Remote View

5d ago

This is pants on head stupid

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/new-illinois-bill-aims-to-increase-age-seniors-retake-driving-exam/3646023/?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_CHBrand

Fuck Cars @lemmy.world

236 28

81 comments

personally i think everyone should be required to retake a driving test every 10 years it's absurd you only take it once at 16ish
- And not just as a refresher/competency test! It should also be a chance to educate on updates like legislation that get passed, safety information and tips as research improves, and new traffic controls like double diamonds or roundabouts that weren’t in use when people learned to drive in their youth.
  But at a minimum you should have to re-validate that you are a competent and safe driver every decade or so, agreed.
  
  I don't know what makes roundabouts so hard that 90% of people stop in my town when nothing is in it instead of yield like the sign they had seen in their drivers test.
  I like your ideas.
- You guys are retaking driver's tests?
  Seriously, I haven't taken one since getting my license in the 90s.
  
  that's what i mean. i think they should be required to retake it. it's wild that you only do it once as a teenager.
- What’s the frequency for forklift/crane certificates or similar? Driving a car should be regulated similarly (with the proviso that it is accepted that many blameless people will be found unfit to drive, and society should accommodate them by means other than lowering safety standards).
  
  My work just had the warehouse driver show me the controls and move a couple of pallets. Now i'm forklift certified.
  
  Forklift certs last for 3 years, but the test isn't much. You take a quiz (can be all done online), and then someone at your workplace who is a certified instructor gives you some pointers.
  I wouldn't base car licensing around that. It's almost nothing.
- As someone who learned to drive in 2 weeks and then passed the test 20+ years ago it’s kind of bonkers that I can get into a car and start driving rn. I haven’t driven since passing the test. I have no idea what many of the signs mean.
- I think driving tests should be abolished, 30h of driving lessons will not teach you how to drive, it will at best teach you how to pass the test. You only actually learn how to drive properly after passing the test by driving by yourself, so the driving test proves nothing, it only gives you a false impression of your own abilities.
  And to the people who disagree; how many idiots with licenses are on the road? How many idiots with suspended licenses are on the road? How many idiots without licenses are on the road? Did the law stop them? No. Because it's a classic example of a law that only affects the people who didn't need to be told to behave in the first place; and all of those who it should apply to the most will just ignore it. As it stands this law only further disenfranchises low income families by adding extra cost to their children's path to adulthood and provides minimal to negative safety benefit.
  
  so the driving test proves nothing
  The driving test proves you can competently drive to a safe standard. I agree that you learn more through experience, but first you need to be able to drive to a particular standard before being allowed to drive on your own.
  What's the alternative if there's no test? You just allow anyone who reaches the driving age to get in a car and drive on their own?
  
  I failed my first drivers test because my car had stickers for democrat candidates on it.
  It’s kinda amazing how much leeway they have.

Makes sense. If we can trust 87 year olds to govern the country, why can't we trust them to drive? /s
- We can only trust people that old if they are mentally unstable

Should be every 2 years past age 60 if you want to keep your license.
Sorry, for every 20 year old doing 90, there's ten seniors wobbling between 2 lanes in a giant SUV intentionally purchased to protect them from the accidents their diminished capacity will cause, about to do a double lane change in the opposite direction of their blinker that's been on since they left their driveway.
Ive always found it bonkers that young drivers with the sharpest reflexes are punished to the maximum from insurance to rental car rates, as they should, while no one dares punitive action against people who literally lack the faculties to drive safely if they wanted to and incur the wrath of AARP and the like. But those necrotic seniors make the rules, sadly. They can cause accidents with abandon, but some thing's gotta be done about those young maniacs on the road driving 10 over the speed Limit as you drive 30 under it with white, arthritic knuckles on the steering wheel for dear life, calling your impromptu roadblock "safe."
- Part of that is a legal issue. People over 40 are a protected class, you can't discriminate against old people for being old. Young people can get fucked though.
  
  I say this as a now old person at 40, that's hypocritical bullshit as far as policy goes, but that's humans for you.
- This is... really specific..
  
  Spent 10 years driving around in a city with a lot of retirement communities setting up home medical equipment. Was a daily blight for me.

in case anyone's wondering, according to data from the National Center for Health Statistics, in 2021, the life expectancy in Illinois was 77.1
- Life expectancy is a useless metric for this purpose. Maybe it would be more useful if you used "life expectancy at age 10" (so after any childhood illnesses), but even then it doesn't really say anything about what the process senescence looks like.

typical boomer privilege - oh wait, now I'm old? no don't test me....

