Thanks for the response. In addition to your assigned reason for no one answering the question, I believe no one knows the answers, they just “know” older drivers should be singled out for discrimination. I personally drive just over 110 miles per night, six nights per week, in Tampa traffic. I cross the Howard Franklin Bridge twice per night. Locals will get the reference. Suffice it to say that the bridge is “about” six miles long and the speed limit is difficult to enforce: There are few places where law enforcement officers can safely station themselves. Almost nightly, I am treated to the spectacle of “crotch rocket” motorcycles racing across this bridge at speeds well over 100MPH. (I typically drive 70-75MPH and these guys leave me in the dust) I have been held up in traffic jams on the bridge resulting from the crash of one or more of these motorcycles; from the appearance of the wreckage, I doubt there were survivors. Somehow I doubt the drivers of these things are “older” in the generally accepted sense. I have also seen road racing between two or more “riceboys” and I have seen their wreckage—again, I doubt they were “older” drivers. I am not claiming that all older drivers are safe drivers; I am claiming that we are set up for discrimination merely on the basis of age. I STILL want to know how restrictions for older drivers would be established, by whom, and how the process would be funded and applied. I doubt I will receive another answer, though.
Yes, they are involved in a disproportionate number of accidents, but not a majority. Are you having trouble remembering your last post? You didn’t just say “young farts” were responsible for a high number of accidents.
Looked back to see what you are refering to.
All I can find is a statement that reckless drivers are almost invariably young farts.
Sounds true to me. Old farts may have their problems----but recklessness isn’t one of them.
I also do think that reckless driving is the cause of most accidents. I consider reckless driving to be speeding, weaving in and out of traffic, trying to multitask while driving (cell phones anyone?, putting on make-up, stereo so loud it would be impossible to hear normal traffic sounds, especially horns), tailgateing, driving when very sleepy, road rage) You rarely see elderly drivers doing any of those things.
But, putting 2 and 2 together, you may have a point. I may have overstated some.
They did drop it-only a few months after it was started, Dominos got in huge trouble because their drivers were getting in accidents because they were driving wrecklessly trying to get the pizza there within a half an hour.
LouisB, I don’t think we should necessarily take away licenses from the elderly-just more frequent testing as a person gets older. Like I said, I have first hand experience with this from my grandparents. (And as I said, my grandfather has ALWAYS been a shitty driver).
You probably meant “recklessly.” “Wrecklessly” would be a *good * thing.
Both of those statements were in your earlier post. They can’t both be true: if most accidents were caused by reckless drivers, and nearly all reckless drivers were young, then most accidents would be caused by young drivers. The statistics, however, show that they aren’t.
You should take a little time and read whole posts.
I did at the end admit that I was overstating–at least statistically.
I still think that the major cause of accidents is reckless driving though. Even if it does not show in statistics.
And I think that we all do agree that recklessness is a folly of youth.
You’re right. I saw that and I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I didn’t.
I’m not sure what you mean by “even if it does not show in statistics”. You think the accidents caused by reckless driving aren’t being reported?
Do you think young drivers really are responsible for a majority of accidents, despite the statistics showing otherwise? If not, can you explain why you continue to hold these two beliefs which, when added together, lead to a conclusion that is contrary to fact?
:smack: