Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Thu Jun 20, 2019 04:39

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: CSCP Targets elderly!
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 02:58 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4967800.stm

OAP drivers 'should be re-tested
Quote:
Almost 65% of people in Cumbria believe drivers over 60 should be forced to re-sit their test to prove they are still safe, a survey has found.

Cumbria Safety Cameras also found that one in three people believed that motorists should lose their licences when the reach the age of 80.

The organisation said poor eyesight often caused accidents and urged drivers to get regular eye tests.

Last year 17 drivers over 60 were killed in crashes in the county.


Sorry Cooperman, but they're out to get you!
Quote:
"As we all get older our eyesight diminishes and reflexes are slower so the ability to perceive and react to danger is reduced. So everyone should be aware of this and make suitable allowances."


So there you have it - the driver coming the other way might be elderly - take a close look, and if they are, make allowances for their driving!!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 07:59 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
Part of the reason there are so many with defective eyesight on the road is that the govt ended free eye tests on the nhs. I am sure that must cost them so much more in accidents, later diagnosis of diabetes, glaucoma and few other things eye checks bring up.

I think as a driving licence holder I should get free annual or bi-annual eye tests. As a VDU user my employer has to pay for tests on health and safety grounds. It seems poor eyesight is a H & S matter that should be taken up with HMG. Of course all they'll do is make some stupid target out of it instead of doing something sensible or force us to pay some inflated fee for a compulsory driver's eye test which the blind bats will ignore.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 16:44 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
Actually I totally agree with compulsory re-testing at 60 or thereabouts. Maybe the original type of test would be inappropriate, but a test as to the continuing ability of drivers to cope with road and traffic conditions as they age is sensible. How many here would be happy to fly with a 60 year old pilot who had not had a medical check and a flying ability check for, say, 40 years? I know I wouldn't and, of course, that doesn't ever happen.
I must say the idea of my turning up in one of my rally cars for re-test and, when being asked to make the vehicle face in the opposite direction, do this with a neat handbrake turn does rather appeal.
In Cumbria, maybe the test could be to drive Hardnott and Wrynose Passes at an average speed of not less than 40 mph at night in order to pass. Now, that would be fun :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 23:17 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
You are quite correct Cooperman, and I agree wholeheartedly with re-testing for elderly drivers, AND free eye tests!! :cry:
However, Cumbria SAFETY Camera Partnership, who operate SPEED CAMERAS, telling us? Surely that is a matter for national debate.

In this press release, the CSCP are merely trying to show they are doing SOMETHING other than prosecuting speeding, when in fact they are doing nothing - they will never be able to influence whether older drivers get re-tested, and in warning the rest of us that such drivers are loose on our roads, they are diluting still further the case for cameras EVER having more than a tiny influence on safety!!

Looking forward to the examiners trip over Hardnott - presumably you have the lights to match!! I could do with some on my Peugeot!!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2006 02:48 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 15:05
Posts: 1225
Location: Glasgow
Didn't that discredited, and about to be pensioned sideways idiot Brunstrom come out with some similar crud about elderly drivers around 2 years ago?

This is just Kevin, Steve and the gang jumping on an old bandwagon.

The Scottish confederation of Police Officers also debated legalising hard drugs this week. The blind and stupid following the equally blind and stupid.....

Oh, and Steve Callaghan is still a :liar:....


Last edited by r11co on Fri May 05, 2006 09:08, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2006 02:52 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
We're about to have legislation brought in to outlaw age discrimination in the job market.

Surely the same should apply to driving.

By all means make everyone take regular retests - but to confine it to the elderly is obnoxious discrimination, which hopefully will now be unacceptable.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2006 10:24 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
PeterE wrote:
We're about to have legislation brought in to outlaw age discrimination in the job market.

Surely the same should apply to driving.

By all means make everyone take regular retests - but to confine it to the elderly is obnoxious discrimination, which hopefully will now be unacceptable.


It's a medical fact that activities requiring a combination of manual and mental skills and co-ordination do deteriorate with age and as an OAP I can respect the need for some sort of 're-validation' of driving skills and medical state (especially eyesight).
Whether there is a need for regular testing at all ages is, perhaps, another issue as that is a matter of skill development which the licencing regime ignores - you pass your test and are deemed fully skilled for an indefinate period.
I did become involved in advocating testing/validation of elderly drivers on the now-defunct CSCP Forum some time ago. Maybe this is where the 'SpeedfinderGeneral' and his accolytes got the idea which they now want to claim as their own scheme to gain 'brownie points' and justify their otherwise pointless existence.
However, although it could make an improvement in general road safety terms, it won't happen as it could cost votes and that's what matters to our gov't, especially after yesterday's results.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2006 11:27 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 18:41
Posts: 893
Cooperman wrote:
How many here would be happy to fly with a 60 year old pilot who had not had a medical check and a flying ability check for, say, 40 years? I know I wouldn't and, of course, that doesn't ever happen.

When the National Private Pilot's License was introduced, they abolished the need for check flights provided you logged more than the minimum hours (IIRC, about 6hrs a year) and abolished the need for a medical. You now only need to self certify that you are medically fit to fly. So, the situation you describe might occur in the future.

