Drivers over 70 could be banned from roads in 2026 (UK) - new checks ‘likely’

[-]

from258to74@reddit

Banning many under 70 in the US wouldn't be a bad idea just sayin'

Reply

[-]

They should at least have to prove their driving competency. I mean, if a 72 year old is in good health, fit and aware then they are fine to drive. But, Id start mandating checks at like 65 years old. Sorry to say but the elderly driving is a major safety issue for themselves and others.

Reply

[-]

Backlists@reddit

Completely sane policy, given that being able to see is a predicate to being able to drive.

Reply

[-]

WaffleTurtle@reddit

Ahhh but it impacts the most vocal voting block who get everything they want, so it won’t happen

Reply

[-]

AnonymousEngineer_@reddit

There's nothing stopping the Government imposing that same condition on everyone. It's not as if having poor vision is the sole preserve of people over the age of 70.

Reply

[-]

bugme143@reddit

No, but because it disproportionately affects elderly people, it probably won't happen because they're more likely to vote against any politician that supports it.

Reply

[-]

AnonymousEngineer_@reddit

Let's be honest. How many people in the UK right now would happily undertake a three-yearly eye test as a condition to hold their licences? The problem with all of these proposals is that everyone loves adopting a "rules for thee, not for me" attitude. In Australia, this disproportionately ends up affecting young people on provisional licences who end up with so many additional special regulations that only apply to them that it may as well be a legislative lasagna.

Reply

[-]

drunkenvalley@reddit

Tbh I already get a yearly or bi-yearly test because, uh, I have bad vision and need to follow its progression. 😃 Cuz it sucks not being able to see well, so I make sure my glasses are up to date.

Reply

[-]

JournalistExpress292@reddit

Australia’s high powered vehicle rule is insane. Go anywhere around the world and generally the worst drivers are older not younger - if anything the younger generation learns all the proper rules but have to change their ways because of all the bad habits others drivers do (speeding in school zones)

Reply

[-]

Floppernutter@reddit

Young drivers are generally over represented in accidents and deaths, hence the intent of such laws. That being said, old people are also over represented I believe.

Reply

[-]

bugme143@reddit

It's the UK, they already live in 1984. One more law isn't going to make or break things. All the government has to do is put some crying face on TV and say that anybody who disagrees with the eye test is a far right Nazi and they'll have people fist-fighting each other in the streets to be the first one to vote for it.

Reply

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

Political [discussion is prohibited](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/wiki/politics). However, if your post involves politics AND CARS, please consider submitting to /r/CarsOffTopic. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Reply

[-]

hannahranga@reddit

Which state does that?

Reply

[-]

cat_prophecy@reddit

> At least where I live in Australia, we need to pass a vision test every time we renew our licences. Is that not a thing everywhere? Even in the US where you can get your license from a cracker jack box we have a basic vision test. That said, the test is *very* basic, takes about 12 seconds, and almost impossible to fail.

Reply

[-]

phr3dly@reddit

I took that test once, when I first got my license, 35 years ago.

Reply

[-]

hannahranga@reddit

Which state does that?

Reply

[-]

AnonymousEngineer_@reddit

NSW. Every time I've renewed my licence at the registry/Service NSW, I've been asked to do the vision test.

Reply

[-]

hannahranga@reddit

Til, WA only does one at application and then yearly from 80 onwards

Reply

[-]

Good_Air_7192@reddit

70+ year old toddlers, they are the worst.

Reply

[-]

Larcya@reddit

Just a reminder that all you need to drive a giant ass rv is a pulse. No stricter licensing required than you or I driving a normal car. What's worse? Often the old people driving that giant ass rv have zero motor functions.

Reply

[-]

InferiousX@reddit

With how big modern pickups are, I think you should need like a mini-CDL for them. These newer trucks are fucking MASSIVE. Most people in them either drive like they own the road or have zero spatial awareness in regards to the vehicle size. They barely fit in a regular parking spot (when they can find the lines at all) and are a general nuisance if you're in a regular sized car.

