When is it to old to drive and be retested?

[Chellybean]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

[Bill14564]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

Yesterday you saw an older lady, frequently I see 20-somethings making poor and unsafe decisions (outside TV of course). When is it too old to drive and be retested? 17 seems to be the best answer to capture all the bad drivers.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Just because most traffic violations are by teenage boys, that is mainly because there are a lot more teen drivers than 80-year-old drivers.

At some point, we become unable to safely drive on public roads. That age is different for everyone. But, it is coming to everyone - someday.

Full Self Driving cars are going to be a godsend for people that can no longer drive safely, or at all. Allowing them to get out safely.

Until then is a very difficult thing to lose your ability to get around independently. But, it is for their own safety and the safety of everyone around them. And driving is NOT a right, it is a privilege.

To answer OPs question, when? When one is no longer able to drive safely and that needs to be determined by someone else. I disagree with Florida issuing driver's licenses for (I think it is) 10 years. I think that once you reach 65 testings should be every year.

[vintageogauge]

The license number of the car should have been given to the police so they can check to see if she is capable of driving safely. When my mother turned 85 she felt that her reflexes were not good enough to be driving so she decided to give up her license and sell her car.

[JoMar]

When I learned to drive I was taught to always be alert and watch out for the other guy. Now, I consider myself the other guy and everyone is watching out for me :)

[Kenswing]

I was shocked when we went to get our Florida drivers licenses that they were good for ten years. I think it would be a good idea to shorten up that interval as your age goes up. Maybe when you hit 60 drop it down to five years. At 65 drop it to three years. At 80 you should be checked every year. At 90, weekly. lol

[Challenger]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

Requiring practical driving tests on any specific age group would foment massive age discrimination law suits. The only way to avoid the problem is to require uniform retesting ,regardless of age. ( ie every 3 or 5 years) How much do you want to bet that will never happen?

[Blueblaze]

Here in America, I thought we were going to reserve punishment until you actually do something to be punished for. Sounds like the lady driving the wrong way needs a driving test, not everybody over some arbitrary age. My Dad was driving into his 90's. He quit driving on his own when he realized his dementia had progressed to the level that made him a danger to others. Nobody had to tell him he needed to be tested.

We used to teach respect for other people's rights, along with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty", and the now totally foreign concept of personal responsibility.

Maybe we ought to try that again.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Here in America, I thought we were going to reserve punishment until you actually do something to be punished for. Sounds like the lady driving the wrong way needs a driving test, not everybody over some arbitrary age. My Dad was driving into his 90's. He quit driving on his own when he realized his dementia had progressed to the level that made him a danger to others. Nobody had to tell him he needed to be tested.

So, your theory is we wait until someone dies, then test the person that caused the accident, instead of being proactive to prevent the death?

We used to teach respect for other people's rights, along with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty", and the now totally foreign concept of personal responsibility.

Maybe we ought to try that again.

But, testing is not punishment. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Validating you still qualify for that privilege is NOT punishment, it is protecting you as much as it is protecting the people around you - oh. , wait, are we talking about driving or vaccinations... hmmm

[twoplanekid]

Here in America, I thought we were going to reserve punishment until you actually do something to be punished for. Sounds like the lady driving the wrong way needs a driving test, not everybody over some arbitrary age. My Dad was driving into his 90's. He quit driving on his own when he realized his dementia had progressed to the level that made him a danger to others. Nobody had to tell him he needed to be tested.

We used to teach respect for other people's rights, along with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty", and the now totally foreign concept of personal responsibility.

Maybe we ought to try that again.

One of the most difficult things I have done in my life is to stress to my best friends brother that my best friend should not be driving as his dementia was impairing his decision making skills. It was necessary to do this as I was afraid for my very good friend and others he might meet on the road. He passed away some nine months after losing his driving privileges. In many instances, self- evaluation of driving skills never takes place until a road accident occurs.

[Blueblaze]

But, testing is not punishment. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Validating you still qualify for that privilege is NOT punishment, it is protecting you as much as it is protecting the people around you - oh. , wait, are we talking about driving or vaccinations... hmmm

You obviously haven't spent much time at the DMV if you think visiting that place is not a punishment.

And please save that "driving is a privilege" BS for 16-year-old citizens-in-training. Everyone who hasn't done something to lose it has a right to own and drive a vehicle. The fact that we place some ground rules around some of our rights does not make them "privileges". There is no such legal term.

Vaccinations? What does that have to do with the topic? Are you trying to say I need to get a shot so you don't have to? I didn't get my shot to protect you. I got my shots to protect me. I could care less if you do -- it's none of my business.

Oh... I get it. You think that an old lady driving the wrong way gives you the right to sentence everyone her age to a day at the DMV -- sort of like the way you think an 80-year-old former smoker with COPD who dies from COVID gives you the right to order everybody to take an experimental vaccine -- even if they're not old or sick or otherwise actually at risk of dying from a cold virus.

Sorry, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm with Ben Franklin -- I think those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety tend to get neither.

[dewilson58]

Everyone should be tested tomorrow.
(same day as free beer)

[retiredguy123]

When you can't drive, why not just buy one of those self-driving cars?

Problem solved.

[GrumpyOldMan]

You obviously haven't spent much time at the DMV if you think visiting that place is not a punishment.

And please save that "driving is a privilege" BS for 16-year-old citizens-in-training. Everyone who hasn't done something to lose it has a right to own and drive a vehicle. The fact that we place some ground rules around some of our rights does not make them "privileges". There is no such legal term.

Vaccinations? What does that have to do with the topic? Are you trying to say I need to get a shot so you don't have to? I didn't get my shot to protect you. I got my shots to protect me. I could care less if you do -- it's none of my business.

