[Guest]

What do you think of the idea of requiring knowledge of and demonstrating skill in the energy efficient operation of a motor vehicle as a condition of initial license and at periodic intervals (e.g., every 8 years)? :?:

 

[GreyMud]

Good luck getting that passed!

 

[mrv]

How about required knowledge of how to drive in the first place? It seems like many drivers got their licenses from a Cracker Jack box.

Retesting would be great (even if just the written portion), rather than the current eye exam every X years...

Adding in fuel efficiency techniques would be great, but...

 

[hyperion]

MRV could have continued with the statement that the RMV knows very little about conservation themselves.
And about drivers licenses and renewals I live in a state of pretty strict road rules.(Massachusetts) We have an annual car inspection required, are ticketed if not observing our seatbelt law, compulsary insurance and I was concerned when my drivers license came up for renewal last month. I had just heard from my "younger" 76 yr. old sister in California who had just gone through the process of renewing her license. She sweated it out. Went to an opthalmoligist for an eye exam and purchased new glasses, got the test booklet and studied for two weekends before going to the registry. She forgot her new glasses but passed easily and aced the written but I was concerned before learning I could renew for five more years on the inter net by just answering a few questions about my physical condition and as long as the picture on my present license was taken after my 21'st birthday and I had no outstanding violations I renewed on the net for five more years...........................NEAT......................

 

[mrv]

actually, here in MA we have a secondary seat belt law. You can't be pulled over for not wearing your seatbelt, but if you're pulled over for another infraction you can then be ticketed for not wearing your seat belt. Unlike many other states with primary seat belt laws where you can be pulled over solely for not wearing a seatbelt... and then there's New Hampshire, with no seat belt laws...

and yes, in MA you can renew your license online. I chose not to my last time, as I wanted a new license number (MA used your SSN by default in the past, and I wanted to change to a random number). I KNOW that I couldn't really read the eye chart, but I thought I'd try without my distance-glasses, and I passed. That's about all they ask for for renewal. Online, all they ask for is if you have 20/40 vision (mine is better than this, maybe that's how I passed without my glasses?), if you're taking any medication or have a medical condition that prevents you from driving, and if your license has been suspended. Not that you couldn't just lie...
https://www.mass.gov/secure/rmv/express/renlicform.htm


It's like how people every so often get into an outcry that seniors should have to take driving tests or give up their licenses after a certain age. I don't think it's age-dependent, based on the idiots I see driving around here. I think everyone should be retested for at least the rules of the road every so often, not just a vision test (or a checkbox that you think you have good vision)... However, that would require the hiring of a lot more state police traffic cops to do testing (if road tests), or more registry time if taking a written test, and with state budgets squeezed as it is I don't see it happening.

 

[hyperion]

For your info MRV From all the commercials appearing on TV the month of June,police officers in the commonwealth and Rhode Island can now pull you over for the seat belt infraction alone. (Snap it, or pay) And one of the requirements for renewing your drivers license "on line" is that you have to give up your ability to retain your soc sec number and accept an assigned new one from the registry. You can still request the soc sec number but you do have to go to the registry to do so. I now have the first different number on my new license than the one I have been using for the past fifty years.
As for drivers today, it's not the ability to drive as much as the ability to think and be aware that disturbs me. This the driving schools fail to emphasize. How often have you pulled up behind someone at a light in a single lane road that stops right in the middle of the lane blocking the ability of anyone behind from going to the right and making an allowed "right, on red" turn. Or stopping on the middle of a single lane and waiting to make a left turn blocking a line of traffic that could pass on the right if the turning car had gotten as close to the center of the road as possible. They just don't think or remain aware of other traffic. They are the same folks who will have an animated conversation on a cell phone while driving a three thousand pound car 70 MPH in the fast lane on the interstate. (in the rain)

 

[An04Prius]

It is an outrage to require stricter testing by age. And re-testing everyone, as has been pointed out, is not economically practical. But there is a way to direct stricter re-testing that makes sense. :idea:

Do it by driving skill: points/seriousness of moving violations, and seriousness of at-fault accidents, regardless of age. By the way, there will be few seniors in that category. :wink:

Last time I looked, Insurance comp. were not charitable organizations. Yet, they give discounts to seniors. Because their databases show, as a group, they are safer drivers.

 

[melgish]

Because their databases show, as a group, they are safer drivers.

Unfortunaly safety of the driver isn't what the insurance companies are really looking at.

The real determination is that as a group, the premium vs. claim ratio is higher. This can be caused by many factors besides safety. Ingorance of benefits, not getting damage fixed, death of the driver. They're all worked in.

 

[FarNorth]

Alaska's primary seat belt law slogan is "Click it or Ticket".

Another factor in reduced or discounted rates for "us" seniors is amount of exposure since we do tend to drive less and not in rush hour traffic. Also, we are past trying to impress anyone with our car-based virility.