Reply

[-]

LemonPress50@reddit

It’s ageism. Why not check everyone, like they do in Australia, and make the roads even safer?

Reply

[-]

Unusual-Arachnid5375@reddit

TF? > Why not check everyone, like they do in Australia, and make the roads even safer? Because your body starts to fall apart increasing rapidly once you hit about 50? Are you new here? I’m all for testing everyone, but this is really simple: Very few people’s eyesight declines between 16 and 50. Testing them every 3 years would remove almost nobody from the road. Once you hit 70, everything starts to go. *Lots* of those people who tested fine 3 years ago would fail today. The point is: Why do you want to waste tax dollars testing a group of people who are virtually guaranteed to pass instead of testing a group of people who have a good chance of (properly) being taken off the road? Should we also have mandatory prostate cancer screenings for 16 year olds?

Reply

[-]

LemonPress50@reddit

Sounds like you think Australia has it wrong. Where I live, we screen seniors at age 80 for vision, cognitive evaluation (timed), possibly a road test or medical follow up. It’s mandatory every two years once you turn 80.

Reply

[-]

psaux_grep@reddit

If people over 70 get everything they want - why are pensions so low?

Reply

[-]

kyonkun_denwa@reddit

In Canada, Old Age Security payments are based on individual income with no regard to personal assets. Child benefits are based on family income. Disability payments for people who are unable to work are based on household income AND you get cut off if your household assets (excluding a primary residence) exceed $40k. Not sure about the rest of the world, but in Canada, the benefits offered to seniors are far more favourable than government benefits offered to working age people. People over 70 do seem to get everything they want, at the expense of younger people.

Reply

[-]

BlazedPandas@reddit

If you're asking in regards to the UK, you really should read into the triple lock and it's impact on the British economy

Reply

[-]

Consistent-Throat130@reddit

If anything, it's half-assing it. "Able and willing to swivel head multiple directions" and "reaction time where the appropriate unit whole seconds" are pretty key problems, too. I don't care if granny can see 20:20 with glasses. If she's not paying attention and rolls her Buick out in 45 mph traffic, we're still in danger. For that matter, it's not just about age - I'd welcome routine retests for everyone.

Reply

[-]

Backlists@reddit

Never seen a Buick in this country!

Reply

[-]

p_rex@reddit

Not sure where you are. Buicks are, or were, sold as Vauxhalls in the UK. I had a Vauxhall “Mokka X” rental that was just a rebadged Buick Encore. Or maybe it was the other way round.

Reply

[-]

Sir_Darnel@reddit

I'm in the UK and didn't know that, I'm fairly sure the Mokka was developed for the UK/European markets though. Funnily enough I've seen a RHD Buick here in the UK, no idea what model it was but it definitely wasn't a rebadged Vauxhall and probably the only one of its kind in the country.

Reply

[-]

p_rex@reddit

I also used to have a Buick Regal GS that was a rebadged Vauxhall Insignia. It had some of the VXR go-fast bits on it, the brembos, super struts, special seats, and magneride suspension. Damned good car, as nice as a Passat CC or Audi A4 for sure.

Reply

[-]

Kurauk@reddit

I'm with you. On my last journey I see people on the slip to to the motor way doing 30 MPH about 30mm's from the wheel. WTF is this. You match the speed of the road. I know independence is important, but not at the safety of others.

Reply

[-]

Yotsubato@reddit

My grandpa had his license rescinded cause he failed the eye exam in California. He got cataract surgery and did the eye exam again and passed

Reply

[-]

meodd8@reddit

Which I feel like is the system working as intended there.

Reply

[-]

jacky4566@reddit

Like seriously, what was the policy before?.

Reply

[-]

V8-Turbo-Hybrid@reddit

If local bus and train systems aren’t perfect for these old people, it isn’t really sane. However, I do believe Britain having good rail system although I hate the quality in London Underground.

