Per the horiffic story referenced below this problem is getting so common lately it’s almost a daily occurance somewhere nationwide. The most typical scenario is that the older person confuses the brake for accelerator, the car takes off and the driver panics and squashes the accelerator thinking it’s the brake. Property damage or (insome cases) mass carnage ensuses.
No one wants to give up their car keys, but how are we going to solve this increasing problem?
This has been mentioned in the other threads as well: everyone, no matter what their age, should be retested every five years or so. Males under 25 cause more accidents than do the elderly, do they not? And people in their 30s and 40s develop health and eyesight problems, too. So let’s not demonize the elderly: everyone should be periodically retested.
Problem is that it’s not just eyesight and health. Most frequently it’s a mental problem, as noted by the OP. (Also, beyond the issue of brake/gas pedal confusion, it seems to me that older people are simply more prone to be inattentive). How do you test for that?
My wife and kids were nearly killed by a 90 year old neighbor a few years ago. He backed the car out of his driveway, across the street and into a neighbor’s backyard, plowing through 7 foot high hedge. Then he came charging out of the neighbor’s backyard at a different point, plowing through another line of hedges. Then he stopped the car, then started up again, heading straight for my family who were walking down the block. He narrowly missed them, as they scattered to either side of his car - he went down the middle and smashed into the fence of yet another neighbor. Then he got out of the car and walked around waving his arms and babbling incoherently.
When the guy realized what he had done he promptly sold his car and has not driven since. But I don’t know if there was anything that could have been done in advance. He seems like a decent enough fellow as he putters around in his yard.
It’s a problem.
The causes for the young and the old causing accidents are very different. The young are full of hormones and stupidity and no testing is needed to ascertain that. Al you can do is make sure they have insurance which will cover them.
The elderly are a different kettle of fish. Some may be perfectly capable of driving while other are loosing reflexes and ability and eyesight and other physical conditions. This can be evaluated with testing so the dangerous can be taken off the roads. My 80 something neighbor totalled a car and went right out and bought another one. She was so blind she could not write her checks and I had to do it for her every month. She clearly did not belong behind the wheel.
Part of the problem is that the elderly have much more influence as voters and you mess with them at your own risk.
Maybe it’s because I’m young, but I don’t understand how anyone can mess this up. Accelerator’s on the right, brake is on the left. If you’re driving a stick, clutch is on the far left. You figure these people have been driving for 50 years with the same arrangement, so what makes it difficult all of a sudden?
I’m 80 years old and I agree with Eve, et al, that those of us in the advanced age group should be tested at every renewal. A California license is good for 5 years regardless of age. For 70 (or so) or older a two year interval would be better. However, this would cost money because of the increased volume of testing and renewals and people just hate to pay taxes.
According to the morning’s LA Times (17 July), the accident rate/million miles driven as a function of age is a bathtub shaped curve like the failure rate curve, The curve starts out high at young ages, falls to and levels off at a constant rate until about age 60 and then starts to rise as age increases.
The accident rate for young drivers can be handled by having an “apprentice driver” period, like the new system here, where youngs drivers can’t carry young passengers without a licensed driver over 25 in the car, or some such system. For older drivers, relatively frequent driving tests probably help.
Just looks like a freak accident and a freak news story.
Both quotes from the same site.
Like I said, it seems like a freak accident. He went to hit the break, and slammed on the accelerator. His mind probably went into shock when he expected his body to be jolted forward from the abrupt stop, but instead went speeding into a crowd of people. Rational thought kinda goes out the window when you are disorientated and in shock.
Eve nailed it though. People of all ages cause accidents.
The only way I could see this being tested is doing an eye test and a reflex test. Establish a national reflex average? 
Do they get to vote twice? 
