Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by Nasrudith on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @10:52AM
(#20402505)
Ageist is one of the isms with an annoying literal legal doublespeak worthy double standard - it is only ageist if you are an elder. If you aren't then it is "reasonable assumption of your capability".
It isn't unreasonable but it is clearly a matter of power given the uneven application. Guess who has an interest in not being restricted now or in the future? Those who pass the laws and judge them.
Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by bspammer on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @09:59AM
(#20401981)
Cognitive decline happens to everyone the longer they live, if that's ageism then I'm afraid it's also reality. Testing everyone yearly would be prohibitively expensive.
Hopefully, self-driving cars will eventually render these discussions redundant. But that still seems to be decades away at this rate.
Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by pavel_lishin on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @10:48AM
(#20402464)
> Testing everyone yearly would be prohibitively expensive.
I reiterate that we're driving huge pieces of metal at nearly a hundred miles per hour. Let's stop sacrificing people's lives for the privilege, and start sacrificing time and money.
Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by magduf on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @12:06PM
(#20403280)
Every society has to make some kind of sacrifice of compromise in usage of resources. Testing everyone yearly is a massive waste of time and resources and money, and won't achieve any benefit, whereas testing old people will.
I don't care if that's "ageist". It's a biological fact that older people suffer from cognitive decline, slowed reaction times, etc.
Is it also "sexist" to claim that only women are able to get pregnant?
Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by cgriswald on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @11:07AM
(#20402657)
I propose greater enforcement of existing traffic laws (instead of just speed and DUI); and a heavier hand when it comes to revocation. This would target those who need to be retested the most regardless of age and the burden of doing so can be put on them through fees.
Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by briandear on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @10:42AM
(#20402418)
I think every two years would work, just like the FAA requires Flight Reviews every two years. For those driving bigger vehicles like commercial trucks, they can have an annual “proficiency check.” If getting a car license were more like getting a pilot license, we’d all be a lot safer.
Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by anticensor on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @04:04PM
(#20405949)
Then you look for a Bundeswagen rating course after your Rugby car breaks down. (brands are deliberately kept fictional) And you find out Bundeswagen model Z is not a so common type rating, and look for yet another successor of Rugby model B.
Re:Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed o...
by guitarbill on Wednesday July 10, 2019 @10:37AM
(#20402378)
And yet we don't let people drive or drink alcohol until a certain, arbitrary age...
It seems to me, probably naively, that the easiest way around this would be to require yearly tests for everyone. You're driving a huge honking piece of metal at 60+ miles an hour down the street; a yearly verification of your ability to do so doesn't seem excessive.