I would say 79 is way too high, seniors should be tested every 5 years after 65. Another commentor points out we should be doing every 10 years which is a decent idea as well.
- frankly there should at least be an online refresher and test that people have to take every year, traffic laws change and people forget things.
  
  But changing traffic laws isn't what makes people bad drivers.
  Everyone should have to take the written AND driving portion of the test every 10 years or so.
- Yeah every 10 years would be good even if you assume they did learn everything correctly the first time and don't forget anything, just to make sure people are keeping up with changes in the law. I regularly still see people loudly sharing interpretations of the law on social media that haven't been true for a decade. And then speed it up to every 5 years after 65 to additionally account for senescence.

Republicans: "Hillary Clinton was pushing population control!"
Also Republicans:

The only reason this would need to be a bill is if people are upset that they are failing the exam. Which means they qre failing the exams, to the surprise of no one.
What we should be doing instead is making our neighborhoods more accessible to those without cars. I'm sure they feel like their mobility is gone if they lose their license, but that shouldn't be the case to begin with.
- Really, you can't think of any reason to be upset that you're required to take an exam that you then pass?
  
  I mean the general logic of it isn't totally off the wall, any more so than say why we're annoyed that ID laws make it harder to vote.
  But I could still 100% say, obviously if you need/want a drivers license, it's fair to say you have reliable transportation. At 79 you are almost certainly either not working, or so well established wherever you are that you aren't at risk of getting fired for needing to schedule a 3 hour trip to the DMV.

Hmm
Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias alongside AARP Illinois
Guess the old regulations might have been eating into profits
Still out of 55,000 administered tests only 97 failed. Imho they should keep the restriction because it did remove 97 unsafe drivers.
However, This also creates a path for immediate family members to report unsafe elderly family members. There was no way to report anyone before this was created.
So is it midlyinfurating? I suppose in that it may allow unsafe drivers to stay on the roads but with immediate family reporting it could also be a wash. I very much doubt these changes will pull more unsafe drivers than the regulations from before since family members will probably be hesitant to report elderly family members
- why should reporting be limited to immediate family?
  if the neighbors see mr. jones take out a shrub or hop curbs the rest of the world ceases to matter, just immediate family?
  
  Also what if they don't even have immediate family?
  
  Well there wasn't any path for anyone to report anyone before so this is better than nothing.

This is your regular reminder that it's generally not older people who are high-risk drivers: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/628ce5c7e90e071f68b19dfa/02-image-2.svg
Drivers get safer until about 70, and only get less safe than your average young driver when over 86.
There is a perception that older drivers are an absolute liability on the roads, which I can only assume stems from impatient people who get frustrated when stuck behind an older driver going more slowly than they'd like.
- Not every 70 YO is the same health. Some can barely see at that age, or at night. There are also plenty of health issues or medications taken at this age which could affect reactions or alertness. Not saying it can't happen to the young, but it's far more prevalent.
  
  You're arguing against factual stats with some kind of generic "old people have old people problems sometimes" ?
  
  Fact is that if you want to spend some money, time or political capital on improving road safety, targeting older drivers is not where you should focus your efforts. The fact that it frequently is, is due to ageism.
- That's from the UK? I don't think you can extrapolate UK driving data to the US. Roads and car use don't compare at all.
  
  In the absence of forthcoming data (hint hint), what factors do you think differ between the UK and USA which affect the ability of very old/very young drivers?
- I wonder if raising the licencing age to 25 would reduce the curve or just shift it to the right

My nanna drove until 80. My Nana shouldn't have driven until 80. He hit something once a week

I expected the main writers of the bill to be about 78, but they look younger. (I'm not digging into it more)

Maybe it'll save money. Illinois is broke and we're one of the last good states
- Arent the drivers required to pay the fee?
  
  ha ha ha
  once a driver is 75, they pay $5 for their dl. at 82, it’s $2 for a 2y license. at 87 it’s free for an annual license.
  
  that's the point

No one over the age of 70 should drive. It's simply not safe. Like putting a 7 year old in front of the wheel.
- Hard disagree. People age very differently, depending on how well they take care of themselves. I know plenty of people I their 70s who are still fully capable of driving.
  Implementint a driving test at 70 does make sense.

81 comments