LogFAQs > #909483379

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	People who are at fault in accidents that back up the freeway
adjl 09/26/18 12:55:41 PM #31:	Kyuubi4269 posted... adjl posted... That said, there is a lot of merit in the idea of requiring mandatory retesting after, say, age 60. That's a specific subset of bad drivers, though. In the UK you need to renew regularly and get eye tests when you reach retirement. That's sensible and would cut down on a lot of the old age-related collisions. Good luck getting such legislation passed with all of the baby boomers in their 60's now, though. Even more so where boomers grew up with the "you must have a car to be independent!" propaganda, so having their licenses threatened would be considered a personal insult (to say nothing of how vital car ownership has become in many North American areas). Troll_Police_ posted... it makes it a lot easier to impose stricter penalties when we can show that less than 5 years ago you understood the rules. Eh, I don't know about that. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse for violating it, especially when you're driving around with a signed contract stating you understand and will follow the rules of the road. It should be perfectly possible to impose stricter penalties without needing such proof, since they are themselves claiming to understand the rules every time they get behind the wheel. OhhhJa posted... There is definitely quite a bit of genuine stupidity on the roads. It's probably mostly apathy but there are a ton of drivers who really dont know a lot of basic rules I really don't know about that. Even the ones who say they didn't know the rules when they're caught violating them could very well be lying to save face. Some of the more nuanced rules like proper merging and implied minimum speed limits for fast lanes (which should really be explicitly posted), maybe, but accidents aren't typically caused by people not knowing nuanced rules, they're caused by people speeding or running stop signs or not checking blind spots. Everyone knows those rules, they just ignore them. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:909483379] in People who... [t:77041754]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>adjl posted...</cite> <quote>That said, there is a lot of merit in the idea of requiring mandatory retesting after, say, age 60. That's a specific subset of bad drivers, though.</quote> In the UK you need to renew regularly and get eye tests when you reach retirement.</quote> That's sensible and would cut down on a lot of the old age-related collisions. Good luck getting such legislation passed with all of the baby boomers in their 60's now, though. Even more so where boomers grew up with the "you must have a car to be independent!" propaganda, so having their licenses threatened would be considered a personal insult (to say nothing of how vital car ownership has become in many North American areas). <cite>Troll_Police_ posted...</cite> <quote>it makes it a lot easier to impose stricter penalties when we can show that less than 5 years ago you understood the rules.</quote> Eh, I don't know about that. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse for violating it, especially when you're driving around with a signed contract stating you understand and will follow the rules of the road. It should be perfectly possible to impose stricter penalties without needing such proof, since they are themselves claiming to understand the rules every time they get behind the wheel. <cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>There is definitely quite a bit of genuine stupidity on the roads. It's probably mostly apathy but there are a ton of drivers who really dont know a lot of basic rules</quote> I really don't know about that. Even the ones who say they didn't know the rules when they're caught violating them could very well be lying to save face. Some of the more nuanced rules like proper merging and implied minimum speed limits for fast lanes (which should really be explicitly posted), maybe, but accidents aren't typically caused by people not knowing nuanced rules, they're caused by people speeding or running stop signs or not checking blind spots. Everyone knows those rules, they just ignore them. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1