Oh... I get it. You think that an old lady driving the wrong way gives you the right to sentence everyone her age to a day at the DMV -- sort of like the way you think an 80-year-old former smoker with COPD who dies from COVID gives you the right to order everybody to take an experimental vaccine -- even if they're not old or sick or otherwise actually at risk of dying from a cold virus.

Sorry, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm with Ben Franklin -- I think those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety tend to get neither.

Sorry, it is NOT a right. Seriously people today LOVE to throw around the "I have a right". Well, you don't. Right are clearly enumerated, there is "everything you want and we forgot to list" clause in the constitution. If you have a RIGHT to drive, and it can be taken away for drunk driving, can they take away your RIGHT to own guns for drunk shooting if you don't kill anyone? Nope,. See owning a gun IS a right, driving is NOT a right.

And complain all you want about the DMV here, try it is CA where you make an appointment in order to get in line and waiit 4 hours. Seriously, if you don't have an appointment to get in line you are not allowed in the line.

I grew up here and I am very familiar with the DMV.

[GrumpyOldMan]

When you can't drive, why not just buy one of those self-driving cars?

Problem solved.

It will be solved but is not yet. there are not full self-driving cars, yet. But, soon, and yes, they will give back the ability to get around for people that can't drive any longer.

[Babubhat]

Notice the words almost and future. Still work to do on software. The regulatory issue is another problem to be resolved.

Full Self-Driving Capability
All new Tesla cars have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat.
The future use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving capabilities are introduced, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates.

[Becca9800]

Yesterday you saw an older lady, frequently I see 20-somethings making poor and unsafe decisions (outside TV of course). When is it too old to drive and be retested? 17 seems to be the best answer to capture all the bad drivers.

Perfect response!

[Becca9800]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

I'm not sure my hubby would agree that poor driving is age-related at all. Every time he rides w me he threatens to write me for an 86D ( he's a retired state trooper, 86D is an OH form for incompetent driver.) You can imagine my response to him.

[Becca9800]

I was shocked when we went to get our Florida drivers licenses that they were good for ten years.

10 years!?! Is that a true story? In OH driver's license have to be renewed every 2 years and includes a vision test. 10 years seems like a huge hole in the safety net.

[Babubhat]

I don’t understand the big deal about having a license. 1/4 of the people who are uninsured and most of them don’t have a license. If you’re stopped it winds up being $150 fine which is nothing. laws are worthless if they are not enforced with material consequences.

Florida has the distinction of having the highest percentage of uninsured motorists, according to the Insurance Research Council, at about 27%. And compounding the problem is that many of these motorists—nearly 2 million—are driving with a suspended license, which has usually been revoked due to unpaid fines.

[Blueblaze]

One of the most difficult things I have done in my life is to stress to my best friends brother that my best friend should not be driving as his dementia was impairing his decision making skills. It was necessary to do this as I was afraid for my very good friend and others he might meet on the road. He passed away some nine months after losing his driving privileges. In many instances, self- evaluation of driving skills never takes place until a road accident occurs.

Very true. That's where family comes in, not the Government. Government's only tool is a sledgehammer to our rights. We should reach for it only as a last resort.

[VApeople]

The only way to avoid the problem is to require uniform retesting ,regardless of age. ( ie every 3 or 5 years)

That was the law in Florida in the 1960's.

I was a student at the Univ of Florida during that time and we had to go into the Dept of Motor Vehicles to be re-tested. They checked our vision, hearing, and ability to read and understand signs. If anyone seemed to be incapacitated physically or mentally, I bet they had to a drivers test as well.

We also had to have our cars inspected every year, as I recall.

Them were the 'good ole days'!

[Blueblaze]

Sorry, it is NOT a right. Seriously people today LOVE to throw around the "I have a right". Well, you don't. Right are clearly enumerated, there is "everything you want and we forgot to list" clause in the constitution. If you have a RIGHT to drive, and it can be taken away for drunk driving, can they take away your RIGHT to own guns for drunk shooting if you don't kill anyone? Nope,. See owning a gun IS a right, driving is NOT a right.

And complain all you want about the DMV here, try it is CA where you make an appointment in order to get in line and waiit 4 hours. Seriously, if you don't have an appointment to get in line you are not allowed in the line.

I grew up here and I am very familiar with the DMV.

Perhaps we should check the contract, since you seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of un-enumerated rights:

Amendment#9:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Amendment #10:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Constitution is not a list of rights. It is a list of prohibitions against government, with a few specific examples of our most important rights that government is specifically forbidden from messing with. EVERY power not specifically delegated to government is retained as a right of the people.

[justjim]

When you turn 80 in Florida you are required to be tested every six years. A family member or others can make a request for a driver to be investigated by DMV to see if they are competent to continue to drive. That’s Florida law according to Google. Some States require testing every year after age 80. Other States require testing at age 75. Florida is more liberal (if I can use that word) toward senior drivers probably because there are so many retirees in the Sunshine State.

[GrumpyOldMan]

10 years!?! Is that a true story? In OH driver's license have to be renewed every 2 years and includes a vision test. 10 years seems like a huge hole in the safety net.

Sadly, yes, it is true.

And yes, age can be a factor in not being able to drive safely. But it is the "not being ABLE to" that is the problem,. whether you are 17 or 87, if you are able to drive safely, then we can start discussing if you are responsible and safe behind a wheel.

But, people do age differently from each other and we need a way to screen out people that are unable to drive safely. One step could be testing more frequently as you get older. 10, 8, 6, 4, 2, and then every year. Maybe starting at 60, 78, 84, 88, 90, 91, 92, etc.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Perhaps we should check the contract, since you seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of un-enumerated rights:

Amendment#9:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Amendment #10:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Constitution is not a list of rights. It is a list of prohibitions against government, with a few specific examples of our most important rights that government is specifically forbidden from messing with. EVERY power not specifically delegated to government is retained as a right of the people.

