Survey finds half of UK motorists want elderly drivers banned
A survey of 300 drivers in Britain conducted by www.motorinsurance.co.uk found that almost half believe elderly drivers are to blame for country's horrible traffic and should be banned from driving during peak hours of congestion. Other findings reveal that about two-thirds of those surveyed believe elderly motorists can't handle modern road conditions and 49 percent believe that our elders' perceived slow and erratic driving actually causes accidents. The insurance company who conducted the survey, however, believes that its findings aren't supported by the statistics. The survey did reveal that many drivers stereotype older motorists as bad drivers, but the insurance company points out that they're more experienced and often more careful motorists than the average driver.
The subject of when a person is too old to drive is certainly a touchy one because it involves a person's freedom of mobility. There's no magic age when the ability to competently operate a motor vehicle disappears, but certainly some of our parents and grandparents have past the point where they can safely roam the open roads.
[Source: WhatCar?]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 8)
Ed Kapuscinski 9:26AM (7/25/2006)
50mph in the fast lane = accident waiting to happen.
But it wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue if public transportation weren't in such a deplorable state here in the US.
Although, then again, they mostly ARE the generation that's responsible for the decline of public transportation in the first place... is it ok to say that they made their own bed?
Reply
GrowUp 9:44AM (7/25/2006)
The survey's from the UK, not the US. They have fantastic public transportation.
I'm for banning teen drivers (or any age for that matter) that 1. sit so low they can't see over ashtray in the dash; 2. leave their shirts at home thinking we want to see their gut; and 3. hang their hand out their window (which for some reason seems to produce enough drag to make a 16 yr. old boy drive like an 108 year old woman with Alzheimers.
Reply
GrowUp 9:46AM (7/25/2006)
Oh yes, and as to elderly drivers....remember--with luck you'll be one some day. How do you want to be treated?
Reply
Paul 9:46AM (7/25/2006)
Absolutely! I say once you hit 65 you must have an eye test every year and a comprehensive drivers test every time your license is up for renewal- 4 years here in PA.
Reply
Bob 10:08AM (7/25/2006)
I find that while they do go slower than traffic flow in the left lane, they are usually doing the speed limit. I agree with GrowUp - with luck I'll be that age someday, and won't tolerate you young whipper snappers telling me what I can and can't do. Also, 300 seems like an awefully small number for a survey, I'd like to see the average age of the survey.
Reply
epilonious 10:13AM (7/25/2006)
Bob: #5 "Also, 300 seems like an awefully small number for a survey, I'd like to see the average age of the survey."
They went into Starbucks at 7:55 and 8:55 and asked 20-somethings wearing scowls about elderly drivers.
Reply
Yaroukh 10:15AM (7/25/2006)
GrowUp: it's not about "how you want to be treated?", it's about "are old people behind the wheel a danger?"
Reply
Bob 10:29AM (7/25/2006)
Epilonious, nice, they went and asked the uber caffeinated about people going too slow? That explains everything.
I think everyone needs to look at this survey and say "DUMB." There are really bad drivers in every age group, granted some groups have more than others, but to pin it on a few, is insane. Testing and evaluations are the key. I am not about to ban anyone - my current hero is an 83 year old man who completed Ironman Hawaii, that is 2.5 mile swim/114 mile bike/and 26.2 mile run (a marathon), I bet he drives just fine.
Reply
epp_b 10:33AM (7/25/2006)
Everyone over sixty-five ("official" retirement age where live) should be subjected to basic driving tests every, say, five years; some of which include the ability to competently maintain driving at speed limits. If you fail, you either don't drive or you hire a chauffeur.
People who drive too slow are an accident and road rage waiting to happen.
Reply
JiAvW 10:40AM (7/25/2006)
Elderly drivers should have to retake the driving test EVERY YEAR. At advanced ages, human beings can deteriorate at rapid paces. To pretend that it isn't possible for an elderly person to lose his or her ability to control and react to modern driving conditions in less than a year is ABSURD.
The simple truth is that elderly drivers ON AVERAGE not only routinely endanger the lives of other motorists through non-customary driving habits (like 50mph in the "faster" lanes, slowing to almost a full stop prior to making turns off busy streets -- actions which cause other drivers to make poor driving decisions such as passing in the "slower" lanes, swerving, etc.) they have no concept of other drivers. They don't care that there creating a mile-long line of traffic behind them. Why? Because they can't drive any other way safely.
Unfortunately, there really isn't any other option for most elderly people. How will they get around without their cars? Are the children and grandchildren supposed to shuttle them around? It isn't exactly safe for them to ride the bus or subway in some major cities these days, nor is paying a taxi for a ride multiple times per day economical.
Perhaps we should force young drivers with learning permits to use their elders as their supervisors instead of their parents? Perhaps there should be an entirely separate set of roads intended only for elderly drivers.
Whatever the solution, GET ELDERLY DRIVERS WHO HONESTLY SHOULD NOT BE BEHIND THE WHEEL OFF THE ROAD.
I hope that I'm at least capable of realizing that I'm not competent enough to get behind the wheel when I reach that age...
