yes
it is a good idea
but i feel it needs to be earlyer
peoples vision might go before their brain, i say every 3 years after 50 you should go in for a "test" just to make sure you are not a danger to the others out on the road!
if some dude was hiding in the bushes trying to get a picture of me.. and i found him.. thats an invasion of privacy.. ima whoop his ass.. then sue him.. then have sex with his wife just out of spite
i agree that its a good idea. there was an 85ish year old man that used to live in my neighborhood who would get out and drive sometimes. when he did... he went about 15mph and waved all of the cars that were behind him angrily around. being behind him pissed me off to no end. this also happens a lot on main roads... older people driving 10 or 15mph under the speed limit and causing all kinds of traffic backup because they either cant see, cant tell how fast they are going, or just flat out cant drive. i think they should all have to drive cars that are like, 1/3 the size of the cars that most of them drive (cadillacs) like geo metros or something. that would cut down on some of the anger when i have to pass them.
I think every 3 years you should have to retake the test. I also think that past traffic convictions should count against you when you're taking the test, so you need extra points on the to renew your license than someone who's scot-free.
There are a lot of middle-aged maniacs out there. I'd rather share the road with someone who went 30 MPH under the limit than someone who went 30 MPH over.
The reason we have so many auto accidents/fatalities in this country is because it's so easy to keep and retain a license. If you look at other countries like Japan, Germany, the U.K., etc. it's different because you have to do more work to get a license and to retain it. It's not just an automatic thing like it is in the U.S.
Comment