Yes, badmama, or even simple electronic/computerized-type test are available (and have been forever)–one I remember in particular from my high school driver’s ed course was something like a box with different lights on it, and a foot pedal. You basically stared at a green light, and as soon as you saw the light change to red you step on the pedal. It basically reported your reaction time (the time from when the event occurs to when you begin your reaction to it). While not perfect, something like that is better than nothing, IMO.
Oh, and there have been a few similar cases right here in St. Louis. . .several months ago an old man ran over a child at a school crossing (ran a red light). He didn’t see it. More recently, an elderly doctor hit and killed a nurse on the interstate who was assisting a minor traffic accident, and he didn’t stop!
Sure, there have been even more reports of young people in fatal car wrecks, but the pattern seems to be that the younger people kill themselves and/or their passengers (usually through high rates of speed, losing control of the car, etc.), while older people seem more likely kill others by ignoring or “not seeing” one thing or another. Just a trend I’ve noticed in my local media, YMMV.
People tend not to see motorcycles. When there is a motorcycle accident, the cage driver frequently says “I didn’t see him.”
No, he shouldn’t be held in the same contempt that the perpetrator of a premeditated mass slaguhter should - no calls for hangings - but goddam he should not extract sympathy from anyone because he is elderly.
And I have to repeat how disgusted I am at the lack of remorse I’ve seen from these old guys. I mean, show me that you are genuinley sick and broken by what happened. FEEL it for cripe’s sake.
Test them, test the reflexes test it all.
Simple answer: Segways for everybody!
When I was in high scholl, my mom borrowed my car because hers was in the shop.
An elderly man drove up to where my mom had parked and apparently did not see my car. He hit it. There were no empty spaces next to it…there was no reason for him to have even wanted to park there!
There were a lot of people in the parking lot, watching. The man backed up and proceded to attempt parking in the same place that my car was. He did this, no kidding, a total of FIVE times.
After the second time, people were yelling at him and he was oblivious. He ultimately parked in another space, got out of his car and genuienly had no idea what had happened. When the police came, he had no idea that he was the one who caused the damage to my car.
So.
I may be biased, but I completely agree with mandatory testing. I also think this (Santa Monica) man deserves jail time. If anything, perhaps he will be an example to others. After all, if I had had run over ten people, I surely would be sent to jail.
I have a really hard time feeling sorry for this man.
They also do a lot more driving. In terms of accidents per mile, elderly drivers are far more dangerous than young drivers. I find it ludicrous that drivers like the one in the OP are still on the road, while kids under age 16 (17, 18, depending on the state) can’t even take a driving test.
Frankly, I don’t care who did this. Sex, Age, Skin Color, Driving record, Criminal Record.
That should be 9 counts of Manslaughter and 54 counts of Attempted Murder.
Jail Time. period. no matter how old, young, rich, poor, christ or antichrist.
It’s only going to get worse. According to AASHTO (American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials), “the number of drivers age 70 and above is expected to double over the next 20 years.” The transportation industry is going to try to compensate, but there’s only so much we can do.
I agree w/Mr2001.
Eve, if a 10 year old was allowed to take a driving test, she passed it, and went on to pass vision/hearing/reflex/etc. tests, should she be allowed to drive?
Granted, maturity counts for a lot in this world, and 85 year-olds have maturity that 10 year-olds don’t have, but at the same time I’m sure some teens and even pre-teens have maturity that twenty-somethings don’t have.
But now we’re getting into the realm of subjective. And sometimes totally objective limits are a good thing. That might disqualify some qualified/able people from doing certain things (voting, driving, possessing a gun, getting a specific kind of job, etc.), but IMO, that’s life.
But I also agree that in many areas, we need better public transportation (I can speak specifically of metro Detroit, and there is absolutely no good, reliable, cheap way for people to get around w/o driving around here).
Happy
Happy
Happy: a name so nice, I sign it twice.
It seems like in so many of these cases it a matter of pushing the accelerator instead of the brake. Maybe it’s time the controls on cars were reconfigured so this couldn’t happen to anyone,not just a confused old man.