No, but the perception is that the elderly , as a percentage, vote more, both in terms of the number registered, as well as actually getting to the polls, then in other demographics. I don’t know that the statisitics back this up, but that is the perception, and the politicians seem to believe it. Also, the overall number of elderly people is also increasing, and will continue to increase, according to the Census. The elderly are also more polliticaly active (e.g, with groups like AARP)
Loss of brain tissue is a likely culprit. I’m not talking about that old “We lose a gazillin brain cells every time we sneeze.” urban legend, either. Age is a significant risk factor in several forms of dementia. The most famous is Alzheimer’s Disease, but there are others, as well. Healthy tissue is either poisoned by a build-up of unnecessary material (AD) and/or replaced by unhealthy material (spongiform encephalopathy).
This is almost always very gradual, so the afflicted is usually unaware of the process until it is fairly far along.
In addition to cognitive dementia, the motor areas of the brain can deteriorate, and age is again a significant risk factor.
No, but they usu. vote once, which is more than most younger people do.
Well, part of the issue is less fine sensation in the extremities, etc., and poorer hearing/vision. For instance, my wife’s grandfather drove his car through the garage door once. He accidentally had the car in drive rather than reverse (which I’ve sure done more times than I can count … and I’m not yet 30), and he’s so deaf that he couldn’t hear the engine racing when he stepped on the gas and overpowered the emergency brake.
What age do you have to be to be “disorientated”? Because I cannot imagine hitting the gas instead of the brakes for three blocks and it always seems to happen to the elderly. “disorientated” indeed.
That is plain silly. The accident rates are very different for different ages and insurance rates reflect that. The accident rate for an 85 year old and for a 42 year old are not statistically comparable. And the only reason 85 year olds have reasonable yearly accident rates is that they hardly drive. If you compare on a rate per mile then they are much more prone to accidents.
You didn’t know that? 
Short of experiencing old age for yourself, sailor, I’d suggest taking a close look at some elderly people for an example.
My grandfather, for instance, is pushing 80-plus, and his mental capacity is clearly not what it was even ten years ago. He doesn’t have any illnesses, it just takes him longer to comprehend things, longer to react to things, and occassionally gets mixed up over the most trivial matters. Yet if he were to have his way, he’d still be driving, because as far as he’s aware, he’s in fine mental shape.
And it’s not a matter of saying “at x years old, you are mentally incapable of driving” – there’s too much variation between people for a hard-and-fast rule like that. Marking an early age for increased testing seems to be the best solution, IMO.
Actually, I read the same L.A. Times article that you cited, and it suggested that the opposition to such testing is because of the political clout of senior citizens:
I honestly think that he had the right idea at the time. Such mandatory testing might have prevented this latest accident in Santa Monica.
I saw that graph as well. When you adjust the data for number of miles driven, as they did, it’s very telling. When you get to age 85 on the graph, fatalities/injuries actually surpass those at age 16!
California already has restrictions on young drivers who are learning, which is the second-most dangerous group, according to that chart. I think it’s time to start testing elderly drivers as well. Without an actual road test, the DMV is not going to know how far a driver’s skills may have deteriorated. It’s not enough just to have a vision test, or to only require a driving test if a doctor alerts them. I don’t think we should do anything drastic like banning driving for any age group; just have a road test for license renewal after a certain age. I know I will be in that age group some day, and I probably wouldn’t like having to re-test, but on the other hand, if I were a danger to others and didn’t even realize it, I would want someone to tell me.
O I C
Couldn’t have been 3 blocks. maybe half a block at MOST.
But let me equate it like this.
Have you ever been blindsiding by something, and your instincts kick in and react to the particular situation without you really doing anything. Then when it is over, you can’t remember anything of what just happened after your instincts kick in.
This has only happened to me once, where I was sucker punched when I didn’t even see the guys fist coming. The next time I opened my eyes, the guy was on the ground and my knuckles hurt. I still can’t remember what I did, survival instincts kicked in and took over.
Same with people who get in car accidents, afterwards they are all disorientated and in shock, unable to comprehend what they just did. You lose touch with realty in a way.
