Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
Why 10 years? If your job involves working with dangerous chemicals, heavy machinery, high places etc, your employer usually requires you to take a course and a test every 3 years. In some cases, every year. A 10 year cycle would be silly. Looking at the numbers, cars are really dangerous.
I don't think this opinion is as unpopular as you expect. Especially post COVID where everyone clearly forgot the little driving skill they did have.
The problem is who the opinion is unpopular with. About 22% of registered voters are in the AARP, and they'd be most at risk of losing their driving privileges. Any legislator proposing this or voting for it may as well kiss their office goodbye.
for a couple years during covid, they didn't even do behind-the-wheel driving tests here, even for new drivers
At least in some places well before COVID they didn't bother with road tests. My first GF got her first license in a tiny little town in GA way back in 1998-99. No driving test was administered
I agree. It's not that your driving skills might be lost over time, it's to refresh everyone on laws and regulations. It would also catch people who have had cognitive decline and should not be driving.
I am nearing 70 and I have 2 cataracts. I am voluntarily taking myself off the road as I don’t feel right. Selling our vehicle at end of month. I will not be one of those old farts that crashes into people for my own convenience. It sucks but it’s the right thing to do.
Bro, as your friendly neighborhood eye doctor, please go get your cataracts fixed. It's honestly one of the best quality of life improvements you can make. Most surgeries are less than 15 minutes.
I have been to an eye doctor. Unfortunately they are still ripening and not yet ready to be fixed. About 3 months ago he said come back in 6 months. I heard it is not good to work on them until the right time?
I watched my grandpa's driving deteriorate to where I didn't feel safe being driven around by him, for myself or for others.
thank you for making that choice. 70 feels early, to me, comparing to when I noticed it in my grandfather and what I am seeing in my father now, so I respect your decision even more
hopefully you live somewhere that you can still get around decently, as my grandfather did. he could still walk or bike all around town, and did
I feel like this is one of those things that I can agree to on paper but I can’t support because I feel like it would disproportionately impact those that are already struggling to get by.
I’m surprised to hear that. If someone can pay insurance, parking, fuel, road tax, maintenance, EU checks for a car surely they can pay for a (potentially subsidized) re-certification once in 10 years?
I’m referring to the US because it’s where I’m familiar: Parking isn’t typically a cost outside of cities. Road tax is included in fuel. I’ve never had to get a car safety inspected, I’m sure it’s a thing in some places
Anyway, it’s not just the associated costs but also another generally pointless reason for everyone to have to visit an already over busy DMV and waste hours at best to show they can do something they are likely doing every day? It’s a lot easier for someone like me to go to the DMV and deal with the BS than it is someone who is working multiple jobs, has to actually clock in, and is otherwise hovered over. It’s easy for me to say how easy it is when I’m not struggling through the shit trying to make ends meet. Then what’s the solution, if the DMV decides, nah you can’t drive, does the state start paying their bills or assign them a chauffeur service so they can get where they need to in order to survive?
It's for public safety, so there definitely shouldn't be fees. It should be covered with taxes.
Yet driving is a privilege not a right so there are already fees on every exam you take, at least where I come from.
Personally I'm of the opinion that there's no need to retest healthy working-age adults unless they have traffic violations... But traffic violations should trigger retesting more easily. Right now you gotta fuck up real bad to have your license taken away (after which you can get it back after a while if you pass tests again).
And once you're in your 60s or 70s, we should start retesting and it should be mandatory. We do have mandatory health exams that go from 10 years to 5 years when you age, but they mostly test the sharpness of your vision and such. They don't test how you actually react to things in traffic, or how good your peripheral vision is. There's other stuff they test too, but I've forgotten it, been a few years since my last one.
Do it when you get your colonoscopies. A little propofol, a little road test… have fun with it.
Sure, why not. Make it a 20min exam at something like 30 bucks and it'll improve road safety for everyone at a manageable cost for the individual. I mean I'm paying way more for the repairs, insurance, gasoline... Also spend way more time in some traffic jams. Guess I could do it every few years or so...
Edit: And go ahead and ask them some questions as well. Like: You're in a traffic jam. What do you do? a) change lines 200 times -- b) do something useful.
And take away their permit do go downtown or drive while rush hour if they're bad drivers.
I think you're making an assumption that isn't true:
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/overview/age-of-driver/
I'd be interested in seeing a percentage based graph taking into account the number of drivers per age group. I would expect there to be fewer drivers in the last two groups, concurrent with an increased percentage of accident drivers.