I guess the urge to put this elderly man in jail is the sad, sad reflection of how mean people have become; unable to see the truth of what happened and mistaken that the parents of the babies who were killed will somehow feel better. Even though I’m not conventionally religious, I remember when I was growing up that people were more forgiving instead of crying for blood; maybe we should just set up a ring and let this man get eaten by lions in full view; or maybe we should hang him in the town square. I was a science fiction fan in my youth where many stories predicted mankind’s eventual enlightment; but, the truth is we are going backwards.
I suspect that most of those crying for blood and absolutely hell-bent on revenge are probably all young and have not felt their bodies slowly failing. You don’t wake up one day and know you are unable to drive; by the time you cross that line I suspect you may be too impaired to know; or, if like my dad, you are under the influence of so many drugs, you don’t know much anyway. In case no one has noticed, no matter what the problem, the doctor writes a prescription (which by the way we younger people are paying for) and says “NEXT!”…
According to USA today (July -17). The elderly are 12% of the drivers out there. They are responsible for 18% of the automotive fatalities.
suezeekay-so, because he is elderly, thus we should bend the rules?
No, absolutely not.
I don’t think he should be tarred and feathered, but I don’t think he should get off, and he SURE AS HELL SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DRIVING!!!
It’s not about forgiveness, but responsibility.
Another vote for retesting everyone, regardless of age. In general, it might reinforce what a responsibility driving is, privilege, not a right, etc… Too, I think there are a lot of people out there who have forgotten some rules of the road or developed unsafe driving habits. My husband is a highway patrolman and he often pulls people over who didn’t even realise how dangerously/illegally they were driving. Occasionally, I find myself asking him incredulously, “You give tickets for that?!” I mean, who knew a solid white line and posted sign had so much power? 
Another poster asked what justice we could possibly find out of this, after all, letting him rot in jail only means that he won’t do it again. I think the justice would be found if we could implement a program of re-testing. Another poster mentioned that there are unlicensed drivers on the road anyway, but this at least would give the family members and local law community recourse should someone fail their license exam. Fail the exam, lose your license; get caught driving without a license, lose the car. Repeated offenses could pay fines on top of confiscation of the car they were driving, whether or not it is owned by the offender. This would ensure that no one would lend their cars to unlicensed drivers, as the risk would be too costly. Funds raised could go to local low-cost/free shuttle services.
Sigh, but it’ll never happen. The voice of the AARP is just too powerful–[Abe Simpson] Maaaaaatlooooooooockkkkk!!![/Abe Simpson]
I’m with you , Isabelle . If it had been me , they’d lock me up for years . Just because the guy is old doesn’t mean he’s not responsible for his actions .
I posted earlier that there were other explanations that didn’t necessarily have to do with age. (i.e., Anyone can freeze in a panic.) But this morning’s news reports that the driver has a history of accidents including backing into his garage (I think someone mentioned this earlier) and driving through a block wall (which I just heard about on the news).
While I don’t think we should immediately point to age as being the cause of this kind of accident, I must now conclude that age was a factor in this one.
As for recurrent testing, I think it’s a good idea for everyone. And I think that it should be more difficult to get a license in the first place. New drivers are often told, “This is a ‘license to learn.’” A “license to learn” might be a good thing to call a newly-printed private pilot’s license; but it takes a whole lot more training to get that than it does a car license. Car drivers should be trained to a higher standard than they are now, IMO.
But policy makers will be hard pressed to make this a reality. Driving is seen as a right, and many places are not “non-driver friendly”. In fact, L.A. is pretty much “non-driver hostile”. A politician who pushes through such legislation might find his stay in office to be short.
If you don’t think he should get off what do you think the punnishment should be to fit this crime.
This is going to be used by the defense for sure. My bet is he will not see a day behind bars. He should not have been driving, plain and simple. But it was not a premeditated incident. It was a non-meditated (???) incident. A horrible accident.
I just can not help thinking about the little children who were hurt and or killed.
Straw baby.