Los Angeles driver, 100, hits group of children
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19420682 (post-incident video)

A friend said he still had his "facilities" ..... :eek:

To Old to Drive

I reckon there should be an age where you should just STOP driving. They are just as dangerous on the road than teenage boy-racers

I think from the age of 80 or so everyone should have to do a quick test every couple of years to make sure they can still drive competently

He should not have been driving at that age, full stop.

Reminds me of that episode of South Park

They do here from 70, then every 3 years.

Yeah, this.

I see

AFAIK, there is no test requirement, just renewal every 3 years :

Renewing your driving licence at 70 plus

http://www.theaa.com/public_affairs/...r-drivers.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19419495

As long as he's sorry ..... :rolleyes:

Perhaps if we're going to look at lowering the upper age that people can drive, we can look at raising the lower age? Young males are statistically much more likely to kill or injure someone because of reckless driving.

17's easily old enough to be a good driver though, plus cars start to become more of a necessity at that age

You're still far more likely to kill someone in an accident at 17 though. It's a shame that because of a few idiots who cannot be trusted this should happen but the facts are still there.

Driving is like everything else, you can only become good at something with experience and you cannot be experienced at 17. Perhaps rather than raising the age that someone can begin to drive, it would be a good idea that, once you've passed your test, you are a provisional driver for a couple of years and can only drive vehicles of a certain engine size.

This.

Poor old fella, he's probably devastated over the whole thing. DO we know if his age had anything to do with it? People have accidents of all ages.

What Alex said, which is highly unusual. We don't know if his age was a substantial factor in this; anything else is simply speculation. Absolutely what makes you think that his age had anything to do with it? We don't know that yet.

Caught a bit of Road Wars the other night and there was a long plethora of car accidents, the drivers being between 17 and 30 ... which would surely render all these 'too old to drive' posts laughable assumptions to make? Unless you're saying that 17 is too old to drive?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012...n_1842109.html

"No-one was killed", bit many will be scarred for life ..... I don't think they'll be "grateful" .....

She's still alive too, bloody hell what are that family eating

age limits are the way forward. once you get a bus pass that should be it

I wonder if you will feel the same when you're 65?

The fact is that older drivers are far less dangerous than younger drivers. To suggest people have their licences taken away when they're old enough for a bus pass, when the majority of accidents are caused by 17-25 year old males, is ridiculous.

I disagree. Someone in their flush of youth, 17... fit and healthy wont need a car through necessity - more out of desire or want but not necessity - not in comparison to those far older, who will not be as physically fit as someone in their teens.

The teen is able to take advantage of their youth and fitness levels to use public transport which requires a degree of physical fitness: ie: being able to walk to bus stops, distances, able to stand for a length of time, able to carry items that are necessary (ie: bags of heavy groceries etc).

When comparing teenagers or Senior Citizens: I'd regard it to be the Senior Citizens who would merit cars being a necessity.

Now now Livia, off you pop to the bus stop. Give me your car keys.

I've got a long while before I get my bus pass.. and a bloody eon before I'd give anyone my car keys, even you.