The Supreme Court has ruled on a number of occasions that all RIGHTS can be limited by the Government.

The supreme court has determined that there are "Fundamental rights", which have a higher bar of requirements for the government to limit them. These include the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, etc.

You have a right to do anything you want to do as long as it is not limited or restricted by the government. The limits to those rights are call laws.

Laws are what limit or restrict rights. Laws are more limited when they restrict fundamental rights.

Driving is not on the list of fundamental rights. So, driving is a "right" you can do only as long as there is no law against it.

The Supreme Court has ruled that you have a fundamental right to travel on public roads. They have not ruled you have a right to drive on public roads. Therefore your "right" to drive extends only as far as state law permits.

So, you are right to the point that it is true you have the right to do anything you want to do - you are wrong in that does not mean it can not be regulated. Since driving has not been determined to be a fundamental right, there are virtually no limits on how the state can restrict or regulate driving.

That is why it is called a privilege because you can do it with permission. An illegal driver is someone that violates the rules/laws concerning driving. Driving without a license is illegal. Driving while intoxicated is illegal.

So, yes, you can drive without a license, but, the States can pass virtually ANY law restricting that "right", up to and including putting you in jail when you drive without a license. Many states have laws about driving without a license that limits the punishment to fines.

[Babubhat]

Anyone else notice the similarities in responses by Toymeister and Grumpyold man? Both consistently condescending and all knowing like The Great and Powerful Oz. The threads read much better with them on the block list.

[Two Bills]

Nothing to do with age, just the state driving laws.
When my wife and I took our driving tests in Lakelad to qualify for a Florida license, we never left the car park in the car.
Just did some static tests, including an 'emergency stop' at under 20mph!
Never went near a road or freeway.
You get what you are given!

[GrumpyOldMan]

Anyone else notice the similarities in responses by Toymeister and Grumpyold man? Both consistently condescending and all knowing like The Great and Powerful Oz. The threads read much better with them on the block list.

Then why am I not on YOUR block list. You have a right to block me, so do it.

[scottiesrgreat@gmail.com]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

Not sure - what is worse - an older person driving - or a younger person who has a grammatical error in every single sentence of a long post? Close call…..

HMMMMMMMM

[tsmall22204]

In the Villages community, is there lift and uber easily available for seniors so they can stop driving?

[Donegalkid]

“Full Self Driving cars are going to be a godsend for people that can no longer drive safely, or at all. Allowing them to get out safely.”

That may be the case for the future but the current self-driving technology is not a substitute for the mental and physical decline of the human driver e.g. the decrease of fine motor skills, decision making ability, dexterity, etc. I’ve ridden in my daughter’s Tesla with auto pilot “on” and the driver has to be very clued in to what is going on with the car, and the driving conditions. For example, if there are no white lines on the sides of the driving lane, auto driving features do not work so good. Another: blinking yellow lights at intersections and auto drive turns off. Woops. And, of course, the driver needs to be able to navigate through the rather complicated systems in place e.g. the video control screen to operate the car, and to engage and disengage the auto drive features. Auto drive is pretty good for highway driving but not a substitute for a human operated car in local traffic conditions (like in TV). Self-driving cars may evolve into more intuitive driving machines but that’s a ways off. We will see.

[donfey]

Sorry, it is NOT a right. Seriously people today LOVE to throw around the "I have a right". Well, you don't. Right are clearly enumerated, there is "everything you want and we forgot to list" clause in the constitution. If you have a RIGHT to drive, and it can be taken away for drunk driving, can they take away your RIGHT to own guns for drunk shooting if you don't kill anyone? Nope,. See owning a gun IS a right, driving is NOT a right.

And complain all you want about the DMV here, try it is CA where you make an appointment in order to get in line and waiit 4 hours. Seriously, if you don't have an appointment to get in line you are not allowed in the line.

I grew up here and I am very familiar with the DMV.

It's not RIGHTS that are "clearly enumerated" but powers/functions of the federal government. We DO NOT get our rights from the government. The Bill of Rights do not grant anything. Rather, they RESTRICT the government from limiting, or infringing against what the framers saw as unalienable rights. They are meant to PROTECT us from an overreaching government. Sadly, they have not been as effective as hoped since the government has worked diligently to "get around them."

[GrumpyOldMan]

It's not RIGHTS that are "clearly enumerated" but powers/functions of the federal government. We DO NOT get our rights from the government. The Bill of Rights do not grant anything. Rather, they RESTRICT the government from limiting, or infringing against what the framers saw as unalienable rights. They are meant to PROTECT us from an overreaching government. Sadly, they have not been as effective as hoped since the government has worked diligently to "get around them."

I misspoke, and apologize.

But, the use of the term Rights does not mean you can do anything you want to do.

Laws restrict or regulate what you can do. Even fundamental rights can be limited. There is no limit to the regulation or restriction of "rights" that have not been determined to be fundamental.

So, I guess my point is, that a right that is not guaranteed to be allowed is a right in name only - ie., not really a right.

My use of the term rights is referring to fundamental rights, which I am allowed to do unless the government has a very good reason (that the Supreme Court agrees with) to limit or restrict.

For example, I have a right to own guns, but there can be restrictions to that right. Those restrictions however are very limited, and the Supreme Court will often rule against state-imposed limits.

Your right to punch me in the face is not a fundamental right, no matter how much some people on here may want to. So there are very few limits to the government's ability to prohibit punching each other in the face.

