I just can't imagine anyone on FR saying something deliberately provactive. Riiiiight.
So you think banning everyone over 50 will solve both the hazardous driver and dependence on oil problems, eh? I can tell you're not in my part of California. Around here, there are thousands of under-50 wackos behind the wheel causing all kinds of accidents and near-accidents. They're driving without licenses or insurance, because they aren't supposed to be here in the first place. And don't even get me started on how many times some chickie about smashes into me while I'm in a crosswalk, because she's checking her makeup or text messaging her boyfriend while driving.
Nah that was totally just kidding. (but it was a quarter of those over 50, not all of 'em.)
I was saying that there are some medical conditions which are known to have some likelihood of leaving somebody suddenly unable to control an automobile. Some types of epilepsy within 6 months of the last seizure would serve as an example.
I was also recalling a very sad accident near my rural home where an elderly gentleman had a catastrophic heat attack, crossed the road and drove into a car. He and the equally nice elderly gentlemen in the other car both died.
SO I was wondering if there might be numbers, probabilities, whatever, that could lead to appropriate "pulling" of a driving license in some demographics.
My understanding is that laws of reason do not generally apply to California, however. Your mileage definitely may vary.