Reply

[-]

Terrh@reddit

Completely insane policy, given that being able to see is a predicate to being able to drive *regardless of what age you are* You have to pass an eye test every time you renew your license here (every 5 years) regardless of age. It was actually how I realized my eyes were getting worse, and I was only 25. Why wait till you're 70? That makes no sense at all.

Reply

[-]

Backlists@reddit

Right, but that isn’t the law in the UK. You don’t need to have any eye tests for your driving licence, only read out a number plate at distance during your actual test. And quite obviously because eye sight starts significantly deteriorating at those ages.

Reply

[-]

Terrh@reddit

My point is that it should be.

Reply

[-]

Politicsboringagain@reddit

My grandmother gave up during at 84 because her eyesight and nerves got so bad. There should be more regular check ups at minimum.

Reply

[-]

GrynaiTaip@reddit

We have full medical exams in my country (Lithuania) that get more frequent as you age. They should remove a lot of drivers from the roads, but quite often the doctors feel pity and let the old man pass.

Reply

[-]

MegaCockInhaler@reddit

This is a good thing. Drivers don’t know when to stop until it’s too late. And with self driving cars becoming more prevalent, there may be a solution to keep them on the road safely soon without them driving directly

Reply

[-]

livinalieontimna@reddit

The roads where I live are absolutely plagued by elderly drivers doing 60% of the speed limit with their own permanent traffic jams behind them. There needs to enforcement to make them resit tests. It’s beyond a joke now and it’s only getting worse.

Reply

[-]

Trolleyracer@reddit

40 in a 60, 40 in a 30

Reply

[-]

carsarefuntodrive@reddit

I70 through Colorado has signs every 3 feet that say, "keep right except to pass" or "slower traffic keep right". No one pays any attention. The right lane going up the first hill into the mountains is almost always empty. Part of the issue is the douchebags in their underpowered shit wagons that cant maintain highway speed on a 6% grade.

Reply

[-]

Colorful_Monk_3467@reddit

I can't think of a modern car that can't actually maintain the speed limit on i70. Which is 65 for most of it, and 55 on the windy sections. The problem is the drivers don't care or don't know.

Reply

[-]

J_NonServiam@reddit

Left lane camping is a Colorado pass-time. It's like our state sport, followed by merge lane cockblocking and double left lottery.

Reply

[-]

Downside190@reddit

More like 40 in. 30, 40 in a 50 and 40 in. 60

Reply

[-]

dont-try-do@reddit

Flash backs

Reply

[-]

CMDR_omnicognate@reddit

The 40mph brigade, where they do 40mph in a 60mph limit, but also 40mph in a 30mph limit.

Reply

[-]

p_rex@reddit

Also, the very foolish people who will have a conniption if you do 80 in a 70 zone on a beautiful sunny day, but who insist on doing 70 on the same road in a driving rainstorm in heavy traffic.

Reply

[-]

Elithiomel_Zakalwe@reddit

Not a chance. Cognitive and eye tests maybe. Outright ban nope. The express is as full of crap as the mail.

Reply

[-]

bobotwf@reddit

People don't understand that almost all laws (and their enforcement) derive from societal practicality not dangerousness. We let 16 year olds drive, not because they're mature enough, but because they need to get places. People who text and drive are never given sentences as harsh as drunk drivers, even tho texting and driving is often more dangerous. I would be in favor of speed limited cars for old people tho, maybe 35mph, or maybe golf cart type cars.

Reply

[-]

Cheap-Rate-8996@reddit

A lot of places don't let 16 year olds drive. The driving age in the US is lower than average. I think it's too simple to say that laws respond to society, often it's the reverse. People used to smoke indoors until it was banned, and (generally speaking) most people just stopped doing it overnight. 'This is the law' does have a big sway in setting social norms.