I fully agree but I think we actually do need to take the independence of seniors seriously too. No they shouldn’t be driving but for many there are no good or affordable alternatives. I don’t like the idea of nana and pawpaw rotting away at home waiting for visitors when they had a normal social life. If this is implemented free or low cost public transportation or shuttles should be provided for anyone over say 65.
Adding more friction to driving might yield better transit options. Let's do it.
I upvoted because this IS an unpopular opinion (outside of this bubble)
I agree with the premise but can guarantee I would hate the outcome
With how many psychopaths have licenses - why do we think an even more bloated system is really gonna “catch em all”
…
But not to argue - please carry on
The only problem with that is that for the last 90 years we have been making our cities car dependant
Sure in places where there are alternatives to driving make it hard to get or keep a driving licence so it's only the competent drivers on the road, but in places with no cheaper alternative the deal the majority has accepted is everyone needs to drive no matter how bad at it they are
Doesn't seem like an unpopular opinion. At least not on Lemmy.
WRONG. DOWNVOTED. BLOCKED.
Just kidding.
But "unpopular opinions" are hard, though, because the TRULY unpopular ones usually don't get upvotes. lol
This is not unpopular. But guess what demographic consistently votes? That's right, older people. They're not going to give themselves less freedom and independence...
There is that, but I'd also argue quite a lot of people would be against this proposal because they don't want a drivers licence really; they just don't live in a walkable area but want to get to work and be able to shop and the licence and owning a car is just a means to an end. If you're a competent driver, having to retake the test would be a pain in the ass and your reward effectively is "You may continue to exist in society."
Getting the letter that you're due for a test would be more frustrating than a jury duty summons; jury duty pays.
The elderly resent the prospect of losing their licence for exactly that reason; it puts them at the mercy of family and expensive taxis to be able to feed themselves.
In a sane world, yes we'd all recognise driving can be dangerous and tests are sensible, but in that world you wouldn't need a car to do basic shit either.
Sometimes when I'm driving home I pretend I'm doing a driving exam and see how far I can get before I fail, and I always seem to fail. My muscle memory for all the discouraged minutae is so strong.
IDK how it is in other states, but California already makes me re-test every few years. And it's less than 10. Tho it doesn't require a behind-the-wheel test; just the multiple choice test.
Those are good for showing you're up to date on law changes, but doesn't do anything about showing actual proficiency.
The BAC content that you take your test at should determine your legal limit.
Eh. I'd rather have real driver training required before a license is issued. Some countries do.
In the US, my driver's education consisted of driving in a car with an instructor and two other students in the back (or being in the back while someone else drove). We were required to drive five mph under the speed limit at all times.
So really, I learned how to drive when I got my license.
I'm 51. I was hit two times in my early 20s, but I've not been involved in an accident since (and so never has been my fault). But it's not because of the driver's ed.
Also, I'd love for science to look at what ages (or medical conditions) affect poeples' ability to drive and start testing based on those things. If that means taking tests now? Sure, fine, let's do it - I know I'm still fine.
But it's also hardly an age thing....... lots of people just don't care to learn how to actually drive defensively. :|
The real answer is a LOT more good, efficient, and affordable public transit options.
At least teach people the new rules.
In france bicycles are allowed to go the wrong way in 30-Zones. For example.
When traffic isn't enforced, driving tests won't make a difference. I'm actually getting to the point where I wish they'd install red light cams again due to the number of people I see regularly run them. And as long as you're under 100 mph, you're good!
I would go a step further: either make the tests progressively harder (they have more experience driving, right?) or gate vehicle class/weight behind better scores.
I really dislike the trend of the worst drivers getting the largest vehicles, endangering literally everyone.
I despise shitty drivers who buy huge dangerous vehicles because they feel safer. absolutely despise them. it's a fucking disgusting selfish decision.
Yeah this is a good idea. I think I can trust my kids to tell me when I get dangerous driving, they did tell both their grandmas.
Not sure why we don't, maybe cost? I took my driver's test 40 years ago, any other license you hold that long requires continuing education.
Night driving should be included in any driving test.
nobody would pass because nobody can see anything with LED headlights anymore
It'll never become a mandatory thing. Driving is too important in the US.
Buuuut what could happen overnight is that insurance companies could start giving discounts for regular driving classes, like how taking a defensive driving class gets you a discount, or taking advanced rider courses often gets you a discount on motorcycle insurance.
And then just start actually enforcing basic traffic laws. Where I am, cops are beyond useless about that.
Not controversial at all. In fact this is already introduced in the EU
Where?