Should people be required to re-take the driving test after the age of 60?
Debate Rounds (3)
here goes nothing,
Pro`s argument starts on the basis for two relevant point, in my humble opinion,
1. Large quantity of accidents are due to ageing process,
2.A requirement for a re-test for to people above the age of 60
On your first point, I would argue that the occurrence of accidents are`t always the cause of elderly, ageing-class people.
Many accidents are due to reckless driving and other issues. Accidents are NOT isolated to elderly(above-60 years of age class), there are other more severe causes to accidents and simpler actions against those causes.
Even so, I would disagree that a re-test is the best solution in this matter. However, in my opinion a re-test at the age of 60 would in fact be discriminatory in nature to the elderly. It should be noted that the elderly lacks mobility and transportation, and a large number of them are not able to take public transports. I would recommend that drivers above the age 60 should be given special privileges in road usage, etc - like disabled drivers*
However, it is not discriminating against the elders. Someone suffering form certain types of disabilities aren't able to drive. Yet, they still do. Providing necessary arrangements to fit their needs is not cost efficient. Simply taking a re-test can ensure that they are up to par with all the rules and regulations of the road. You cannot certain issues such as memory loss by providing a separate lane. Due to unique cases, they should be required to take another test. Honestly, if they follow the criteria of the test then all is well. Public transportation comes at a lower rate for seniors as well. If they do not want to take taxis, buses, etc., then arranging rides could be another solution.
Daurokz forfeited this round.
In all honesty I am not trying to prevent people (who are 60 or over) from driving, I am simply trying to protect themselves as well as others. There are reasons why children do not drive. Such as lack of knowledge and understanding. Not comparing children to elders, but medical situations provide reasons as to why they shouldn't drive either (not all of them). Kicking people 60 or older off the road would be unfair unless given the opportunity to prove their dedication to the road. According to (http://www.medicinenet.com...) ,
"As you age, your joints may stiffen, and muscles weaken. Turning your head to look back or steering and braking the car may become hard to do. Movements are slower and may not be as accurate. Your senses of smell, hearing, sight, touch, and taste might grow weaker.
Vision, being able to see, is a vital part of driving, but age brings changes in the lens of the eye. Eyes need more light in order to see and are more sensitive to glare. Your ability to see things on the edge of the viewing area, peripheral vision, narrows. Vision problems include cataracts, macular degeneration, and glaucoma."
There are obviously going to be changes in the human body over time. Thus leading to the incapability to drive in many situations. Surveys prove that many drivers become enraged due to the slow pace at which some seniors drive at. Yes, other drivers can drive slow for safety precautions, but it is mainly seniors. Having a re-test can lessen the chances of an accident. It may not completely stop this, but it can help prevent it.
The issue which arises here, in my humble opinion would be the point of proportionality.
In my view, a re-test is extremely unfair /taxing /strenuous for anyone above the age of 60, especially a physical / time-reaction based test. As you have mention in round 1-
"simply beneficial when it comes to protecting the lives of others"
we are currently debating on the effect of elderly drives on the safety of road usage. In my view, a balance between the right for movement for elderly drivers and the safety of other drivers lives are of utmost important fundamental rights. A basic addition of to the disabled/elderly lane would benefit both causes. However, Public transportation such as taxis, buses or even arranged rides prove to impose further limitations on the elderly mobility. *For example, if an elderly receives information of a severe emergency of their relatives, would it seem possible to arrange transportation ? would it seem fair to take public transportation in these situations ? it would only seem justifiable that they are allowed to travel without imposing burden on to their movements.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by The_Gatherer 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made better argument for his / her case, also provided sources. Con FF 1 round and also did not make as good a convincing argument.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.