Reply

[-]

Drunken_Hamster@reddit

Cool, now if only the same could be applied to politicians running for or employed in office.

Reply

[-]

accountforrealppl@reddit

>if they fail to attend for a compulsory eye test I fear that much like your title, this part will be missed and people will assume this is a blanket ban on people over 70 driving and it will get shot down. Completely reasonable proposal but the political environment around anything that doesn't benefit seniors has never been reasonable since they're the ones voting. A good reminder why voting is so important if you're young

Reply

[-]

zeromadcowz@reddit

Is this not a thing everywhere? If I fail the vision test when renewing my license then it’s restricted to driving with eyewear and if it’s really bad then they won’t give me a license until I furnish a letter from an optometrist.

Reply

[-]

TheCountChonkula@reddit

It isn’t. For the 15 years I’ve been driving, I haven’t had to take any tests outside of my initial driving test to get my license. Although for my job and since I have a company provided vehicle and do a lot of driving, I do have to complete a DOT physical every 2 years for insurance purposes, but that’s company policy and not law. At least in the US I believe the only time you are required to take a DOT physical is if you have a CDL.

Reply

[-]

mklimbach@reddit

Yes, but they're proposing more frequent tests. I don't have to renew my driver's license but once every 8-10 years. People can lose a lot of function in that period of time, especially when they're older. I almost think the testing should be yearly above a certain age (maybe 75 or 80?), but I'm sure that would cost a lot more than every 3 years.

Reply

[-]

zeromadcowz@reddit

Ah my renewal is every 5 years, 10 years seems a bit too long.

Reply

[-]

mini4x@reddit

My state renewal is every 5 years too, but only every other is in person, so 10 years for a new phot / eye test.

Reply

[-]

StonechildHulk@reddit

Retirement age. The age the government says you are no longer fit for employment should be the age you are required to retake these exams yearly. I don't care if the government makes it free or extremely discounted for these people but it needs to be yearly and you only get one retest. If you fail both license is revoked on the spot.

Reply

[-]

Duathdaert@reddit

Retirement age isn't when the government say you're not fit for employment. It is not mandatory to stop working at the age of retirement, it's just a restriction on when you can access state pension and other benefits tied to the state pension age....

Reply

[-]

StonechildHulk@reddit

It's not mandatory but that's when the government recognizes the decline of bodily functions as well as pension and other stuff.

Reply

[-]

TheLordLongshaft@reddit

Source: I used to work at an opticians. The opthalmologist can tell the individual they should not be driving with their eye sight but there is no legally binding action involved it's simply medical advice and only becomes relevant if you are legally partially sighted or legally blind because at that point the DVLA needs to know and so does your insurance company and it is likely neither will allow you to drive. However if you never go for the eye test then you don't have to tell anyone anything.

Reply

[-]

WinVistaUltimatex64@reddit

I love your SEAT Leon.

Reply

[-]

coconutpete52@reddit

Ha. I love how the headline makes it sound like they are checking ID at the intersection and just fucking taking the keys if you are 71!

Reply

[-]

deleted_by_reddit@reddit

[removed]

Reply

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

[Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/about/rules/) "No memes, trolling, copypasta, or low-quality joke posts or comments." *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Reply

[-]

BigDataCore@reddit

That's sane

Reply

[-]

Tumbleweedwhacker@reddit

The ridiculous thing is: why isn't that a standard worldwide since the 1960s.

Reply

[-]

Jazztify@reddit

My private pilot’s license had medical review every 2-3 years. And every year after 65. It included blood pressure, ECG and an eye test . My license said “glasses must be available”. That was the way to say I needed reading glasses. And that I would only need to pop my glasses on if I have to look at something on the gauges. My drivers license never had any such notation on it. I support this initiative but they have to make it easy to administer, maybe kiosk based perhaps. There also has to be a way to test reflexes and situational awareness too. My 85 year old dad slowly and steadily drove into oncoming traffic when he just decided not to follow the gentle curve of the road. It was a very low speed crash and nobody was hurt. (But! The plaintiff got an ambulance chasing lawyer and tried to sue my dad’s insurance company for about a million. He failed. But that is also an added cost we all bear for bad older drivers).