[Babubhat]

You have this option to get Tesla like technology if your car is compatible.

comma.ai – Introducing openpilot (https://comma.ai/)

[Girlcopper]

The license number of the car should have been given to the police so they can check to see if she is capable of driving safely. When my mother turned 85 she felt that her reflexes were not good enough to be driving so she decided to give up her license and sell her car.
Again the answer is “call the police”. Unless the police witness something , they can do nothing. They dont randomly check peoples driving skills. Thats why there is a DMV which is responsible for checking capabilities of drivers before issuing a driver license. They are a flawed govt agency with no help in sight. They give licenses to everyone.
Example: A friends dad, age 88, was due to renew his license and needed to pass a eye test. He knew he couldnt pass it and also had hearing issues so he figured his license wouldnt get renewed. Just on a hunch, he renewed it on line, it was accepted and he got a license for another 7 years. Scarey!!

[1948JDG]

I definitely agree!!!!!!! Closer scrutiny as we get older. Nobody wants to lose their license and their independence, but that day will come for all of us.

[Bay Kid]

Dad hasn't driven in over 1 1/2 years, but the VA. DMV mailed Dad a new license I requested for $8. No test not even questions. He is 88, can't hear, hardly walk and doesn't see very well.

At least he can ride with my grandson later this year when he gets his learner's permit.

[Girlcopper]

Just because most traffic violations are by teenage boys, that is mainly because there are a lot more teen drivers than 80-year-old drivers.

At some point, we become unable to safely drive on public roads. That age is different for everyone. But, it is coming to everyone - someday.

Full Self Driving cars are going to be a godsend for people that can no longer drive safely, or at all. Allowing them to get out safely.

Until then is a very difficult thing to lose your ability to get around independently. But, it is for their own safety and the safety of everyone around them. And driving is NOT a right, it is a privilege.

To answer OPs question, when? When one is no longer able to drive safely and that needs to be determined by someone else. I disagree with Florida issuing driver's licenses for (I think it is) 10 years. I think that once you reach 65 testings should be every year.
65 and a yearly test? The DMV doesnt have enough employees to test that many people in TV yearly. And 65 isnt old regardless of the number. Many people are still working full time and carrying on with their careers. Maybe a written test to show they know laws but a physical driving test is impossible to administer to that many people annually

[KRMACK55]

I was shocked when we went to get our Florida drivers licenses that they were good for ten years. I think it would be a good idea to shorten up that interval as your age goes up. Maybe when you hit 60 drop it down to five years. At 65 drop it to three years. At 80 you should be checked every year. At 90, weekly. lol
When was it changed to 10 yrs? I got my license in 2019 and it was 8 years.

[ThirdOfFive]

But, testing is not punishment. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Validating you still qualify for that privilege is NOT punishment, it is protecting you as much as it is protecting the people around you - oh. , wait, are we talking about driving or vaccinations... hmmm
I admit I'm of two minds on this issue. Would testing on the basis of age be discriminatory? Yes--but we discriminate when it comes to driving all the time. People with various physical handicaps cannot drive legally unless their vehicle has the adaptive aids necessary for them to operate it safely. There are probably some 12-year-olds out there who would make better drivers than people 5, 10, or 20 years older than they, but we have set the arguably discriminatory age of 16 as the age when you can LEGALLY drive on our highways, regardless of skill level.

And speaking of skill level, we discriminate there too. No one is born with the right to crawl behind the wheel and herd the ol' Family Truckster down the highway. We have to prove, via written and practical testing, that we know the laws, understand how to operate our vehicle and can demonstrate the skill level to drive safely. With age being a process, it is illogical to assume that skills DON'T diminish over time, because on average they most certainly do.

I no longer drive after dark or in bad weather unless there is absolutely no other choice, nor do I travel on unfamiliar roads, recognizing that my wife is a far better driver in all three of the situations mentioned here than I am. Sure, that male pride thing was an issue when, about five years ago now, I first began to suspect that my skills were eroding. But I'd rather sacrifice pride than a life, or lives.

And periodic testing after a certain age would most certainly save lives.

[GrumpyOldMan]

65 and a yearly test? The DMV doesnt have enough employees to test that many people in TV yearly. And 65 isnt old regardless of the number. Many people are still working full time and carrying on with their careers. Maybe a written test to show they know laws but a physical driving test is impossible to administer to that many people annually

Many people are very active at 65. And many are not, and are not capable of driving safely. It only takes one to kill someone.

And you are right, there is no simple solution. I don't know if it would be impossible to administer that many tests, but it certainly would be expensive.

[GrumpyOldMan]

I admit I'm of two minds on this issue. Would testing on the basis of age be discriminatory? Yes--but we discriminate when it comes to driving all the time. People with various physical handicaps cannot drive legally unless their vehicle has the adaptive aids necessary for them to operate it safely. There are probably some 12-year-olds out there who would make better drivers than people 5, 10, or 20 years older than they, but we have set the arguably discriminatory age of 16 as the age when you can LEGALLY drive on our highways, regardless of skill level.

And speaking of skill level, we discriminate there too. No one is born with the right to crawl behind the wheel and herd the ol' Family Truckster down the highway. We have to prove, via written and practical testing, that we know the laws, understand how to operate our vehicle and can demonstrate the skill level to drive safely. With age being a process, it is illogical to assume that skills DON'T diminish over time, because on average they most certainly do.

I no longer drive after dark or in bad weather unless there is absolutely no other choice, nor do I travel on unfamiliar roads, recognizing that my wife is a far better driver in all three of the situations mentioned here than I am. Sure, that male pride thing was an issue when, about five years ago now, I first began to suspect that my skills were eroding. But I'd rather sacrifice pride than a life, or lives.

