Should states reduce the number of qualified drivers?

[Construct]

That would be in-egalitarian and antidemocratic, because it would correctly perceive that some people are better than others and deserve more rights. So a democracy would never enact that.

The other problem would be forcing people to maintain and upgrade their cars in a timely manner. You may force John Q. Teenager to only drive a subcompact, but you also need to make him drive something other than a dilapidated Yugo equipped with dollar-store brake pads.

[adaher]

It’s a license. We recognize that only certain people are qualified to be doctors, or pilots, and we should be the same way with drivers.

[Jackmannii]

@Do Not Taunt

And my point is that the reason that elderly or just plain poor drivers are able to keep their licenses is because the bar that the test sets is too low.

I doubt this is the problem with the statistically most dangerous group on the road - young/teenage drivers, who have the incentive and know-how to pass driving tests, but then go out with their buddies and drive recklessly/at high speeds.

@hkepotat

Having colored license plates based on the grades and driving abilities of the primary driver would be nice too. That way, I know that someone is just a really bad driver, and I should avoid them

Those type of plates already exist.

[elbows]

Careful what you wish for! Or are you imagining they’ll be denying car ownership to young people with lightening fast reflexes? I’ve got a feeling those reaching 50, who’s reactions times are scientifically proven to be slowing, will be the first forced onto mass transit.

[John_Mace]

@adaher

If more people were denied licenses to the point where driving was actually a privilege rather than a nearly universal thing, I think you’d find voter support for better mass transit to go way up.

No, you’d see voter support to stop denying so many people licenses.

[steronz]

@robert_columbia

What if there was a much finer set of graduations in driver’s licensing? E.g. we could have a minimal driver’s license that almost anyone with a reasonably functioning brain and basic driving skills could get but that limited one to slow subcompacts that are jam-packed with safety bumpers and then establish a series of license upgrades that are progressively harder to get. E.g. most people could probably make it to Level 2 and qualify to drive most ordinary family cars, many could reach Level 3 and qualify to drive sportier performance-oriented cars, and a smaller, highly skilled, and very well behaved minority could get the Level 4 and 5 licenses that allow them to drive sports cars and whatnot. Level 6 and 7 licenses could represent the elite of the elite in skill and behavior and be used as screening criteria for, say, hiring taxi drivers or chauffeurs for the rich.

For example, you could have a law providing that in order to keep a Level 4 License, you can’t have more than one traffic ticket a year. If you get two in a year, you drop down to at most a Level 3 until you go a year with only one additional ticket. If this is your first Level 4 to Level 3 drop in the past ten years, you can get your Level 4 license back by completing rigorous skill exams and a thesis at the College of Traffic Science as long as you don’t get a third traffic ticket that year.

I could get behind something like this, along with periodic testing to determine driving level.

[sarcasm]
Many states already have something like this for motorcycle endorsements. In my state, if you pass your written test, you can go out and buy a 1300cc Suzuki Huyabusa, but you can’t ride it at night until you go pass your riding test on a little 150cc thumper.
[/sarcasm]

But seriously, many states do have graduated driving privileges now for young drivers, but AFAIK they’re automatic based on age – first you can drive with an adult in daylight hours, and then solo in daylight hours, and then any time. The only change would be to make those various conditions skill-based instead of age-based. I dunno, the devil is in the details, but I’m not opposed to the idea in theory. The EPA might also get behind it if it forced a lot of drivers into smaller, more fuel efficient cars.

[Eva_Luna]

@Voyager

Come to think of it, there is a practical first step - banning cars from city centers. Transit already exists, high density reduces the average trip length, and reclaiming parking places would be great. You could allow buses, of course, and maybe clean cabs and Uber cars, but that is about it. You’d also clean up the air a lot, and make it easier for delivery vehicles to move around, reducing business costs.
Doesn’t quite eliminate drivers (except for those who live in the city) but it would help reduce the number of trips.

You’d need to make some kind of allowances for people with impairments that make it difficult or impossible to walk or use public transportation, and for people who need to pick up or deliver large things.

[davida03801]

Yep. Lets get everyone herded back to their villages, working the fields and bring up the local economy. While we are at it too much electricity in the world and lets shut that down also.

Going to be a lot of fun living on the liberal serf plantation.