What on the roads has annoyed you today?

[Strokes]

Because it's demeaning and he'd rather they caused a huge crash than be made to feel bad.

Young people are more likely to be in road traffic accidents. They should have to take a test every year until the age of 30.

[kingcarr21]

Young people are more likely to be in road traffic accidents. They should have to take a test every year until the age of 30.

Yes they are but thats because there's more young people driving than there is elderly.

 

Come off it now. Even you must agree that the elderly should have some sort of medical to acknowledge that they're still deemed safe to drive a car. IMO they should also have a theory test to also acknowledge that they understand any new rules/signage that came into force after they passed their test. Perhaps once you hit retirement age you must have a sight/hearing and theory test before continuing to drive.

 

Im taking the retirement age as the age to do this as it would be a sensible assumption that if they were deemed safe to work then they would be deemed safe to drive. Once you hit retirement age or take early retirement (possibly due to inability to work) then it should be standard practise to have a medical and theory test imo.

[MikeyT]

People who don't indicate,

People that tailgate,

People that pull out in front of you and then proceed to drive so slow you think you may have to stop,

People texting or speaking on mobile phones (see it all the time..TW*TS)

Driving around the one way system of Lancaster Centre (did it last week and it's a nightmare). 

 

All bar the last one seems to happen daily. (I am not in Lancaster every day)

Edited 30 June 2015 by MikeyT

[Ollie93]

Young people are more likely to be in road traffic accidents. They should have to take a test every year until the age of 30.

 

They have a test at 17, so its fresher in their minds. I don't see why you're so against it, it's making the roads safer for everyone?

[Strokes]

Yes they are but thats because there's more young people driving than there is elderly.

Come off it now. Even you must agree that the elderly should have some sort of medical to acknowledge that they're still deemed safe to drive a car. IMO they should also have a theory test to also acknowledge that they understand any new rules/signage that came into force after they passed their test. Perhaps once you hit retirement age you must have a sight/hearing and theory test before continuing to drive.

Im taking the retirement age as the age to do this as it would be a sensible assumption that if they were deemed safe to work then they would be deemed safe to drive. Once you hit retirement age or take early retirement (possibly due to inability to work) then it should be standard practise to have a medical and theory test imo.

I've already stated I've no problems with health tests, 'anyone' who suffers medically something that may impair their driving should undergo assessment.

[Strokes]

They have a test at 17, so its fresher in their minds. I don't see why you're so against it, it's making the roads safer for everyone?

Why don't you ask your grandparents how they feel about your proposal?

[Footballwipe]

My other half's grandad was given a new licence in his 80's when he had bad parkinsons' the rest of the family were utterly baffled and understandably very nervous when he drove anywhere. A syatem that grants someone so unfit to drive the right to needs a look at itself.

 

I don't think people aged 60 need a test every year, but maybe at 70 things like reactions should be tested, even if they are perfectly fit and healthy and compos mentis. Reactions are so critical it could be the start of such tests, gradually increasing as they get older. It's not right to be basically shoving older folk onto buses as soon as they reach a certain age, but on the whole monitoring does need to happen, especially as the population is ageing.

 

The most annoying thing for me on the roads are people who go storming down the lane which ends up merging into one making the queue in the lane they want to join even longer. Thank god for lorries who pull out and stop it. Magically the traffic starts moving when you don't have to let all the selfish people in.

[Ollie93]

Why don't you ask your grandparents how they feel about your proposal?

 

Well considering one is dead and the other doesn't drive it really doesn't mean much does it.

 

If someone at 17 can't drive without taking a test why should someone be able to drive at 70+ without taking a "refresher" course. It's just making the roads safer, what have you got against this?

[Babylon]

Yes they are but thats because there's more young people driving than there is elderly.

 

Come off it now. Even you must agree that the elderly should have some sort of medical to acknowledge that they're still deemed safe to drive a car. IMO they should also have a theory test to also acknowledge that they understand any new rules/signage that came into force after they passed their test. Perhaps once you hit retirement age you must have a sight/hearing and theory test before continuing to drive.

 

Im taking the retirement age as the age to do this as it would be a sensible assumption that if they were deemed safe to work then they would be deemed safe to drive. Once you hit retirement age or take early retirement (possibly due to inability to work) then it should be standard practise to have a medical and theory test imo.