And periodic testing after a certain age would most certainly save lives.

I completely agree with you and thank you for the mature handling of your situation. And the point is the age where we begin to have diminished capacity to drive varies from person to person. I hope we can all agree that someone with diminished capacity to drive should not be allowed to drive. If we can agree on that, then the question becomes, how do we determine someone is able or not able to drive. Testing is certainly one way. As someone pointed out, that might be hard to do, considering the number of older people driving.

[Mistymom]

Concerning expiration dates, we recently moved here. My husband is over 80 and his is 6 years. I'm under 70 and mine is 9 years. I don't know if this is the norm, or just for new residents in Lake County.
The problem is, there was only an eye test. No proficiency test at all.
Unfortunately, the proficiency of many seniors gradually deteriorates, without them noticing all that much. Unless a law enforcement sees this or an accident occurs, this continues because many seniors live alone without someone advising them that it's time to stop driving.
Maybe the best thing to do would be what was mentioned earlier, get their tag number and report them. Hopefully then someone from the Sherriff's Department would follow up in a compassionate way.

[newgirl]

It is a shame that this is the largest retirement community yet have no public transportation for folks that shouldn't drive. I am sure 95% would stop if they had a affordable option( and no, not everyone is wealthy here).

[Kenswing]

When was it changed to 10 yrs? I got my license in 2019 and it was 8 years.

Did you come from another state? When we got ours they told us that ours expired 10 years from the time our current licenses were issued in our old state.

[pgettinger01]

I think FL gives a ten (10) year license. So if you are tested and pass at 80 years old you are OK until 90 years old.

[scottiesrgreat@gmail.com]

It is a shame that this is the largest retirement community yet have no public transportation for folks that shouldn't drive. I am sure 95% would stop if they had a affordable option( and no, not everyone is wealthy here).

I would not use public transportation.

[noslices1]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

Maybe she just had to get home fast cause she had to pee and that extra 5 seconds to get around the roundabout was just too much. In 11 years here, I’ve never seen anyone in the wrong lane except for the people who make left turns in the roundabouts from the right lanes.

[NoMoSno]

Sadly, yes, it is true.

And yes, age can be a factor in not being able to drive safely. But it is the "not being ABLE to" that is the problem,. whether you are 17 or 87, if you are able to drive safely, then we can start discussing if you are responsible and safe behind a wheel.

But, people do age differently from each other and we need a way to screen out people that are unable to drive safely. One step could be testing more frequently as you get older. 10, 8, 6, 4, 2, and then every year. Maybe starting at 60, 78, 84, 88, 90, 91, 92, etc.
No, every 10 years is not true.
Renewal is every 8 years.
Every 6 years after 79.
Driver License Renewal Requirements/Options for Older Drivers - Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/florida-granddriver/driver-license-renewal-requirements-options-older-drivers/)

[NoMoSno]

I think FL gives a ten (10) year license. So if you are tested and pass at 80 years old you are OK until 90 years old.
Driver License Renewal Requirements/Options for Older Drivers - Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/florida-granddriver/driver-license-renewal-requirements-options-older-drivers/)

[Windguy]

For all those suggesting regular testing, please keep in mind that lack of a driver’s license won’t stop people from driving. My mom had a heart attack while driving at the age of 90. The cop who investigated the accident told me that her license had expired many years earlier. I had no idea.

Self driving cars are the only solution to this problem.

[PurePeach]

I was shocked when we went to get our Florida drivers licenses that they were good for ten years. I think it would be a good idea to shorten up that interval as your age goes up. Maybe when you hit 60 drop it down to five years. At 65 drop it to three years. At 80 you should be checked every year. At 90, weekly. lol

My husband and I just moved here at the end of October last year. My DL was issued for 9 years and his for 6. I’ll be 66 and he’ll be 86 this fall. So they’re not all for 10 years. :shrug::a040::a040:

[Neils]

Focus on 20 year olds with no license or insurance

[JMintzer]

Many people are very active at 65. And many are not, and are not capable of driving safely. It only takes one to kill someone.

And you are right, there is no simple solution. I don't know if it would be impossible to administer that many tests, but it certainly would be expensive.

I have patients, well below age 65 who have on foot in the grave and can't be trusted driving a car... It only takes one to kill someone...

Age is just a number...

[GrumpyOldMan]

Wrong.

I would never take public transportation - unless I was so disabled and unable to drive. In that case - would public transportation come to my house and driveway and wait for me to be wheeled out to the bus? Wouldn’t public transportation require those not fit to drive to get to a point of pick up and drop off?

Really unreasonable. I moved here to remain active in my older years. Having a car and driving is what makes active living possible. Yes - the day will come - where I am disabled - mentally and/or physically - but living in my current home will not be an option - then.

Just my opinion.

Well, there currently are public transport systems being tested that do come to your house and take you where you want to go. They are full autonomous self driving cars and vans. They are being tested in some cities around the country.

I read an article about a year ago that a company providing a taxi service was starting up here in the villages, and it will be using self driving cars.

I think that is a very viable alternative, even if I have to pay per ride, since most of the time my car sits in the garage not being used, but I still pay taxes, and insurance on it.

[GrumpyOldMan]

I have patients, well below age 65 who have on foot in the grave and can't be trusted driving a car... It only takes one to kill someone...

Age is just a number...

The question is, do you have patience with your patients, or are they patient with you?

[GrumpyOldMan]

Focus on 20 year olds with no license or insurance

It is possible to work on two problems at the same time.