Reply

[-]

HalfFrozenSpeedos@reddit

Simplest answer would be to hire extra examiners and subject everyone to a 5/10 yearly retest and one every 3 post 70 and yearly post 80, perhaps 6 monthly closer to 90 given the rapid degradation in driving ability that can and does happen in that age bracket - where someone at 80-85 can still be a fantastic albeit not as fantastic as they used to be driver....but post 85 the capability, eyesight, reflexes, dexterity etc can rapidly degrade without them or their close ones noticing and this is where having an impartial retest would make sense??

Reply

[-]

Jazztify@reddit

Agree totally. But it’s got to be efficient and cost effective. Govt workers are very expensive where I live. (Ontario Canada. I used to be one)

Reply

[-]

HalfFrozenSpeedos@reddit

Simplest way would be to make the process self funding or alternatively hide the cost in some other form of taxation, where the cost would be insignificant. Are govt workers expensive or is it that private sector workers are comparatively underpaid?

Reply

[-]

mini4x@reddit

I don't care about race, age, color, sexual orientation, mandatory retesting every 5 years.

Reply

[-]

Razathorn@reddit

Great idea, shit clickbait title.

Reply

[-]

AutismStickk@reddit

good. they should be retested every 5 years starting at 50 imo

Reply

[-]

Jimbo415650@reddit

Politicians over 70 must retire

Reply

[-]

avboden@reddit

My Dad is 74, he just had cataracts surgery like most do as they get older. Well turns out there's now a type of lens they put in that can be focused after the fact to perfection. So now he's 20-10 vision and can see better than I can! He just went to renew his license and was able to read the tiniest bottom line on the test that almost no one can read, the person doing it was pretty amazed. I'm surprised the Uk didn't already have some sort of vision testing for licenses.

Reply

[-]

mr_lab_rat@reddit

I think license renewal process for older people (I’m getting there myself) should be reviewed and reworked. It’s not just vision. At some point people should be required to prove they are capable of operating the car. Basically taking the license test again.

Reply

[-]

CatKungFu@reddit

5 years and nobody’s going to need to drive once you can just chill while being whisked off in an autonomous travel pod.

Reply

[-]

nirach@reddit

I mean sure, but. Everyone else should be subject to, IMO; * Vision tests * Reaction time tests * Random 5 questions about the highway code every few years. The last one maybe shouldn't be license loss worthy, but it should have *some* weight on it.

Reply

[-]

NDALLASFORTY@reddit

My 99 yr. old uncle just renewed his license even though he lost an eye a few years ago and is deaf in one ear. I drove him to the appointment and was shocked when they approved him. The only stipulation was that it is good for only 2 years.

Reply

[-]

brazucadomundo@reddit

They could do this here in the US as well to help improve traffic.

Reply

[-]

kegsbdry@reddit

I'll back drivers over 70 are banned from driving if there is a program to give them free local solo rides for free via a driving service (Uber, taxi, etc).

Reply

[-]

Blurgas@reddit

Ok, so it isn't "*Happy Birthday! You're banned from driving!*" and instead is "*We need to ensure you can still safely operate a vehicle*"

Reply

[-]

put_tape_on_it@reddit

Make this compulsory for everyone, every age, every license renewal. I don't care if you charge more for a license, so you can hire more people, I'm just tired of blind drivers!

Reply

[-]

Futt_Buckman@reddit

We have vision tests in America too (idk how frequent or at what age) but nobody loses their license over it

Reply

[-]

Pseudonym_741@reddit

Clickbait horseshit. I bet they "wrote" the article with AI as well.

