Over 70 off the road

I recently had a close friend knocked off his motorcycle and kill by a 74yr old drive who pulled out in front of him.

It also seems that most of the fatalities involving head on collisions round us involve 70+ drivers.

I think accidents involving younger drivers is an attitude problem and older drivers a decline in faculties.

75.. its a bit young to worry about driving? Many of are still Rocking n Rolling..drinking and winking..?at that age and more.

Its all relative..some are "old" at 30,whilst many of us like to age disgracefully..

I realise that this is an emotive subject, but any such legislation, if necessary, should be introduced on a purely factual basis and not on, just think of a number.  It would be very interesting to see, after the evidence has been collected and correlated, just which age group, if any, should be singled out for such treatment.

I think, as has been suggested, the Insurance Companies may already know the answer.

found some stats from a commons commitee report from 2012 which makes interesting reading for those trying to castigate the older age groups without facts so here goes, Note these are taken from official government report not plucked out of thin air they concern road casualties in 2012 and are as follows

Of the 6,029 car drivers killed or seriously injured in 2012: 8% were aged 17 to 19; 25% were aged 20 to 29; 42% were aged 30 to 59; 9% were aged 60 to 69; and 13% were over 70.

Make of it what you will but i thought some actual figures may bring some parity to the debate.

I was watching a programme about age related driving ,and one thing that did stand out,, was that the older you are the more likly in any accident ,road or otherwise,to suffer seriose or fatal injuries as the body cannot absorb or recover from them

found some stats from a commons commitee report from 2012 which makes interesting reading for those trying to castigate the older age groups without facts so here goes, Note these are taken from official government report not plucked out of thin air they concern road casualties in 2012 and are as follows

Of the 6,029 car drivers killed or seriously injured in 2012: 8% were aged 17 to 19; 25% were aged 20 to 29; 42% were aged 30 to 59; 9% were aged 60 to 69; and 13% were over 70.

Make of it what you will but i thought some actual figures may bring some parity to the debate.

 

Please do not think I am trying to rubbish your attempt to put forward some facts and figures, as you are only passing on the information that others have put together.  However I note that one age group, 17-19yrs represent only a 2 year span whereas another 30-59yrs represent a 29 year span and the others are grouped with similar disparity. Add to this, no data indicating the numbers of drivers in each group or the fact that it relates only to the those killed or seriously injured and not any causal factors and does not include all of the other accidents, not considered serious by whatever criteria has been appiled.

Then,  I can as you say, ‘Make of it what I will’.   

If you are still fit and healthy carry on.

If you are still fit and healthy carry on.

..and that's part if the problem.  It's 'you' that declares yourself fit & well .... whether you are or not

If you are still fit and healthy carry on.

..and that's part if the problem.  It's 'you' that declares yourself fit & well .... whether you are or not

Whilst others are not even required to lie or otherwise about their fitness drive, it's left up to thier own scruples !!

found some stats from a commons commitee report from 2012 which makes interesting reading for those trying to castigate the older age groups without facts so here goes, Note these are taken from official government report not plucked out of thin air they concern road casualties in 2012 and are as follows

Of the 6,029 car drivers killed or seriously injured in 2012: 8% were aged 17 to 19; 25% were aged 20 to 29; 42% were aged 30 to 59; 9% were aged 60 to 69; and 13% were over 70.

Make of it what you will but i thought some actual figures may bring some parity to the debate.

 

Please do not think I am trying to rubbish your attempt to put forward some facts and figures, as you are only passing on the information that others have put together.  However I note that one age group, 17-19yrs represent only a 2 year span whereas another 30-59yrs represent a 29 year span and the others are grouped with similar disparity. Add to this, no data indicating the numbers of drivers in each group or the fact that it relates only to the those killed or seriously injured and not any causal factors and does not include all of the other accidents, not considered serious by whatever criteria has been appiled.

Then,  I can as you say, ‘Make of it what I will’.   

Thats the age group of the fatalities and it doesn't say what age the driver of the other vehicle was.  Thats the problem with statistics