Blixy Sticks

Did anyone hear that the old man was one of Hitler's Nazi Death Camp Commanders?

Tristan Scott

I did, and you ignored it.

Sauron

Apparently they think the old fart was fleeing the scene of *another* wreck he had just caused.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in563636.shtml

donaldkilroy

From linked article in the above posting:
What his motivation was? How about simply not wanting to get caught. Maybe he has high insurance or accidents on his record and one more would mean loosing his license.

What's confusing about hitting another car. It's either it is or it isn't hit.

Who is not scared when they've either caused or been a victim of an automobile accident?

Being scared and/or not wanting to get caught is not a legitimate reason to leave the scene of an accident (hit and run). In any case, if this was the situation then what he did in the market needs to be pursued as a criminal investigation. Someone needs to be held accountable, be it the old man, his family for not reporting him let alone taking his driving privileges away themselves, the DMV that gave him his license, the people who videotaped him crashing into a retaining wall at a birthday party and most of all the old man himself!

ohwilleke

A few thoughts:

(1) If fewer older people were permitted to drive, there would be more demand for public transporation, and economies of scale would bring down costs.

(2) Many people who are incapable of driving are also to frail and fearful to handle riding a bus. They have to climb high stairs to get to seating, the bus often starts before boarding riders have sat down, there is often insufficient seating in high demand periods, and buses, for better or worse, are also frequented by drunks and poor, unemployed young adults who scare frail elderly people to death. The elderly also often have a very hard time learning anything new, and learning how to use a bus system does take a modest leaniing curve.

(3) Traditional "local" bus service only works in high density areas outside surburbs and rural areas. Park and ride bus service can work well in suburbs, but isn't what the elderly need. Of course, one solution is for the elderly who are unable to drive to move to places that do have viable transporation options, such as apartment buildings near grocery stores. Almost every older person who does not die suddenly spends some of their last years outside the home where they spent most of their life.

(4) Better insurance underwriting could be a big solution to the problem. There are relatively brief tests that can do a decent job of predicting the risk of a particular person driving. They aren't necessarily easily done at a DMV office, but an insurance company wouldn't be out of line, in my opinion, to require drivers over a certain age, say 70, where risk per mile on average starts to go up a great deal, to submit to a half an hour test of driving abilities every year or two, which would influence insurance rates. High risk drivers would be found uninsurable or see their insurance rates go sky high. Older, but healthy, drivers would see their insurance rates stay at managable levels. Many older drivers on fixed incomes might psychologically respond better to deciding that it is no longer affordable to drive now that their insurance rates have tripled based on a driving test, than they would to being told by a government agency that they can't drive. All the government would have to do is require proof of insurance.

While insurance can't replace a lost life or serious injury, it is also true with the elderly, as it is with all high risk drivers, that most accidents are far less serious. And, in a less serious accident, like crashing into the front window of a strip mall where no one is actually hurt, or fender benders, insurance is a fair remedy for the harm caused by allowing the person to drive.

(5) Alerting people to their own driving abilities better also calls for a public relations campaign comparable to that for drunk driving.

I don't know how many people have come into my office at age 70 or 80, exclaiming that they must be great drivers and outraged because they haven't had a ticket in 50 years. Yet, the classic scenario is for someone to be a perfect driver for decades, and then to have tickets start appearing, followed by minor accidents, followed by serious accidents or close calls. Insurance companies and the "point system" for driver's license revocation, may need to take tickets that would ordinarily be considered minor, more seriously for high risk drivers, like teenagers and older drivers.

Worse yet, since short term memory is often the first thing to go in early stage dementia, the guilty older driver often doesn't even remember having been negligent after the fact and honestly does not know that he or she caused the accident.

At 35, a ticket for running a red light is likely to be a lapse which is simply a function of the fact that no one is perfect and that people drive a great deal. When someone runs a red light at age 70, it is likely to be an early warning for a far more serious accident that could happen later as the driver's abilities deteriorate.