[GrumpyOldMan]

My husband and I just moved here at the end of October last year. My DL was issued for 9 years and his for 6. I’ll be 66 and he’ll be 86 this fall. So they’re not all for 10 years. :shrug::a040::a040:

I was not aware of that, thank you. Based on my own situation at 71, I think 6 years between tests at 85 is too long. It all depends on the individual, but are some point we being to spiral down and health and capabilities can deteriorate quickly. For some that happens younger than others.

[graciegirl]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

I can understand how frightening that must have been. How could you tell her age from your vantage point inside your car unless you did in fact see her for a second or two rather close?

Let me also say that about two years ago when I had an out of the blue episode of an extremely low heart rate, (corrected by a pacemaker) I decided not to drive. I am 81. My husband who is one year younger does the driving in our family, and plays golf four days a week and trims the large bushes and trees all around the property and keeps up with his doctor checks at LEAST twice a year as do we all at our house. I still drive the cart to Laurel Manor from our home to paint. I still feel completely safe doing so and driving our precious daughter with me. That may change. If someone tells me I am not capable, I will listen.

It is very difficult, this issue, because aging affects us all differently. Almost impossible to make a one size fits all decision based on age.

Age is one factor in driving. As we all know there are many people who probably should not be at the wheel of a motor vehicle. Some still drive with their licenses revoked. We cannot seem to be able to legislate and enforce moral decisions. It is a worry to be sure.

[J1ceasar]

or until your the one getting hit ?



Here in America, I thought we were going to reserve punishment until you actually do something to be punished for. Sounds like the lady driving the wrong way needs a driving test, not everybody over some arbitrary age. My Dad was driving into his 90's. He quit driving on his own when he realized his dementia had progressed to the level that made him a danger to others. Nobody had to tell him he needed to be tested.

We used to teach respect for other people's rights, along with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty", and the now totally foreign concept of personal responsibility.

Maybe we ought to try that again.

[GrumpyOldMan]

For all those suggesting regular testing, please keep in mind that lack of a driver’s license won’t stop people from driving. My mom had a heart attack while driving at the age of 90. The cop who investigated the accident told me that her license had expired many years earlier. I had no idea.

Self driving cars are the only solution to this problem.

I agree with you completely. However, the fact that laws don't work, doesn't mean we should not have any. It is illegal to rob a bank - people still do.

[GrumpyOldMan]

We cannot seem to be able to legislate and enforce moral decisions.

This is one of the truest statements I have ever read on TOTV!

[JMintzer]

The question is, do you have patience with your patients, or are they patient with you?

Sometimes...

[Blueblaze]

The Supreme Court has ruled on a number of occasions that all RIGHTS can be limited by the Government.

The supreme court has determined that there are "Fundamental rights", which have a higher bar of requirements for the government to limit them. These include the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, etc.

You have a right to do anything you want to do as long as it is not limited or restricted by the government. The limits to those rights are call laws.

Laws are what limit or restrict rights. Laws are more limited when they restrict fundamental rights.

Driving is not on the list of fundamental rights. So, driving is a "right" you can do only as long as there is no law against it.

The Supreme Court has ruled that you have a fundamental right to travel on public roads. They have not ruled you have a right to drive on public roads. Therefore your "right" to drive extends only as far as state law permits.

So, you are right to the point that it is true you have the right to do anything you want to do - you are wrong in that does not mean it can not be regulated. Since driving has not been determined to be a fundamental right, there are virtually no limits on how the state can restrict or regulate driving.

That is why it is called a privilege because you can do it with permission. An illegal driver is someone that violates the rules/laws concerning driving. Driving without a license is illegal. Driving while intoxicated is illegal.

So, yes, you can drive without a license, but, the States can pass virtually ANY law restricting that "right", up to and including putting you in jail when you drive without a license. Many states have laws about driving without a license that limits the punishment to fines.


Well, there you go -- our "Living Constitution" (9 un-elected representatives from the lawyer's union) have told us "Shall not be infringed" really means "infringe all you want"!

Waitaminute... can someone point to the article or amendment that says the Supremes get to "interpret" the Constitution? Oh, I remember! It's not in the contract, it's in that Supreme Court ruling, Marbury vs. Madison, where the Supremes declared themselves the sole arbiters of what our contract with the gooberment actually says.

You can declare the moon made of green cheese and unicorn poop the source of all energy in the known universe. Doesn't make it so, even with a Harvard Law degree.

Regulation? I never said Congress is forbidden from putting some ground rules on our rights -- in fact I specifically supported it. It's legal when the regulations EXPAND the right for the majority, and don't specifically discriminate against the minority. A law saying we have to stop at stop signs is an example of that -- it makes vehicle transportation possible for all of us. A law saying old people must prove they are still competent is an example of age discrimination, and it is already specifically forbidden by the law.

Sentence everybody to a day at the DMV every year if you think you can get your fellow citizens to go along with it. At least it would be constitutional. But making an old man prove he's still competent, just because he has half a century of driving experience is not only un-Consitutional, it's downright stupid.

[JMintzer]

It is possible to work on two problems at the same time.

For the MVA? Not hardly... :icon_wink:

[BCBword]

I recently visited TV. There's much to like, but it seems that a car is essential. What do residents do if they live alone and have to quit driving? Can you survive with a golf cart?

[JMintzer]

I recently visited TV. There's much to like, but it seems that a car is essential. What do residents do if they live alone and have to quit driving? Can you survive with a golf cart?

Many do... They either borrow a neighbor's car in a pinch or bum a ride when necessary...

Personally, I'll keep a car (or two), along with a golf cart...

[Blueblaze]

It is a shame that this is the largest retirement community yet have no public transportation for folks that shouldn't drive. I am sure 95% would stop if they had a affordable option( and no, not everyone is wealthy here).

