[deanc]

> Older people in the UK already have free bus passes and various other substantial concessions regarding public transport. Cars are dangerous, and if you can't see clearly, you're obviously not fit to drive. It's true that there will be negative impacts on people who will fail the eye tests, and we should be compassionate, but ultimately those people aren't safe behind the wheel, and put other peoples lives at risk, not just their own.

This is an absurd take. I grew up in a town of ~60,000 people in the UK. The public transport, was, and _still_ is terrible. To get to the nearby shopping center which was the only place with bowling and a movie theatre, and any shops that weren't charity shops involved 2 trains and a bus taking about an hour and a half. A drive would be 20 minutes and a negotiation with my parents to give me a lift.

Nowadays my mother is in her 70s and lives in this same town, and drives into the countryside every day to take her mental health walks. Without this, she probably wouldn't be here today. Taking her car away from her would be giving her a death sentence to rot at home on a council estate that she hates living in.

> The UK has plenty of public transport options and places where people can live with amenities close by

I mean this simply isn't true. You must live in London or a bubble.

[newdee]

But if she’s unfit to drive, should she still be allowed to drive?

[deanc]

Maybe I should have snipped the first part of the paragraph, but no absolutely not. If you're unfit to drive you should have your license taken away.

I was commenting primarily on the suggestion that all these old people who rely on their vehicles will suddenly be able to use a functional public transport system - allowing them to get around freely. This is simply not true outside of London.