pretty easily.
---