So I'm beginning to change my mind about Senior Citizens driving...

[Vic]

Obviously, what with recent tragically fatal accidents involving highly negligent senior citizens in Oregon and California, and the very recent non-fatal accident in Florida, the capability of the elderly to safely drive has been in the news a lot lately. But what's more, in the last 2 weeks, I have witnessed some rather dangerous driving by senior citizens.
Just minutes ago, on my drive home from work, I was following behind an elderly gentleman in a newer Volvo who blew right through a red light without even touching the brake, causing cross-traffic to lock-up brakes, etc. I caught up with him at the next light, pulled alongside him, and gestured for him to roll down his window. Our conversation was like this:

Me: You realize that you blew through a red light back there, don't you?
Him: No, I didn't.
Me: Yes, you did. You didn't see?
He refuses to answer and begins to roll his window back up as though indignant.

Me: You might want to get yourself checked out, pal... you almost killed someone back there.

What blew me away is that he obviously didn't see the red light at all, despite the fact that at this location it is clearly obvious. IMO, people who run red lights are FAR more dangerous than any speeder.
Alright, rant over. Just be careful out there, folks. There are old people behind the wheel of expensive new cars who pay $5 bucks/month in full coverage insurance and yet are more dangerous than a 16 year-old behind the wheel of '69 Nova with a 454.

 

I agree with your entire post. Those are exactly my sentiments.

 

[Vic]

I thought I might clarify: this wasn't a red light as in the light just turned red and he had been chasing the yellow. This was red as in RED. Red as in I only waited a few seconds before it turned green again.

 

[BruinEd03]

I say mandatory vision test at the DMV every 2 years after the age of 65.

-Ed

 

[Zugzwang152]

Originally posted by: BruinEd03
I say mandatory vision test at the DMV every 2 years after the age of 65.

-Ed

sometimes its not even vision though, the people are just too senile or just plain ignorant.

 

[MacBaine]

Teenagers are still far more dangerous, and many times more likely to injur/kill somebody behind the wheel. While I agree that as somebody gets older, they should be tested more regularly. At least most older people have had many many years of experiance behind the wheel, and most of the time they drive slower and more cautiously.

 

Originally posted by: MacBaine
Teenagers are still far more dangerous, and many times more likely to injur/kill somebody behind the wheel. While I agree that as somebody gets older, they should be tested more regularly. At least most older people have had many many years of experiance behind the wheel, and most of the time they drive slower and more cautiously.

But on the other hand, their reflexes, eyesight and muscular abilities are often much worse than that of your normal teen. I personally feel that teens make a conscious decision to drive recklessly, while senior citizens often don't have any clue what they're doing behind the wheel. That, IMHO, makes seniors more dangerous.

 

[Eli]

My dad is 60, but he drives like hes 20. 😛

 

I'm 19, and I drive like I'm 70. Honestly - I don't think there's anyone on these forums who is more afraid of getting a traffic ticket than me. And I've never even gotten a ticket before! 😛

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: MacBaine
Teenagers are still far more dangerous, and many times more likely to injur/kill somebody behind the wheel. While I agree that as somebody gets older, they should be tested more regularly. At least most older people have had many many years of experiance behind the wheel, and most of the time they drive slower and more cautiously.

But on the other hand, their reflexes, eyesight and muscular abilities are often much worse than that of your normal teen. I personally feel that teens make a conscious decision to drive recklessly, while senior citizens often don't have any clue what they're doing behind the wheel. That, IMHO, makes seniors more dangerous.

Nah Teenagers are more dangerous because they haven't any common sense for the most part!

 

[MacBaine]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: MacBaine
Teenagers are still far more dangerous, and many times more likely to injur/kill somebody behind the wheel. While I agree that as somebody gets older, they should be tested more regularly. At least most older people have had many many years of experiance behind the wheel, and most of the time they drive slower and more cautiously.

But on the other hand, their reflexes, eyesight and muscular abilities are often much worse than that of your normal teen. I personally feel that teens make a conscious decision to drive recklessly, while senior citizens often don't have any clue what they're doing behind the wheel. That, IMHO, makes seniors more dangerous.

While it is true that they may have slower reflexes, IMHO the cause of most accidents isn't slow reflexes, it's driving recklessly. 16-21 yr olds cause far more accidents than any other age group, mainly because they are young, inexperienced, hyper, etc. While teens do make a concious decision to drive recklessly, this doesn't make the elderly more dangerous.

 

[McCarthy]

It's quite simple, but politically unpopular - everyone, from the snot nosed brat with his shiney new license, to the GAP addicted SUV driving soccer mom to the WWII vet having flashbacks of the Normandy invasion at the stoplight should be tested. OFTEN.

And not this "ok, drive around the block at 15 mph, don't kill anyone. Good, you pass" test. Real driving test, paid for by the motorist wishing to renew their license, good for 2 years. With a physical certificate from a doctor. Vision test might as well stay at the DMV since they already are used to doing it.