Reply

[-]

Ftpini@reddit

Take age out of it and it’s a good change. Everyone should have to prove they can still see to keep on driving.

Reply

[-]

HalfFrozenSpeedos@reddit

The express and GB "News" aka NONSENSE - neither of them are respectable or accurate news sources

Reply

[-]

gt4rs@reddit

lol yeah this was also my immediate reaction I appreciate this is an international sub so not everyone would know, but these sources are as far from actual sources as you could get short of the onion

Reply

[-]

RanMan5@reddit

Im 30 and drive for a living. I have to take an eye test every year for safety

Reply

[-]

90Carat@reddit

I fully supported increased testing for drivers over 70. What ALSO needs to be included in this plan is vastly increased transportation for elderly. The elderly may not be great drivers, though they still need to be mobile. They have Dr appointments and need to be social.

Reply

[-]

Gator2Romeo0@reddit

Now do drunk drivers.

Reply

[-]

MyGrandmasCock@reddit

They should definitely make drunk drivers do eye exams. Thank you for your common sense input. 👍🏽

Reply

[-]

Gator2Romeo0@reddit

ban them not make them do an eye exam..Thank YOU for your common sense reply 👍

Reply

[-]

HalfFrozenSpeedos@reddit

They already do ban people for lengthy periods for drink driving in the UK and jail for the worst offenders, with a requirement to pass an extended length driving test when you finish your ban - not the normal driving test....no a much longer indepth test. Your insurance is also much more expensive and many insurers won't touch you due to having drink driving conviction(s) Scotland has a lower drink driving limit than the rest of the UK and it is strictly enforced, with it being a criminal offense to refuse both the breathylser and the blood test. (If you have respiratory problems you can explain you can't undertake the breathylser but you get no option about the blood test at the police station)

Reply

[-]

WinVistaUltimatex64@reddit

And ban all Altimas in the US. (I'm not American here)

Reply

[-]

sephirothwasright@reddit

Isn't that already illegal?

Reply

[-]

Gator2Romeo0@reddit

they say.

Reply

[-]

OtterCreek_Andrew@reddit

Good. Bless their heart but I watched an older couple about cause a massive crash just last week. They ran a red light and a semi truck driver just narrowly missed them, thankfully he was paying attention and swerved in time. He laid on the horn and the older couple panicked and came to a complete stop in the middle of a 4 way intersection while other cars swerved around them. I had a clear view of their face and they both seemed completely oblivious as to what was going on, just parked in the middle of a busy intersection like they were supposed to be there. It was very scary

Reply

[-]

HalfFrozenSpeedos@reddit

2 lanes per side highway through a local city in Scotland - 40mph limit.....had to brake when coming off a roundabout to find the car in front was doing less than 10mph, over took them and the driver was no younger than 90, clearly squinting and struggling..... Way past when he should have hung up the keys.....literally crawling along where a bicycle would have had to overtake them....

Reply

[-]

1ne9inety@reddit

Why do the quoted articles make that sound like a bad thing

Reply

[-]

colin_staples@reddit

Because it's the Daily Express, the pound shop wannabe Daily Mail Only old people buy it, and provoking fear and anger in their readers is their goal So they write their headlines to meat that goal

Reply

[-]

TheLordLongshaft@reddit

This is the correct answer

Reply

[-]

WinVistaUltimatex64@reddit

I love your SEAT Leon, and you should love my Citroën C4 too.

Reply

[-]

cat_prophecy@reddit

Is "SEAT" meant to be an acronym? I always see it spelled with all capitals. Or is that just how the brand does it? Also, I always want to pronounce it "Seat" instead of "Sey-at".

Reply

[-]

colin_staples@reddit

It's an acronym Sociedad Española de Automóviles de Turismo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEAT

Reply

[-]

HalfFrozenSpeedos@reddit

And backed up by GB News who want to really stoke societal and inter generational tensions.....