After the age of 70 you have to reapply for your license every three years and meet eyesight standards.

[Babylon]

Well considering one is dead and the other doesn't drive it really doesn't mean much does it.

 

If someone at 17 can't drive without taking a test why should someone be able to drive at 70+ without taking a "refresher" course. It's just making the roads safer, what have you got against this?

In that case everyone should take one every ten years from the date of passing, because I see more people 18-45's doing dangerous things than I do the elderly.

[Strokes]

Well considering one is dead and the other doesn't drive it really doesn't mean much does it.

If someone at 17 can't drive without taking a test why should someone be able to drive at 70+ without taking a "refresher" course. It's just making the roads safer, what have you got against this?

Oh its 70+ and a 'refresher course now, you are moving the goalposts a little don't you think?

Retirement age is 67 and health being totally separate from what we were origionally talking about, I find it a bit strange that you feel/felt all 60+ should undertake a test.

[Ollie93]

In that case everyone should take one every ten years from the date of passing, because I see more people 18-45's doing dangerous things than I do the elderly.

 

Happily. I really don't see what the problem is? 

[Ollie93]

Oh its 70+ and a 'refresher course now, you are moving the goalposts a little don't you think?

Retirement age is 67 and health being totally separate from what we were origionally talking about, I find it a bit strange that you feel/felt all 60+ should undertake a test.

 

A refresher course because you said I might "harm some elderly peoples confidence" I'm just saying I think older drivers should have to have another test, I really don't see the problem?

[Strokes]

In that case everyone should take one every ten years from the date of passing, because I see more people 18-45's doing dangerous things than I do the elderly.

Thank you, I drive around 50000 miles a year and there is no real significant trend to the demographics of dangerous drivers. Its not like roads changed overnight, the elderly have driven throughout all these changes.

[Rincewind]

A driving instructer once said to me dont drive like I do when you pass. I never did pass and if I did I may be six feet under  by now. I might have had a good day when I took my test but there is no guarantee that I or anyone can be a pefect driver every day. It only take over confidence and a brief lack of concentration to make a good driver into an ex-good driver. And that can happen at any age.

How many of you would pass first time if you took a test again?

[kingcarr21]

My other half's grandad was given a new licence in his 80's when he had bad parkinsons' the rest of the family were utterly baffled and understandably very nervous when he drove anywhere. A syatem that grants someone so unfit to drive the right to needs a look at itself.

 

I don't think people aged 60 need a test every year, but maybe at 70 things like reactions should be tested, even if they are perfectly fit and healthy and compos mentis. Reactions are so critical it could be the start of such tests, gradually increasing as they get older. It's not right to be basically shoving older folk onto buses as soon as they reach a certain age, but on the whole monitoring does need to happen, especially as the population is ageing.

 

The most annoying thing for me on the roads are people who go storming down the lane which ends up merging into one making the queue in the lane they want to join even longer. Thank god for lorries who pull out and stop it. Magically the traffic starts moving when you don't have to let all the selfish people in.

 

Wait a minute. You do realise that drivers are supposed to use both lanes. Using both lanes eases the traffic at the back of the queue. It does my head in when people stay in the left lane which ultimately causes havoc at say a roundabout with queues of cars taking up the roundabout when the right hand lane is free to use and merge at the end. Lorries blocking the right hand lane are the biggest c**** on the road.

 

Cars in the left hand lane at the merge point dont have right of way over the cars on the right either. If everybody used the 'zipper effect' properly then the traffic would run smoothly with both lanes full of cars. Quite simply if your car is physically in front of the car next to you then you have right of way over them. The d**** in the left lane that dont let people in by closing the gap to the car in front is the real problem.

[Strokes]

A driving instructer once said to me dont drive like I do when you pass. I never did pass and if I did I may be six feet under by now. I might have had a good day when I took my test but there is no guarantee that I or anyone can be a pefect driver every day. It only take over confidence and a brief lack of concentration to make a good driver into an ex-good driver. And that can happen at any age.

How many of you would pass first time if you took a test again?

I very much doubt I would, I'd be posting on here while talking on the hands free and adjusting the radio at the same time. That's at least two minors already.

[Ollie93]

I very much doubt I would, I'd be posting on here while talking on the hands free and adjusting the radio at the same time. That's at least two minors already.

