MLD Woody Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/03/us/florida-elderly-driver-kills-three/ We should probably institute frequent drivers tests as you grow older. Make sure you are safe to be on the road. DieHard, please, retake your drivers test. As you grow older your reflexes slow and you become more a danger to yourself and those around you when you get behind the wheel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Don't mess with us old guys: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Also, woody, I would guess that if die hard backs over your tricycle in the driveway he probably did it on purpose. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Also, woody, I would guess that if die hard backs over your tricycle in the driveway he probably did it on purpose. WSS Unlikely - Die Hard would be going forwards at about 80mph, especially if the tricycle had woody on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I couldn't agree more, Woody. If it were up to me I would say mandatory driving retests every 4 years starting at 70 and every 2 years starting at 80. If you're mentally capable of driving then this should be no problem at all; A minor inconvenience for the safety of us all. Reminds me of: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I couldn't agree more, Woody. If it were up to me I would say mandatory driving retests every 4 years starting at 70 and every 2 years starting at 80. If you're mentally capable of driving then this should be no problem at all; A minor inconvenience for the safety of us all. Gun reform? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Gun reform? Stay on topic Woody I know it's tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 A minor inconvenience for the safety of us all.... just sounds familiar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 A minor inconvenience for the safety of us all.... just sounds familiar... MMGW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 sure even taxes in general. Some small inconvenience with the purpose of improving society as a whole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I couldn't agree more, Woody. If it were up to me I would say mandatory driving retests every 4 years starting at 70 and every 2 years starting at 80. If you're mentally capable of driving then this should be no problem at all; A minor inconvenience for the safety of us all. Reminds me of: Well, that gives me 11 more years (if I make it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Gun control and reform has much more serious implications than forcing the elderly to retake driving tests. They are completely different topics for different threads. You went and made a good point and followed it up with the usual BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Gun control and reform has much more serious implications than forcing the elderly to retake driving tests. They are completely different topics for different threads. You went and made a good point and followed it up with the usual BS. But who wants credibility? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 It is a very similar premise, lol. No, it is not one to one. I view some of the gun reform ideas as minor inconvenience, like stricter registration process. No one is talking about removing the 2nd amendment. Not infringing on anyone's rights. Point you agree with = good Point you disagree with = bad got it but you are right, we should keep it in its own thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 To be fair, why stick with over 70s? There are plenty of people whose vision deteriorates after the age of 30 or so, my brother started wearing glasses in the last couple of years and he's 34. Also, if someone who's 70 has been driving all their life, chances are they're a safer driver than someone who passes their test aged 18, then does no driving for 20 years. So, given that it's half a day's inconvenience for the test, plus a little theory revision (is that a thing there? we have to do a theory test here), once every 10 years isn't unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 No, I don't think it is. My vision is awful. -7.5 for my contacts. I am damn near blind without contacts or glasses. I am used to it though. If someone had their vision change later in life they may not take care of it and it could be an issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Been checked for diabetes? But we must make cars harder to get. And when a tragic accident happens, we must hold the car manufacturers responsible. And God help us, we MUST have "NO CARS" zones. And, if you buy or drive a car, you should have to have a background check to make sure you aren't a serial killer, or a mentally deranged person, or a terrorist. And all cars must havea steering wheel fingerprint reader, so that only the owner of the car can ever start it and drive it. Everybody knows that cars are only made with only one thing in mind: making $$$$$$$$$$$ despite all the tragic deaths, and forcefully rolling over stuff. We must ban all cars from school buildings, and zones, even 2500 feet near a school. You'll have to leave your car locked up in a suitcase and it won't hurt you to walk the rest of the way into work. We can ban cars, but the AAA and liberals just want these kids to be run over. These dangerous half ton things don't need those big engines. Just enough engine to eventually go foward or backward as is necessary. You murderous liberals don't need a v-6 or v-8., You can ride bicycles, dammit. Little teeny tiny little Big Wheels. It would for you to exercize and lose weight, get in shape, so Obamao doesn't have you costing his Obamaocare any money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 That was cute Cal, but like every other fucking car to gun comparison it doesn't work.... keep doing it though. It makes your side of the argument really look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 No diabetes, just bad vision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 It is a very similar premise, lol. No, it is not one to one. I view some of the gun reform ideas as minor inconvenience, like stricter registration process. No one is talking about removing the 2nd amendment. Not infringing on anyone's rights. Point you agree with = good Point you disagree with = bad got it but you are right, we should keep it in its own thread It's not good vs bad point. It's relevant to the current conversation vs irrelevant. Gun control has more serious implications because the 2nd amendment is meant to be our protection from the government; Not from each other. If you control the guns then you control the people, and I for one have zero trust in our government. Serious. Trouble. lol sorry I couldn't help it. I'll talk gun control/reform all day with you, just in another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 To be fair, why stick with over 70s? There are plenty of people whose vision deteriorates after the age of 30 or so, my brother started wearing glasses in the last couple of years and he's 34. Also, if someone who's 70 has been driving all their life, chances are they're a safer driver than someone who passes their test aged 18, then does no driving for 20 years. So, given that it's half a day's inconvenience for the test, plus a little theory revision (is that a thing there? we have to do a theory test here), once every 10 years isn't unreasonable. I said 70 and up because I was not assuming vision deterioration was the problem. I figured it's more that the mental capacities are diminished and that is why the elderly are unsafe drivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Lol. I like the "serious, trouble" shout out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.