It sounds like a great idea until you ask who's going to pay for it. I bet half the reason you retired to Florida was for the low taxes. Even New York has to run their public transportation system at a loss, to keep it "affordable". Who pays the difference? New York City tax payers -- which is why nobody can afford to retire in New York City.

Frankly, I didn't move to Florida to spend my retirement savings on taxes for empty buses running around my neighborhood.

We already have a solution -- golf carts. We live in a community designed for old people that has special roads where you can drive a cheap little car that doesn't go over 20 mph and doesn't require a drivers license, for when you get too feeble to manage 3 tons of metal at 70 mph. And the beauty of it is, you don't have to hobble down to the street corner and wait for a bus to pick you up on their schedule.

And when you get even too feeble to handle a golf cart, you will discover that your house has appreciated so much that you can sell it and move into an assisted living center and quit driving altogether.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Well, there you go -- our "Living Constitution" (9 un-elected representatives from the lawyer's union) have told us "Shall not be infringed" really means "infringe all you want"!

Waitaminute... can someone point to the article or amendment that says the Supremes get to "interpret" the Constitution? Oh, I remember! It's not in the contract, it's in that Supreme Court ruling, Marbury vs. Madison, where the Supremes declared themselves the sole arbiters of what our contract with the gooberment actually says.

You can declare the moon made of green cheese and unicorn poop the source of all energy in the known universe. Doesn't make it so, even with a Harvard Law degree.

Regulation? I never said Congress is forbidden from putting some ground rules on our rights -- in fact I specifically supported it. It's legal when the regulations EXPAND the right for the majority, and don't specifically discriminate against the minority. A law saying we have to stop at stop signs is an example of that -- it makes vehicle transportation possible for all of us. A law saying old people must prove they are still competent is an example of age discrimination, and it is already specifically forbidden by the law.

Sentence everybody to a day at the DMV every year if you think you can get your fellow citizens to go along with it. At least it would be constitutional. But making an old man prove he's still competent, just because he has half a century of driving experience is not only un-Constitutional, it's downright stupid.

That is all interpretation. I will go with that Conservative hero's thoughts on rights:

Scalia's position, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." Further, it is not "a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."

[Ben Franklin]

Well, there you go -- our "Living Constitution" (9 un-elected representatives from the lawyer's union) have told us "Shall not be infringed" really means "infringe all you want"!

Waitaminute... can someone point to the article or amendment that says the Supremes get to "interpret" the Constitution? Oh, I remember! It's not in the contract, it's in that Supreme Court ruling, Marbury vs. Madison, where the Supremes declared themselves the sole arbiters of what our contract with the gooberment actually says.

You can declare the moon made of green cheese and unicorn poop the source of all energy in the known universe. Doesn't make it so, even with a Harvard Law degree.

Regulation? I never said Congress is forbidden from putting some ground rules on our rights -- in fact I specifically supported it. It's legal when the regulations EXPAND the right for the majority, and don't specifically discriminate against the minority. A law saying we have to stop at stop signs is an example of that -- it makes vehicle transportation possible for all of us. A law saying old people must prove they are still competent is an example of age discrimination, and it is already specifically forbidden by the law.

Sentence everybody to a day at the DMV every year if you think you can get your fellow citizens to go along with it. At least it would be constitutional. But making an old man prove he's still competent, just because he has half a century of driving experience is not only un-Consitutional, it's downright stupid.

Article 3 Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority...

Constitution also states in Article 10: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

I don't recall driving as one of the freedoms delegated to the US by the Constitution. I also don't recall any state making driving a right. If you don't like it, then you can try to get an Amendment passed. Good luck.

There are times, however, when the Supremes overstep their authority by legislating from the bench. One such court case was Santa Clara County vs Southern Pacific Railroad in 1886, we saw the Supreme Court make a judgement without any discussion or debate. The court clerk simply penned in to the summary, that corporations had personhood, and that act by the clerk is still considered law today, because corruption is in every branch of gov't.

[airstreamingypsy]

I've seen an old lady is a big older 4 door sedan going the wrong way on Powell Road, don't know what she did when she got to the circle. At least she was going slow. Lets talk about the Black Dodge Charger....... I've heard about it, but didn't actually see it, until I almost got run down, the other night. It was going north on Morse, turned right at Odell. It was flying, weaving around cars..... loud pipes. When it went by my at first I thought I was hearing a Harley. This guy is literally racing through The Villages....... I tried to get his plate # but couldn't and what good would it do, if the cops don't see him. Over 100 comments about him on Nextdoor, and no one can do anything. He is going to cause a terrible wreck, it's just a matter of time.

[La lamy]

Where I live half the year, at 80 years of age all drivers have to be retested every 2 years. There's also a stipulation that doctors need to inform the permit renewal agency if they see a patient that has a condition that would make their driving hazardous. I think this is a good system.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Where I live half the year, at 80 years of age all drivers have to be retested every 2 years. There's also a stipulation that doctors need to inform the permit renewal agency if they see a patient that has a condition that would make their driving hazardous. I think this is a good system.

Excellent.

[butlerism]

Boooyahhh

I am 56, I can barely drive.

Help!!!!!

[butlerism]

Old people bickering.
Love to watch a good fight with no outcome.

[Ellen Szmyr]

Maybe she was from England or where people drive on the left side of the road????

[Windguy]

I agree with you completely. However, the fact that laws don't work, doesn't mean we should not have any. It is illegal to rob a bank - people still do.
I suspect that the fraction of people who drive after being told not to is far greater than the fraction of people who rob banks.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Old people bickering.
Love to watch a good fight with no outcome.

:bigbow:

[GrumpyOldMan]

I suspect that the fraction of people who drive after being told not to is far greater than the fraction of people who rob banks.

