Should 70+ have to re-take drivers ed?

yes.

I agree with this in theory, but why 70? Some will be competent until they die, others should be off the road at 35! Coming up with a universally acceptable age is problematic. Maybe we should all be retested every 5 years or so?

I can agree with that, i just chose an age.

every five years may be a bit much but maybe after 60 every 5 years…

I believe that drivers should be retested every x number of years after a certain age since statistics have shown that accident rates generally increase in elder age groups. The same retesting requirement should also apply to drivers who get a high number of certain kinds of driving infractions (anyone see Canada’s Worst Driver?).

I’m sure Canada’s Worst Driver would be hilarious. Great concept. Better to see it on TV than in real life.

What I want to add to this conversation is the importance of sensitivity. My grandpa just turned 97, and my dad and his sister just had to take my grandpa’s car away from him. He still can walk and get around ok, it’s just that they felt his driving was too unsafe.

It’s been very very difficult for him. His car represented his independence, not only as a symbol, but in terms of getting around every day. He’s now much more dependent on others for his needs. He hates that.

It would have been easier on my family if the state had taken care of it. Maybe better for him to blame them than us. But still… can you imagine being “rejected” by the state, declared unfit to drive? Ouch!

I think people should be retested every 2 years, stating from when you first get your license, I see people every day that shouldn’t drive,(putting makeup on wile diving, doing 60 on the hwy, weaving from lane to lane(not changing lanes just end up halfway into the next lane before going back to the original) and so on,

@Trustinglife
“can you imagine being “rejected” by the state, declared unfit to drive?”
yes I can…

Your main question was different from the question in the description…

Sure, they should be required to get tested again, but that’s not the same thing as taking driver’s ed… I never took driver’s ed, and it is not required of anyone. It is also probably a whole bunch of BS.

It is simply a fact that our brains get slower as we get older. Reaction time is reduced, etc. Consequentially it should be mandated that elderly people who wish to continue using their driving privileges should have to be tested to ensure they are mentally and physically capable of driving a car. I would support such testing starting at 60 years old – and if the driver proves to be fully capable and not impaired in the least by their age, they should be given more time between testings. After all, not every brain is the same, and I sure know of plenty of elderly people who can drive much better than many youths I see on the road.

Then again, it’s worthwhile to point out that the majority of car accidents are not caused by elderly drivers, but by impaired or reckless drivers of all other ages. So while such legislation would sure help curb elderly car accidents, I think policy makers should be focusing on lowering the overall car mortality rate by making campaigns that target all drivers. But that won’t be happening anytime soon, seeing as Ontario (my province) cares more about the revenue than the safety of its people, as evidenced by the numerous low quality drivers I see.

Yes. I got in my accident with someone who was 76. They made a left turn from the right lane in front of my car and then after the accident told me they saw my truck in front of there car before they turned. People like this should not be allowed to drive.

@Augustlan, standard age requirements and driving have never been problematic before. What if a 14 year old is a perfectly good driver with good judgment and reflexes? What if a 21 year old isn’t? Licensure is based on the convention that “certain things happen at certain ages,” whether or not that is grounded in reality.

But, yes: vision, hearing, reaction time, and judgment are all good things we all should be tested for. How about every time your license expires? That’s, what? Every 7 years? I think it is in Florida.

From what I gather I think everyone should take the test every five years as a refresher. No one seems to know who has the right-of-way and what to do at four way stops. My biggest pet peeve is when people take turns onto the median when it is not a turning lane but just a cut through for people to try to get out and across the road. Also, people who do not know how far back they are suppose to ride from another car. Being five feet behind me while I am going 55 in the right lane is going to get you brake-checked pretty badly. I hate driving!!!!

I do believe that everyone should have to take a drivers test every few years and after they reach say 60 or maybe 70 then the span between drivers test is lessened to every time they get their license. Also no extensions given for people that have even minor traffic offenses then maybe it would help with the younger ones causing accidents….but then again maybe not!

@girlofscience thats why I said ” a test specifically for 70+” .... i really don’t understand why that is unclear….

In theory, I agree with the idea of retesting all drivers when they renew their licenses (every 5 years in BC). I believe it would make our roads much safer and that any driver worthy of a license wouldn’t be afraid of retesting. In reality, I think it would be too large a burden on the system to be feasible and the public outcry against it would be immense. I’m guessing that the majority of voters would balk at the expense (I’d be surprised if the gov’t didn’t charge test fees) and inconvenience.

After 16 years driving a car (all accident free), I decided to get my motorcycle license this summer so I could have a cheaper mode of summer transportation. I had to book a month in advance just for the 15 minute motorcycle skills test. After I passed that, it was another month and a half before a date was free for me to take my road test. Could you imagine if all drivers had to routinely book those tests? Especially in smaller communities where gov’t services access is minimal, public transportation is not readily available and a licensed driver is a must in most households?

I do believe that it is feasible and prudent to retest drivers beyond a certain age range, though. Mental and physical decline is a reality for many people as they age and mandatory retesting would get drivers who are no longer safe off the road without family having to intervene. My aunts and uncles race my grandmother to the car so they can drive instead of her. Over the years, her awareness and reflexes on the road have declined to the point where family is just waiting for her to be in a serious accident.

@ girlofscience I think you are nit-picking just a bit there. Everyone else understood the question for what it was and didn’t let semantics bother them. We all new “drivers-ed” and “test” were the same thing…