Annual Driving Tests for the Elderly?
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: D Walford on 26 Jun 2010 22:03 On 27/06/2010 10:04 AM, Albm&ctd wrote: > In article<4c2470bc$0$28646$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, > dwalford(a)internode.on.net says... >> There are certainly plenty of hopeless drivers at 60+ but suggesting its >> 50:50 is rubbish, I'm almost in that age group so I know a lot of people >> in their late 50's early 60's and I can't think of anyone I know who has >> had a car accident in a very long time. >> > Aside from poopy the drivers seat. Is that a problem you experience Al? Daryl
From: John_H on 26 Jun 2010 22:39 D Walford wrote: >On 27/06/2010 10:04 AM, John_H wrote: > >> Downside might be the price (they don't come cheap).... Google >> *drivewear* to find them. >> >I think my last pair was about $450.00 so not cheap at all. >Drivewear looks interesting, do you use them indoors or do you carry >another pair for that? I've got a pair for each vehicle, so they never leave a car unless I'm wearing them. I almost always wear them for daytime driving, but never at night. AFAIK DriveWear don't offer photochromatic in bifocal or graduated lenses (I've never been able to get on with the latter) so I've only got polarised sunnies... which have been vastly better than genuine Polaroid prescription lenses or clip ons. They're fine in anything from bright sunlight to a full cloud cover. It's not unusual to leave the car and forget to change over but, like Polaroids, they're not particularly good indoors or under artificial light. Around $350 (lenses only) from an optometrist IIRC but you could probably do a lot better online. -- John H
From: John_H on 26 Jun 2010 22:55 John_H wrote: > >AFAIK DriveWear don't offer photochromatic in bifocal or graduated >lenses (I've never been able to get on with the latter) so I've only >got polarised sunnies... Correction: According to their FAQ polarised photochromatic are available in progressive (but not bifocal). -- John H
From: atec7 7 ""atec77" on 26 Jun 2010 23:00 D Walford wrote: > On 27/06/2010 10:04 AM, Albm&ctd wrote: >> In article<4c2470bc$0$28646$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, >> dwalford(a)internode.on.net says... >>> There are certainly plenty of hopeless drivers at 60+ but suggesting its >>> 50:50 is rubbish, I'm almost in that age group so I know a lot of people >>> in their late 50's early 60's and I can't think of anyone I know who has >>> had a car accident in a very long time. >>> >> Aside from poopy the drivers seat. > > Is that a problem you experience Al? > > > Daryl Many of Al's posts say lots about his personal problems and traits your question is in fact redundant as the poop is a certainty
From: Albm&ctd on 27 Jun 2010 00:29
In article <i06erq$rdo$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, atec7 7 <""atec77\"@ hotmail.com"> says... > D Walford wrote: > > On 27/06/2010 10:04 AM, Albm&ctd wrote: > >> In article<4c2470bc$0$28646$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, > >> dwalford(a)internode.on.net says... > >>> There are certainly plenty of hopeless drivers at 60+ but suggesting its > >>> 50:50 is rubbish, I'm almost in that age group so I know a lot of people > >>> in their late 50's early 60's and I can't think of anyone I know who has > >>> had a car accident in a very long time. > >>> > >> Aside from poopy the drivers seat. > > > > Is that a problem you experience Al? > > > > > > Daryl > Many of Al's posts say lots about his personal problems and traits > > > your question is in fact redundant as the poop is a certainty > No no, you've fallen for cupcakes Katie Sagal (Peggy Bundy) voice.. and alluring looks. Al -- I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone. http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html |