Suddenly, the sound of shattering glass and contorting metal.

Screams puncture the air – a vehicle has careered into a shop.

It emerges the driver is an 89-year-old woman.

She’s made a frightening mistake – most likely having the car in “drive” instead of “reverse” – but has escaped unscathed.

As is often the case, the accident is followed by calls for more stringent checks on older drivers.

It’s a perennial topic.

If L-platers are the pariahs of the roads, those at the other end of their driving careers – the elderly – aren’t treated much better.

Those calling for mandatory testing of elderly drivers make some sound points.

As we age, our cognitive and physical abilities deteriorate and we are more likely to be on multiple medications at once.

Our capacity to divide our attention between multiple things at once – a skill required for good driving – is also diminished.

But the cold data suggests the twilight years do not necessarily turn once-safe drivers into rolling disaster zones.

Figures from the Monash University Accident and Research Centre suggest older drivers are pretty much as safe as anyone else.

In Victoria, there’s no compulsory test for older drivers whereas in NSW, drivers over 85 must sit a biennial driving test or opt for a restricted licence that limits their driving.

And yet crash statistics for older drivers in both states are eerily similar.

The ageing process is a different for everyone – you can’t compare one 85-year-old to another. As such, any test should be function-based, not age-based.

While some of our abilities decline over age, others, like wisdom and sound judgement, tend to increase.

Older drivers have long ceased thinking their car is an extension of their genitalia and they’re more likely to drive at the speed of a funeral cortege than a Formula One driver.

Rather than discriminate on them based on age, we should rely on our seniors to make the best decision for themselves – and other road users.