Instead of going through life as a moron, why don't you try learning something before spouting off?

I never said that we shouldn't armor vehicles because they're going to get blown up anyway, but I guess you're too stupid to understand. I said that armor isn't a guarantee that you won't get blown up anyway and also has some drawbacks such as decreased maneuverability and acceleration. Both of those characteristics can be useful in an urban warfare environment where the ability to avoid getting hit is often better than the ability to absorb a hit. Likewise, unless you put heafty armor on the underside of the vehicles, then the vehicles are going to be very vulnerable to buried charges. If the warhead on an AT4 can punch through 400mm of armor, then a 10 pound charge buried in the road is likely to be able to go through at least an inch or two of steel. How much armor is enough?

If you're actually up to reading instead of just spouting off your typically ignorant nonsense, you might want to try reading this article. It shows that the issue isn't as straightforward or as simple as it seems.

You're also too ignorant to note that I never said we can eliminate driver testing, moron. Testing and licensing IN AND OF ITSELF accomplishes little. Once someone has passed the tests (typically as a teenager), they're likely to never be tested again. We have millions of licensed drivers on the road and still manage to rack up some 2 million accidents a year, with an average of over 800 highway deaths each week. Sounds like the testing isn't adequate to me - there are still way too many bad drivers on the road.