 

Why are you ignoring my question? What's the problem with people over a certain age/ have been been driving for a certain number of years having to take a certain type of test to prove they are fit to drive?

[Thracian]

Old People.

 

Going around a roundabout with indicators on so clearly going around to take the 3rd exit. You see a car pull out of the 2nd exit and drive about 5 mph forcing me to stop dead on the roundabout. Just f*** off back to your retirement home. C***

 

 

Bastards all of them - I got overtaken by one in an Audi 10 minutes back. What right has any old timer got to all that acceleration! Just wait til he gets to a roundabout. I'll show the sod. At 10mph I'll scare him shitless. 

[Strokes]

Why are you ignoring my question? What's the problem with people over a certain age/ have been been driving for a certain number of years having to take a certain type of test to prove they are fit to drive?

I've not ignored it, in my first post I quite clearly said it was degrading. I can see you like repeating yourself, I'm not quite so fond.

[Smudge]

I'm old. I have driven everything from a 100 ton quarry truck to a golf cart. I have a license for car, motorbike, commercial vehicle and single engined plane, so I have passed a few tests in my time.

 

Nevertheless, I don't drive with the confidence I used to.

• I am comfortable driving within 10% over the speed limit,
• I always keep a good distance between me and the vehicle in front.
• I slow down in heavy rain and icy conditions
• I tend to keep four wheels on the road while going around corners.
• I expect others to make mistakes so I allow for someone to unexpectedly pull out.
• I don't race another car to the next red light, I find I get there in time for them to turn green.

All of this is much to the annoyance of everyone who thinks I'm being just not up to speed. I get honked at for driving at 30 while in a village with narrow roads. I get overtaken just before a stop sign, she turns left I go straight.

Yep I should have my license taken away, I'm just not good enough.

 

I do agree that as I have aged my reactions aren't what they were and that is why I drive in a safe defensive way, surely that's a good thing.

[Babylon]

Wait a minute. You do realise that drivers are supposed to use both lanes. Using both lanes eases the traffic at the back of the queue. It does my head in when people stay in the left lane which ultimately causes havoc at say a roundabout with queues of cars taking up the roundabout when the right hand lane is free to use and merge at the end. Lorries blocking the right hand lane are the biggest c**** on the road.

True, but then there are time when it's quite feasible to just join the back of the first lane without causing any obstructions at the back. By trying to get an advantage by shooting up the side it then causes traffic to stop due to having to merge.

[kingcarr21]

True, but then there are time when it's quite feasible to just join the back of the first lane without causing any obstructions at the back. By trying to get an advantage by shooting up the side it then causes traffic to stop due to having to merge.

Again the traffic stops because people in the left lane decide to close the gap instead of letting people merge in the zipper. Theoretically if everyone used the zipper the traffic would flow perfectly fine. Why should people have to think if its feasible to use both lanes or not? If people just accepted to use both lanes in every circumstance and used the zipper properly traffic would run fine.

 

Thats my take on it anyway

[Ollie93]

I'm old. I have driven everything from a 100 ton quarry truck to a golf cart. I have a license for car, motorbike, commercial vehicle and single engined plane, so I have passed a few tests in my time.

 

Nevertheless, I don't drive with the confidence I used to.

• I am comfortable driving within 10% over the speed limit,
• I always keep a good distance between me and the vehicle in front.
• I slow down in heavy rain and icy conditions
• I tend to keep four wheels on the road while going around corners.
• I expect others to make mistakes so I allow for someone to unexpectedly pull out.
• I don't race another car to the next red light, I find I get there in time for them to turn green.

All of this is much to the annoyance of everyone who thinks I'm being just not up to speed. I get honked at for driving at 30 while in a village with narrow roads. I get overtaken just before a stop sign, she turns left I go straight.

Yep I should have my license taken away, I'm just not good enough.

 

I do agree that as I have aged my reactions aren't what they were and that is why I drive in a safe defensive way, surely that's a good thing.

Without coming across rudely, would you mind or find it offensive if you had to take some form of test or refresher course?

[Smudge]

Without coming across rudely, would you mind or find it offensive if you had to take some form of test or refresher course?

No I wouldn't, I think if I wasn't good enough, I shouldn't be on the road.

 

On the basis that I'm pretty sure I'd pass, I'd happily display the enlarged results it in the back window with a image of my middle finger.