Reply

[-]

ArcticBP@reddit

And the ops second source is even worse

Reply

[-]

Nomanal@reddit

I have been saying for years that drivers over the age of ~65 should have to re-qualify for their drivers licenses every five years or so. I think this is a great policy

Reply

[-]

cat_prophecy@reddit

I believe that *everyone* should have to re-take their license test every 5 years. As it is, we just renew it as a bit of bureaucratic paper pushing. The only way you're likely to lose it is if you develop epilepsy, or go totally blind. Even then, it usually requires a doctor's orders.

Reply

[-]

cjdubais@reddit

Alarmist (and not completely accurate) headline aside, I'm in complete agreement. And at 68 years old, I would soon be subject to these checks. When the license renewal facility moved online, that was the first thing I thought about was the eye exams that were no longer "required".

Reply

[-]

HalfFrozenSpeedos@reddit

Yes the "Express" whose other output consists of "Snowmageddon" EVERY winter, "Hotter than hell heatwaves predicted" EVERY summer, "Diana killed by MI5/MI6/Al Qaeda/ISIS/Masons/random other group", "Source claims Madeleine McCann sold as CHILD BRIDE in <country>", "Are there too many <ethnic group> in Britain? Our readers say YES", "Was Enoch Powell the subject of a witch hunt?" Etc etc Also quoting GB News is less accurate than quoting Newsmax etc......

Reply

[-]

iroll20s@reddit

Honestly every 3 years probably isn't often enough. There is often really rapid degradation at old age. They should also do day and night tests and limit licenses to daytime for people who can't pass at night.

Reply

[-]

TenderfootGungi@reddit

They have decent public transportation. In the US, I know several people well over 70 that drive because the pubic options are either abysmal or non-existent.

Reply

[-]

PaulaDeen21@reddit

Make total sense, if you can be too young to drive you can be too old to drive.

Reply

[-]

betrara@reddit

Only thing that comes to mind is the partial lack of infrastructure, especially in rural areas, which could lead to a greater dependency and potential greater isolation! Visual tests by all means, but just an afterthought...

Reply

[-]

piddydb@reddit

That headline is super misleading. The actual proposed eye test is already mandatory in plenty of other places, regardless of age.

Reply

[-]

OldRed91@reddit

I just hope they have the option to use good public transit. Growing old should not mean totally cutting off mobility.

Reply

[-]

GtrplayerII@reddit

This is the case where I am and in fact after 75 a Dr sign-off is required every year to renew.

Reply

[-]

EdwinMcQ@reddit

I live in Kentucky where everyone applying for or renewing a DL must pass an eye exam. It seems like a reasonable requirement. I think they should periodically require a complete written and road test for everyone. Like motorcycles, there should be a special test and designation for large SUVs and trucks.

Reply

[-]

HellCrownCult@reddit

Nanny state, I hope none of those olds go on social media and express their opinion in a negative way, then they'll be in jail! I guess they couldn't hurt anyone then... maybe that's the point?

Reply

[-]

pdp10@reddit

Are there precedents in other jurisdictions, where we now have resulting data about crashes or infractions?

Reply

[-]

RafflesEsq@reddit

Let’s repeat what our parents told us all: Driving a car on a public road is a privilege, not a right.

Reply

[-]

JaffaTheOrange@reddit

Elderly and hesitant drivers are 1000x more dangerous than people who speed

Reply

[-]

dr_strange-love@reddit

Just a reminder that the people who would be barred from driving are the same people who voted to leave the EU. So they will turn out in drives to get this legislation killed, to the detriment of the rest of the country.

Reply

[-]

AyeMidnight@reddit

Good. It’s asinine that Ms Rottencrouch gets dirt cheap insurance even though her car is all banged up and she can’t see shit while driving.

Reply

[-]

TheLordLongshaft@reddit

The roads where I live would suddenly be empty 🤣

Reply

[-]

Ok-Foundation6764@reddit

Good.

Reply

Reply to Post

133 Comments