But of course the public won't go for it. Because we have a RIGHT, by God, to drive a car. And to do it cheaply. And without inconvenience! We're Americans!

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: MacBaine
Teenagers are still far more dangerous, and many times more likely to injur/kill somebody behind the wheel. While I agree that as somebody gets older, they should be tested more regularly. At least most older people have had many many years of experiance behind the wheel, and most of the time they drive slower and more cautiously.

But on the other hand, their reflexes, eyesight and muscular abilities are often much worse than that of your normal teen. I personally feel that teens make a conscious decision to drive recklessly, while senior citizens often don't have any clue what they're doing behind the wheel. That, IMHO, makes seniors more dangerous.

Nah Teenagers are more dangerous because they haven't any common sense for the most part!

While it's certainly true that teenagers without common sense are probably more dangerous (I was one once!), you senile senior citizens should definitely be tested as well. I'm all for increasing the testing requirements for both groups.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: McCarthy
It's quite simple, but politically unpopular - everyone, from the snot nosed brat with his shiney new license, to the GAP addicted SUV driving soccer mom to the WWII vet having flashbacks of the Normandy invasion at the stoplight should be tested. OFTEN.

And not this "ok, drive around the block at 15 mph, don't kill anyone. Good, you pass" test. Real driving test, paid for by the motorist wishing to renew their license, good for 2 years. With a physical certificate from a doctor. Vision test might as well stay at the DMV since they already are used to doing it.

But of course the public won't go for it. Because we have a RIGHT, by God, to drive a car. And to do it cheaply. And without inconvenience! We're Americans!

i agree, that sounds like the fairest and most effective way.

 

[Cyberian]

Originally posted by: McCarthy
It's quite simple, but politically unpopular - everyone, from the snot nosed brat with his shiney new license, to the GAP addicted SUV driving soccer mom to the WWII vet having flashbacks of the Normandy invasion at the stoplight should be tested. OFTEN.

And not this "ok, drive around the block at 15 mph, don't kill anyone. Good, you pass" test. Real driving test, paid for by the motorist wishing to renew their license, good for 2 years. With a physical certificate from a doctor. Vision test might as well stay at the DMV since they already are used to doing it.

But of course the public won't go for it. Because we have a RIGHT, by God, to drive a car. And to do it cheaply. And without inconvenience! We're Americans!

Bingo !!

 

[Thoreau]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: MacBaine
Teenagers are still far more dangerous, and many times more likely to injur/kill somebody behind the wheel. While I agree that as somebody gets older, they should be tested more regularly. At least most older people have had many many years of experiance behind the wheel, and most of the time they drive slower and more cautiously.

But on the other hand, their reflexes, eyesight and muscular abilities are often much worse than that of your normal teen. I personally feel that teens make a conscious decision to drive recklessly, while senior citizens often don't have any clue what they're doing behind the wheel. That, IMHO, makes seniors more dangerous.

Nah Teenagers are more dangerous because they haven't any common sense for the most part!

While it's certainly true that teenagers without common sense are probably more dangerous (I was one once!), you senile senior citizens should definitely be tested as well. I'm all for increasing the testing requirements for both groups.

Easy Fix:
Make the driving tests here as difficult to pass as they are in Germany. Problem solved.


BTW: I'm 20 years old, had my license only since I was 18, and the thing doesn't expire until i'm *60*!!! Arizona, of course, has some of the highest speed limits I've ever seen for a metro area, nice combo.

PS: I'm not complaining. I drive to work every day anywhere form 75-95mph depending on how well traffic is moving.

 

[tcsenter]

There are old people behind the wheel of expensive new cars who pay $5 bucks/month in full coverage insurance and yet are more dangerous than a 16 year-old behind the wheel of '69 Nova with a 454.

Statistically, that's not true. Elderly drivers as a group rank right behind teens in terms of risk.

 

[Cyberian]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

There are old people behind the wheel of expensive new cars who pay $5 bucks/month in full coverage insurance and yet are more dangerous than a 16 year-old behind the wheel of '69 Nova with a 454.

Statistically, that's not true. Elderly drivers as a group rank right behind teens in terms of risk.

Nothing to do with this particular thread, but I've been in a long-running discussion about this with a family member.
Do you have a link to those statistics?
(I suck at teh Google.)

 

[Medea]

Originally posted by: BruinEd03
I say mandatory vision test at the DMV every 2 years after the age of 65.

-Ed

Many states, if not the majority, require vision tests when renewing driver licenses so I don't think this alone is going to help.

My concern is that reflexes/response time is drastically slower in senior citizens. Actually, 65 is young compared to the age of some real seniors - I'm talking about 75+ and 80+. These guys drive like the one Vic posted about. They're not even aware of some of the things they do that's dangerous and resent it if you point it out to them. They're the ones that scare me.

 

[tcsenter]

Nothing to do with this particular thread, but I've been in a long-running discussion about this with a family member. do you have a link to those statistics?

Nope, but I saw an interview with a representative from some national insurance industry group that publishes all the highway/driver risk information.