Old people are a threat to road traffic! The topic comes up here again and again and in the thread around FallSoWireless’s grandfather germinated a discussion about it, which, however, could not be meaningful due to the lack of meaningful figures.Previous: The topic is merely a thesis and deliberately very provocatively chosen. I am curious if there are not the first indisputable objections in the course of the discussion. Probably the one then did not read more than the topic. I In the current motor world, there is the statistics that have been missing so far for a qualitative evaluation of the topic. Unfortunately, I have not got the thing at hand anymore.In each case, percentages of the kilometers driven and shares of the accidents are shown.In the rough it looks like that the drivers between 18 and 25 only get a relatively small part of the kilometers driven for you, but a percentage of many times the accidents. group! The only group, which also causes percentage accidents as kilometers, is the one, at 65 years and more on the hump. However, this is from memory and after eye measurement of the beams but about 1:1.4. In any case a significantly (!) better ratio than with beginners. Likewise, the tendency is to notice that the ratio of driven kilometers and accidents from ~40 (from memory) slowly and strictly monotonously gets worse. The greatest potential danger in road traffic is, according to groups, the very young driver. Second largest of the pensioner, but with considerable distance! What is not examined more precisely in statistics is accident liability in the second row. In other words, accidents caused by indirect provocation, e.g. by a creeping pensioner. As a result, one cannot make a proper statement here either. Nor is the group 65+ divided again. Ergo It is not possible to say whether the group 70+ is critical. I consider it critical to assume to the ADAC that this inaccuracy has been chosen in the awareness that the differences within the group are negligible. I do not think much of the association. However, I see through these statistics the thesis that very old people can cope with the traffic situation less well than “younger” (explicitly NOT “young”. I therefore still consider it useful, I don’t think it would take much more than a simple visual test, a simple reaction test and a rudimentary test for the mobility of the head. I guess that would eliminate the actual risk potential for the most part. And, of course, the limits for such a thing should be reasonably set. The reaction time of a thirty-year-old can no longer be expected, just as little as abs Olut error-free vision. Only the rough cases, which the age-related inferior abilities can no longer compensate by experience and appropriate caution should be the aim of such a thing. Someone of the 2 seconds reaction time, can no longer turn the head or the environment can only schematically perceive belongs no longer on the road. But much more urgent I see the group up to 25. Here there is much more potential for optimization of the accident event. However, it is less because of the lack of basic physical fitness, but rather because of psycholgotic factors. It is also clear to me that this group, just like the particularly old drivers, will never produce as little accidents as those of the 35-40 year olds. My personal impression is that especially young drivers in terrifyingly many individual cases do not adhere to speed limits at all or almost no assessment for overtaking possibilities This is why I would call for a tightening of the fines here. This really hurts the self-employed, often not even financially, and therefore creates the necessary pressure to keep the ball flat against their own feelings. At the same time, I find it extremely useful that the stick includes the carrot, at the same time imposing binding measures towards “driver training”. The resulting costs are likely to be considerably low. I would be happy to have a scan or other useful playback of the data.