Chris Tolley wrote:
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 23:24:37 -0000, Stimpy wrote:

I've still not heard a compelling reason why mandatory periodic
re-testing isn't a good idea

Logistics? If one presumes that people take a test and then drive for
40 years on average, then it follows that he testing system has to
cope
with 2.5% of the drivers per annum. Give people a test, say every 5
years, and it will have to cope with 20%. That's an awful lot of
appointments to fit in.

Yes but I'm not sure that's a *compelling* reason. If the standard of
driving is as bad as we're led to believe then presumably the cost of repeat
testing would be offset to some degree by the reduced consequential cost of
accidents.

If we can academically test all 16 and 18 year olds every year then surely
the logistics involved in testing (say) 4 million drivers (?) a year aren't
insurmountable