Anyway, even just this morning I was at the bank, ready to back out of my parking place, looking behind me, when i let go of the brake and the car went forward and nudged the curb and went slighty up it. I wasn’t expecting it and it threw me off guard. So i put it in reverse and back out, my mind was a little confused I guess because I didn’t look to my left and almost hit a car coming through the parking lot towards me.
So yea, it can happen to anyone.
How to stop confused drivers from running around? Silly answer: install a mind game start up device in older people’s cars like tetris or something 
Kind of like the breathalizer interlock system they have in some cars. If they can’t win in 30 seconds or less they can’t start the car.
Seriously though, I doubt it’s going to be possible to stop this from happening. I see older confused people on the roads all the time and there’s not much I can do about it. The problem really isn’t old = crazy, but more like the older folks start to lose their situational awareness and become hazards for faster moving vehicles.
Per today’s L.A. Times, it was 2 1/2 blocks. Also:
Being in shock after an accident has nothing to do with mistaking the brake for the gas and driving 2 1/2 blocks. The man’s confusion was what caused the accident, not a result of it.
O.K., I know you want to win the argument with Sailor, because he was a little combative about it, but you’re way off base. What happened to you is hardly the same thing as what happened to Mr. Weller in Santa Monica. You said you almost hit another car, so I take it you still had the presence of mind to avoid doing so. I’m assuming you didn’t kill 9 people like Mr. Weller did. We’re not talking about a minor little mistake here. Minor mistakes may happen to everyone, but not everyone gets completely confused and speeds through a crowded street market for 2 1/2 blocks.
This is exactly the kind of thing that differentiates a competent driver from an incompetent one. If accidentally hitting the gas instead of the brake causes you to become completely disoriented, you are not a competent driver.
I find it very interesting that the answers to this problem being bandied about all revolve around individualized solutions to this problem. Let’s not set a mandatory cutoff date after which people are not allowed to drive, because everyone is different, and their abilities are different. Someone may be caught in the grips of dementia, while others are sharp as a tack. And the rumors are that governments see this “more testing, no blanket ban” approach as a Good Thing.
I agree.
However, why is it that the approach to younger drivers is always “No driving” or “no driving at night” before a certain mandatory age? If you’re in favor of not allowing kids to drive until 18, shouldn’t you also logically be in favor of allowing no drivers over 80?
This was on NPR today- one of the experts talked about the statistic where the older population is reponsible for the least amount of accidents, and how that is often misinterpreted. The fact (according to them) is that they have less accidents because they drive less, as was noted earlier in this thread. The fact is that per driving mile, they have the second most accidents of any group (after teenagers).
I think mandatory road tests for everyone every 5 years until age 60, then every 2 years thereafter is the answer. Along with some educational programs and some better public transportation, so people who shouldn’t be driving are able to get around without driving.
A terrible, terrible situation yesterday. How that man will ever live with himself is beyond my comprehension.
Damn… I stand corrected.
that was exactly my point.
I wasn’t very eloquent but that’s what I meant. He was dazed while he drove. He lost touch with reality. I’m not saying that he should still have a license. I’m saying that he went into a shock-like state.
I agree… but how would you test this in a controlled enviorment? I am totally in agreement with most of you that this guy shouldn’t be allowed to drive.
My point being that, this is near impossible to test on people like Mr. Weller. A beloved community icon and all around do-gooder who for the last 70 years was driving just fine. It doesn’t make sense to change the laws for elerly just based on one case of temporary psychosis.
I’m still open for debate.
One obvious difference I can see is that the reasons for elderly drivers being more dangerous are different than the reasons for young drivers being more dangerous. For young drivers, it’s lack of maturity and foolish risk-taking that’s the problem. But how would you test for such things? Conservative driving can easily be faked in a test, but basic competence cannot be faked.
Banning driving over 80 seems too draconian to me, but mandatory road tests seem like a reasonable solution.
BTW, aren’t people still allowed to start driving at age 15 in California? That’s when I started driving.