Reply
Brian 10:45AM (7/25/2006)
Too bad the half of the population that wants them banned doesn't vote (just like they do not here!) I think there is no reason why elderly drivers should be banned based on age, I honestly would love to see EVERYONE have to re-take the drivers test every 10 years regardless of age. Also make the test harder and more realistic, should be 30-40 minutes long and involve highway, and back streets as well as 3 parking lot emergency evasive manuevers going at least 30 MPH.
Finally you should fail the test if you do not pass left and stay right!
Reply
aliasfox 10:49AM (7/25/2006)
As for the sample size, 300 isn't bad - statistically speaking, a sample size of 391 should give an error of no more than 5% on a population of any size. If I remember correctly, 300 people should be enough to get that level of accuracy out of a population of about 1,000,000. That is of course, if they didn't survey people a) at Starbucks, b) in rush hour, or alternatively, c) everybody that uses more than two coupons at the grocery store
My advertising statistics might not be completely up to snuff, but that's what I remember...
Reply
GrowUp 10:51AM (7/25/2006)
Yaroukh, Wrong. It is about how you treat those upon whose shoulders you stand in life. If individual drivers are a danger, then find a way to deal with that objectively, such as with license renewal testing. But don't try to justify agist bigotry and stereotyping by touting "safety".
(and though many have now likely assumed I must be elderly, I'm only 34)
Reply
cowboy bob 10:54AM (7/25/2006)
Why is it that almost all old farts have to drive either a Crown Vic, Cadillac or some other 22 foot long boat? If more of them drove a smaller car, maybe they wouldn't be bouncing off everyone else at the mall. Yea, yea, yea, I'll be an old fart someday too, I just hope I have more good sense. If not, do the public a favor and shoot me.
Reply
JimR 11:03AM (7/25/2006)
The issue of safety should be addressed. Reflex, vision, and basic motoring knowledge can be tested, and should be applied to all. If that nets a disproportionate number of elderly, that's better for all.
Elderly as "good" and "careful" motorists should be examined in the light of their time on the road and during what hours. Our other "bad" drivers - teens - drive to school during the heavy traffic of morning and late afternoon, and are socially active after hours. Accidents and near-misses among old people must be weighed as a percentage of their drive time. I'd like to see data on that.
However, the time that elderly drive is self-regulating. Banning them from 4-6PM is kind of pointless and fascist. They are often spendthrifts on fixed incomes, and shy away from excessive mileage. Plus, having no job means they can piddle around at extremely early hours or mid-day. If they're like my grandmother, they hate traffic, anyway.
Reply
Robert Aitchison 11:14AM (7/25/2006)
It shouldn't be based strictly on age, some people will be better drivers at 75 than most people at 30.
Still statisticly older drivers are a greater risk.
They should have more frequent behind the wheel driving tests after a certian age, something along the lines of age 50, 60, 65 & annually starting at 70 and the test should be completely different than the one given to 16 year olds for their license. It should measure reaction times and the ability to identify and react to road hazards, as well as ability to properly integrate with surrounding traffic, even (especially) if that traffic is exceeding the speed limit.
Of course even discussing this is pointless, here in the U.S. the AARP wields so much political power that any kind of restrictions or increased testing would never get enacted.
Reply
Corey W. 11:22AM (7/25/2006)
There should not be any type of BAN on anyone because of age. Your license should be suspended because of tickets. If old people are getting tickets, then there will be a record, a pattern to observe when justifying suspending their license. If they are going to slow, enough to cause an accident, it's called IMPEDING TRAFFIC. If they are not paying attention, it's RECKLESS DRIVING. The infrastructure is there, it's up to law enforcement to be more observant of these types of infractions.
Reply
Tri-Bob 11:25AM (7/25/2006)
I wonder how much debate would ensue on the cut-off point of reflex and eye sight scores? Awww heck with it, let's all ride bicycles and the elderly with replaced hips will automatically be taken off the road. Simple, yet effective.
Reply
Karl 11:28AM (7/25/2006)
I'm for retesting all driver's periodically, however, it's really hard to define an age where people should stop driving.
My 90 year old grandmother who passed away in May was an incredible driver for her age. I recall when she was doing 80 on back roads where I grew up, I was about 14 at the time. Her driving did change a little, she had an accident, which everything indicates was just that an accident it could have happened to me under the circumstances. That seemed to have scared long trips out of her. The last four years or so, I don't beleive she drove out of state. But all in all, I was confident enough in her driving to let her keep going. Wouldn't want her to run F1 cars or anything though.
She was driving up to about 2 weeks before she died.
My great uncle on the other hand, probably should have stopped driving around 70 or so. His eyesight was just too poor. We finally convinced him to give up his car before anything happened.
FWIW, one of my role models is Ray Price. The guy is 69 years old. I think he's retired now. I don't keep up with NHRA much, but I know about three years ago he was running Harleys in the sixes at 200+ MPH. How many retirees (pensioners for those of you across the pond) do you know of who can say that?
http://www.rayprice.com/racing.htm
Reply
Mark Remy 11:31AM (7/25/2006)
Speaking of elderly drivers, you may find this amusing:
http://www.officepirates.com/officepirates/fyi/0,26102,1216973,00.html
Reply