Would I be happy to fly with a sixty-plus pilot who met the minimum criteria? Resoundingly, "Yes!". It would get me off the ground, I love flying, but don't get nearly enough time in the air :twisted:

_________________
Will


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2006 11:53 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 00:24
Posts: 2400
Location: Kendal, Cumbria
Reminds me of the one about the bloke who says he wants to die peacefully in his sleep like his father did, rather than die screaming and yelling like all the passengers on his bus! :lol:

To my mind there is a narrow path that lies between "ageism" and Political Correctness. It is wrong to discriminate against able people on account of their age, but it is equally wrong to be blinkered to the fact that people do age and their faculties and capabilites reduce.

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that ageing happens at a hugely different rate in different people. As a few on the forum may be aware I had the very great honour of navigating in Cooperman's rally car the other week, and can quite honestly state that his skill level and awareness are substantially better than vast majority of drivers 40 years younger! By his results he remains in the top 5% of competitors of any age. Yet others seem to be well on the way to senility by the age of 50.

My preferred solution would be that every driver is required to take some form of re-test every 3-5 years, but that the content and duration of the test would be varied according to their age and experience. That way we deal with each case as an individual, which to my mind treads precisely along the narrow path I mentioned above.

And so as not to be discriminatory this scheme should be state funded as a safety service to all road users; partially out of the massive tax take from motorists, and partly out of the massive saving to the NHS that a decent educational road safety scheme would surely yield.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2006 17:00 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
Are you trying to embarrass me, JT?
But, yes, I do still really enjoy competing in motor sport and whilst I can still be reasonably 'on the pace' I'll continue to do so.
As a former pilot and flying instructor I didn't realise that the requirement for an annual medical had gone now and that's not a good thing IMHO. When I was flying one had to do a minimum of 5 hours per annum to keep a current licence and it was normally mandated by the flying clubs that you had to have a 'check trip' with a qualified instructor if you ahd not flown for 3 months or thereabouts. Nothing wrong with that.
It is somewhat ridiculous that you can pass a driving test at 17 and still be driving on the same licence at 70 without any further instruction, tuition, medical check (eyesight especially!) or any other validation of continuing ability.
The thing I need to do is to decide what I want to do when I grow up :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2006 18:27 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
The principal difference between anti ageism in the workplace, and a re-test at 60, is that it is really a medical test to confirm fitness to drive, triggered by age.
Some drivers should really have this medical sooner because of illness or infirmity, and will get away with it until 60. :oops:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2006 18:08 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
Eyesight deterioration without the use of spectacles is really a problem, or so I read somewhere. There are so many drivers who should but who won't wear glasses that this is possibly a really major contribution to accident causation.
It is quite possible that if the Cash-Camera Pratnerships set up 'eyesight checks' at random locations with a legal mandate to check driver's eyesight, instead of playing useless games with their silly cameras, they would actually achieve an improvement in road safety.
From my background in aviation, I am sure that the main thing involved with safe driving is 'spacial awareness'. Combat pilots have this in large measure, as do successful racing/rally drivers and ball-game team players, as examples.
This is largely intuititive, but improvements can be achieved with training. The problem is that we don't have that type of training available. If passing some sort of validation of driving ability at specified ages did exist, maybe that training would flourish.
It must make sense that the continuing priviledge of driving should not depend on a simple test passed many years before with no further confirmation of on-going ability, eyesight or awareness ever being made or further training being required.
All we get, however, is the on-going 'speed-kills' mantra with no attempt to address the actions which could achieve a real improvement in casualty levels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2006 18:13 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
I don't think drivers should be retested at 60, I think we should all be retested every ten years.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2006 21:37 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9259
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Going back to the eyesight criteria - perhaps some of the cash generated by the pratnerships could be invested in an eyesight research campaign-

EG - to see if field of vision is important.
to see if ability to judge distances at speed ( there is a term for it in aviation)

etc

etc


In short to see what are the crucial eye standards for driving, and then evaluate each driver and advise on problems. If the driver was aware of a problem , eg problems with judging distance at speed , then there could a chance that that driver could compensate for it or avoid the situation.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2006 11:26 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
The problem with using Pratnership generated cash to fund real road safety initiatives is that it then gives the scammers a reason for their scamming as a source of revenue for these new activities.
This will just increase the scamming and the subsequent difficulties this gives to safe drivers of increased insurance premiums, loss of licences for many and the continuing breach of their rights not to have to self-incriminate.
Personally I would rather an element of an increased road fund licence be used for these new initiatives.
Competence validation testing, including eyesight testing, every 10 years does seem a good idea, but then it will seem a good idea to experienced drivers with an interest in their driving skills. Take Mr. or Mrs. Average who really have no interest in driving except to get to and from work and the shops/schools. To insist on 10-year validation tests would not sit well with them and could cost the gov't making such a decision some votes - thus it won't happen. Remember, votes, power and cash are more important than road safety to our wonderful government.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2006 20:13 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9259
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Or perhaps , simply the eyesight test should be free and drivers instead of llifelong licences( which took over from 3 year ones) be required to have a test every say 5 years from a certain age with the frequency increasing over another age limit.We saw computerisation of car MOT tests , why not driver MOT ,at least in the seeing department.

Suggestion thrown in for brainstorming reasons.(Please don't shhot/maul or otherwise injure the suggestor :lol: )

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.303s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]