 

[Sanny]

...Another factor in reduced or discounted rates for "us" seniors is amount of exposure since we do tend to drive less and not in rush hour traffic.

I imagine that exposure would be a problem for more than just seniors, at least 9 months of the year. They charge more for that? Seems like just wearing a warm coat and mittens would help.

 

[An04Prius]

Because their databases show, as a group, they are safer drivers.

Unfortunaly safety of the driver isn't what the insurance companies are really looking at.

The real determination is that as a group, the premium vs. claim ratio is higher. This can be caused by many factors besides safety. Ingorance of benefits, not getting damage fixed, death of the driver. They're all worked in.

"Older drivers are not causing more accidents" said Russ Rader of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. "They are more likely to be killed or injured in a crash, but that's because they are more fragile". 10-18-01.

The many fellow seniors I know from volunteer work at several senior centers know more about coverage, health, car, home, than any younger folks I have met...including my & their very well educated adult children. (lots of phi magna-beta laud-ees , attorneys , accountants :? engineers, etc)

We actually READ the policies...and we are on that phone quick making sure the agent is earning his premium. Living on SS, a small pension, and savings focuses the mind to NOT MISS any potential re-imbursment.

I agree that seniors choose the non congested times to shop, travel, visit. It's wise, levels the traffic load, and...SAFER. Another reason we are safer drivers, and get well earned :wink: discounts on insurance.

 

[An04Prius]

...Another factor in reduced or discounted rates for "us" seniors is amount of exposure since we do tend to drive less and not in rush hour traffic.

I imagine that exposure would be a problem for more than just seniors, at least 9 months of the year. They charge more for that? Seems like just wearing a warm coat and mittens would help.

Hey, just get one of these bear suits. They're washable (with the whites, no bleach) & not that expensive. Be sure to clean the filter each time !!

 

[DanMan32]

[quote="An04PriusI agree that seniors choose the non congested times to shop, travel, visit. It's wise, levels the traffic load, and...SAFER.[/quote]

Not around here they don't! They have to rush to the bank or store as soon as it opens, which is the same time many of us are heading to work.

 

[An04Prius]

Not around here they don't! They have to rush to the bank or store as soon as it opens, which is the same time many of us are heading to work.

If I were to guess, it sounds like all those former New Yorkers, NJs, who now live in Fla., or snow-bird there. They never got over being NY/NJers (hard to do, I was one for 35 yrs). They just like the climate but kept the old habits.

Around here the preferred (intelligent ) senior pattern is go to bed late, get up late, out into the world for exercise, banking, groceries, etc in middle of the day, home before the rush hour starts. If eating out, main meal is a late lunch (less crowded, better prices) or early bird dinner (specials, & those better prices again)

Let you young kids have the rush hour, we been there, done that. 8)

 

[Hep]

I KNOW that I couldn't really read the eye chart, but I thought I'd try without my distance-glasses, and I passed. That's about all they ask for for renewal. Online, all they ask for is if you have 20/40 vision (mine is better than this, maybe that's how I passed without my glasses?), if you're taking any medication or have a medical condition that prevents you from driving, and if your license has been suspended. Not that you couldn't just lie...


It's like how people every so often get into an outcry that seniors should have to take driving tests or give up their licenses after a certain age. I don't think it's age-dependent, based on the idiots I see driving around here. I think everyone should be retested for at least the rules of the road every so often, not just a vision test (or a checkbox that you think you have good vision)... However, that would require the hiring of a lot more state police traffic cops to do testing (if road tests), or more registry time if taking a written test, and with state budgets squeezed as it is I don't see it happening.

In Minnesota you need to have 20/40 corrected vision in one or both eyes, and a certain range of perpheral vision to have an unrestricted license. At vision levels lower than that you can get a license with increasing degrees of restrictions such as no night driving, no freeway driving, less than 45 mph, within 10 miles of home, etc.

One of the hardest things I must do in my job is to tell someone that their vision no longer is adequate to drive safely. It takes away so much of their independence, and they are almost always in tears. Many people (most are elderly) are functioning very well with lower levels of vision, and I would feel completely safe riding with them. Safer than riding with the average, healthy 16 year old new driver.

 

[SgtKarl]

An04Prius said

It is an outrage to require stricter testing by age. And re-testing everyone, as has been pointed out, is not economically practical. But there is a way to direct stricter re-testing that makes sense.

Do it by driving skill: points/seriousness of moving violations, and seriousness of at-fault accidents, regardless of age. By the way, there will be few seniors in that category.

This really is the answer. Re-tests should be based on objective behaviours. It should also be more strict. i.e. after your 2nd at fault crash, you should be re-tested. In Ohio, the tests are for 5 minutes in residential neighborhoods. HEY BMV, wake up, that is not where the serious crashes occur.