I expect you are right.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Here in America, I thought we were going to reserve punishment until you actually do something to be punished for. Sounds like the lady driving the wrong way needs a driving test, not everybody over some arbitrary age. My Dad was driving into his 90's. He quit driving on his own when he realized his dementia had progressed to the level that made him a danger to others. Nobody had to tell him he needed to be tested.

We used to teach respect for other people's rights, along with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty", and the now totally foreign concept of personal responsibility.

Maybe we ought to try that again.

So, you decide that taking a test to be able to drive is punishment, and then use that punishment for an argument against taking tests. Okay.

Taking tests is a punishment. I will have to think about that for a while. It changes everything.

And personal responsibility. Yeah, no more driver's licenses. We can just trust everyone to drive safely and if a few people get killed, well that is the just the cost of freedom.

[Marjorie Hardman]

Welcome to TV. Been here 4 years and have seen 4 ther similar incidents. Still wouldn't go back to snow and ice.

[KarenandJohn]

Yesterday I was on Buena vista traveling north in the right lane Biking.
Her comes a car going south in the left lane of the North bound two lanes going the wrong way.
I start screaming at this person your going the wrong way. The best I could tell, it was a older lady in her 80's plus barely able to look over the dash. I pulled over, looked back as she was going the wrong way in to the round about, OMG!!!
Thank God the person in the Blue SUV slammed on his brakes as she turned left into one of the villages. Also a state body utility truck almost broad sided her as well and slammed on the brakes as everyone else coming into the round about did. I think she was oblivious to what was happening.
HMMMMM no one wants there freedom taken away but this lady almost cause injury to 4 vehicle and there passengers UGGHHHHHH

People in TV can have their driver’s license revoked, be declared legally blind or deaf and still drive a golf cart on the streets.

[FUSSY LADY]

License is renewed for 6 years when you are 80 and over.

[DaleDivine]

I was shocked when we went to get our Florida drivers licenses that they were good for ten years. I think it would be a good idea to shorten up that interval as your age goes up. Maybe when you hit 60 drop it down to five years. At 65 drop it to three years. At 80 you should be checked every year. At 90, weekly. lol
This is why we have so many old people moving to Florida. License is good for 10 years.
:pray::pray::ohdear:

[DaleDivine]

People in TV can have their driver’s license revoked, be declared legally blind or deaf and still drive a golf cart on the streets.

Had a friend that was legally blind, couldn't see the greens so we had to line him up.
Annnddd, you guessed it, he still drove to the courses and home.
:ohdear::ohdear:

[DaleDivine]

Did you come from another state? When we got ours they told us that ours expired 10 years from the time our current licenses were issued in our old state.
Mine is only good for 9 years.
:shocked::shocked:

[CoachKandSportsguy]

rights, many think/feel that rights are able to do anything they want until they get caught, and then its someone / something else's fault? reeks of entitlement, or ODD. . .

However, what the free license versus testing by govt comes down to is whether the government wants to be proactive or reactive. Government is inherently reactive, ie, your are innocent until proven guilty. we all love that, because the alternative is a negative proactive stance by oppressive governments.

the legal system is reactive, so yes, a proactive testing system is ideal for safety, but is expensive and somewhat counter to the concept that you are innocent until proven guilty. Why? people have twisted the concept of innocent to be interpreted as a right or an entitlement, but that argument doesn't stand up in a court of law, most times for the average non billionaire.

I reacted negative in my mind to Grumpy once because he disagreed with me, and I know that he is still wrong :boxing2: as he typed theory versus reality in my little area of knowledge, but, I read and learn from his comments, because he knows more than i do in many more areas, and I can learn something from everyone, thankfully. . . I am not so entitled to believe that bbs board members can't disagree with me or can't know more about topics than I do, ie, i don't take his typing personally . . .

sportsguy

[Normal]

Laws help us interact with others of the human race in safety. We would need no laws if only one person lived in one place. But the reality is the population is booming in TV. Laws are needed.

Since that is the reason we have laws, you have to know that the mentioned driver can’t function with driving privileges and others. I pray for the good of all she is removed from the roads soon.

It wouldn’t be a sin to have all drivers tested every 2 years after receiving the first SS check.

[GrumpyOldMan]

Laws help us interact with others of the human race in safety. We would need no laws if only one person lived in one place. But the reality is the population is booming in TV. Laws are needed.

Since that is the reason we have laws, you have to know that the mentioned driver can’t function with driving privileges and others. I pray for the good of all she is removed from the roads soon.

It wouldn’t be a sin to have all drivers tested every 2 years after receiving the first SS check.


I agree with you.

Sadly laws are hard. Some are unenforcible, some are selectively enforced, some are unconstitutional and push a narrow agenda, and on and on. Eventually, people no longer obey the law because there is little to no deterrent. And it is sad that there has to be a punishment to get people to just get along with each other.

[EviesGP]

FL licenses are good for 8yrs, but expire on your birthday(of the 8th year), so mine is 8 1/2yrs from date of issue. When I applied for mine(2019), there was an older gent at the next desk(with his son), and was NOT happy, as he was surrendering his driver's license in exchange for a FL(non-driver)ID. I felt bad for him, but understood. It was just a bit humbling.

[billethkid]

FL licenses are good for 8yrs, but expire on your birthday(of the 8th year), so mine is 8 1/2yrs from date of issue. When I applied for mine(2019), there was an older gent at the next desk(with his son), and was NOT happy, as he was surrendering his driver's license in exchange for a FL(non-driver)ID. I felt bad for him, but understood. It was just a bit humbling.

A major milestone in the aging or declining health/ability.....not to be trivialized in it's emotional impact on an individual.
(my comment is not intended in any way that anybody has!).

Major change in life style, dependence and freedom.