Agreed--here is my standard response whenever someone comments about a news report of an older driver in a crash: "Take their license away from them!!"
Here is the thing, you can be a poor driver at any age.
If, as a society we are truly interested in road safety, we need to retest after the initial license. (not just "renew" every four years for Seniors, instead of six--what does that solve? (Maine))
Why not do it on a periodic schedule that is easy to remember: ten-year anniversaries from your very first license?
Thus, start at age 16 for example. Then, at age 26 you get another written, vision (BTW, a REAL vision test, by a licensed optometrist!), and road test.
Same at ages 36, 46, 56, 66, 76, 86, 96, 106, etc. , or 10 year anniversaries of whatever age you started. If you fail, you have 30 days to study up, get retrained, get new eyeglasses so you might pass the tests again.
People can be a menace on the road at any age: drinking/drug problems, arrogance, inexperience, simple lack of knowledge.
Expensive, you say? Factor the cost of hospital bills, rehab, police, ambulance, fire, road workers, etc. Not to mention deaths. What is THAT cost?
Within a generation or two, the culture behind the wheel would change, and people would stop thinking they could drive ** just fine after a few drinks...** and other poor presumptions.
If we are truly serious about road safety....and not just grandstanding. Are we serious? What does your state legislator think?