Should a person's Driver's License ever be revoked by the state because of the chronological age factor alone?

Question

.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w88Mz_Q154

.

Answer 1

I agree with the answerer before me. My great-grandma stopped driving because her eyes weren't too good anymore, and neither were her reflexes. Nonetheless, my great-grandpap is 93, ten years older than her and he is still an alert driver.

It all depends on the person. It would be better if there were people like my gramma that would just stop driving when they knew that they were starting to put people at risk :|

Answer 2

No. I am assuming that you mean by virtue of OLD age (whatever ones perception of old age is). If we were to revoke a license due to old age, we had better go the whole gambit and revoke in a more generalized way. I know many young people who just got a license and are a menace on the road. I know people who are mid-life and their driving leaves me more than willing to walk instead of get in the car with them. Age has nothing to do with it.

Answer 3

Only if that person cannot drive a car safely but other than that no.......

Answer 4

No. But once someone is past a certain age then they should have to retake the drivers ed driving exam every 4 years or so to make sure they are safe since some drivers are not responsible or capable enough to deciding for themselves. I know it's hard but too bad. We will all be there someday if we are lucky. It's a good thing if we start improving public transportation and making it more accessible to more people. It will be easier then for more to give up their cars because one factor that older people don't is because they still need to get to places. They should not be stuck at home just because they are unable to drive safely.

More should be done against reckless drivers. They are the real danger and it doesn't discriminate.

Answer 5

Not "alone", but testing should be required at, say, two year intervals after something like 70 or 75 years.  The fact is, and without "discrimination", the aged have deteriorated reflexes, eyesight, hearing, and even lapses of judgment which mirror those of DUI drivers.  And this portion of drivers is growing all the time.

I certainly respect the elderly, and at 58 years of age am approaching that status myself.  But being free and being free to drive a 2-ton vehicle on public streets are two different things.    Limits have to be recognized and set, within the bounds of reliable testing -- not age per se.  The cost will be balanced in lives and property saved.

Answer 6

if you noticed she never wrecked.

Answer 7

This is a serious issue in our nation. I was at a restaurant yesterday, and the waitress actually had a *separate* menu for the elderly! It’s discrimination and segregation on an alarming level.

Common sense indicates that age alone is a poor measure. People of the same age are NOT the same (though interestingly, we have no problem setting “age only” restrictions on when one can BEGIN to drive, smoke, drink, etc…).

It’s a complicated problem, and there is only one viable solution. When I am elected President, we will be the first Nation in the world to adopt the “dance test”. Trials have been greatly successful:  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsPRVEHDT...

Answer 8

Well, now, as long as they can get to Wendy's they should be able to keep it!  After all, the beef is what's important.  

Hahaha I drive like that all the time and I'm still in my prime....just ask my kids.   When I give anyone a ride, I tell them to hang on and my girls tell their friends that when they happen to get in.  I just laugh!

Answer 9

Not because of age alone, but all drivers need someone watching them and a few "skills tests" are not only good, but I believe they are life-saving.  

In my mother's case, she accidentally let her insurance premium go unpaid, and when we discovered it, her policy had lapsed.  Because of her age, she was required by law to get a vision test before she could renew the policy.  She failed the test, and we had her sell her car so it wouldn't be a temptation.  She said, "Well, I could just drive.  No one would know."  My sister said, "Mom, you never broke a law deliberately in your entire life.  Why would you want to start now?"  Mom agreed that the law was probably there to protect her, and she acquiesced. No one looked forward to her losing her independence, but it was a relief that it was "the law," and not us telling her she couldn't drive when we realized how dangerous she had become. As much as we love her, it is still hard to "parent" the woman who raised us.

Answer 10

Is this DeJaVu?  What happened to the last Wendy's query?  I agree with most, at a certain age, test the driving skills.  So many at retirement age tend to feel they are "entitled" to the roadway because of their age.   Some are sharp as a tack, others have slipped into their own world and make right hand turns in the left hand lane . . . . sound familiar? . . . . toward the end of her life, my mother in law thought she lived in England and was driving on the left hand side of the road until a state trooper pulled her over and pulled her license!  The sad thing is grandpa was with her, but his eyes had gone and he was hard of hearing . . . .

Answer 11

I'm so glad the spunky Granny is back on the road!!!  It was a political car-jacking with some of us (3 to be precise) in the back seat  (You didn't get to read the answers,  I guess).   But did we enjoy the ride?  You bet!!!  [Momma went far enough to thank her sonny for providing the badly needed laughter-therapy as (belated) Mom's Day gift].  Long live Granny & long live Sonny!!!  In fact I was worried sonny would be hopping mad finding us all gone but he is showing exemplary flexibility/resilience these days.

Chronological age is unimportant in many areas (driving happens to be just one) if a person is in control of all his senses and is skillful as ever.  We must not deny them their place in the mainstream,  (or beef),  only because of their age.  You'll be surprised to notice in India most of the politicians assume important offices only when past the normal retirement age for the Govt. Employees.  Isn't that ironic???

Answer 12

Yes, at the age of 192.

After that you should be given an "Honorary License"

Answer 13

Yes, at 65, they should lose their licence, and be given the services of a 24 hour a day on-call chauffeur paid for by all those who think seniors shouldn't drive.  What, too expensive, they say?  Well, tough beans, it's either give them the chauffeur, or be forced to admit that age is just a number, right?

Answer 14

big no on this. I would agree drivers of any age who were found at fault in a serious accident should be retested. this way you test the ones who are causing the problems, and yes if some one elderly has a lot of accidents sure they should have their liscence taken.

Answer 15

Age is only a part of the equation. Reflexes, eyesight, and awareness are more important. Some 90 year olds are still pretty active and alert.