Old people dodge a driving test bullet…and then drive into a wall
Key lawmakers, facing public concern over a raft of highly publicized accidents involving older drivers, yesterday proposed requiring vision tests for drivers over 75 years old seeking to renew their licenses, and granting legal immunity to doctors who report that their patients are not competent to drive.
The bill would also ban text messaging while driving, the other major road issue that safety advocates have moved to the top of their agenda in the past year. The texting ban, echoing language recommended by a legislative committee last week, also forbids all drivers under age 18 from using cellphones while behind the wheel.
What the hell is going on here? We go from wanting to give mandatory driving tests to the elderly to proposing mandatory vision tests? I thought it has been confirmed that vision isn’t the culprit. The real problem is that these people are old and as such have reflexes that are working on a 15 second delay. Sure they saw that house that they were plowing into just fine, they just couldn’t muscle up the strength to turn the car. ( On a side note, what in god’s name did the elderly do before power steering?) Once 95 year old Great-Grandma Ethyl puts on her 10 inch thick spectacles, she may end up passing that vision test. And from the RMV she will end up driving straight through the entrance of the new Target, overshooting the handicap spots by a cool 100 feet.
So not only is the proposed testing on the elderly pointless, we also have the equally pointless ban on texting. Texting on the road is a right of passage. Sure, some people crash while texting, but some people also crash while doing nothing! Are we going to ban nothing as well? How do you propose a ban on nothing?? And furthermore, how do you prove a person was texting? Will this cause a person to get in a heated discussion of semantics with an officer?
Actually officer, I was using the Facebook app on my iPhone. So I wasn’t texting, I was Facebooking. I don’t believe it is a crime to Facebook. And yes, Facebook is also a verb.
We just saw a dude last week scarfing down some Wendy’s chili while plowing his lumber truck into a house. Are we going to include some food legislation into this hot mess? If so, the Dunkin’ Donuts morning rush crowd is SCREWED.
Also part of the bill is a ban on teens under 18 using cellphones while driving. This I don’t have a problem with. Only because seeing teens get their cellphones taken away is kind of funny.
Ned
Scott
Mark
Steve
This morning approaching the little bridge over the canal facing the start of Broadway on Dutton street, a lady of indeterminant years turned at the light onto said little bridge, and drove straight at me in the wrong lane because she couldn’t see. (The rising sun was giving her some trouble). I laid on the horn and flashed my lights and she stopped within inches of my bumper about 75 feet from the bridge. (Meaning she had come a LONG way in the wrong lane).
It’s vision, too, and that’s a nice non-age-discriminatory way to start weeding out the folks who shouldn’t be behind the wheel. No, it’s not perfect, but it’s a good start.
The vision part is what confuses me though. We all get tested for vision. This doesn’t sound like much. So instead of every 10 it will be every 5. Better than nothing? Of course. But barely.
I agree with Scott, eye testing isn’t much at all. They should have to take a road test if they’re 75 and over. Everyone is scared of the elderly because they vote. So we’re willing to let a few more children die in crosswalks to pander to the elderly. Give me a break. This isn’t a start, it’s an end. They won’t do another thing for decades and tout this as elderly driver reform.
Some of you little darlings had better check the RMV statistics before you start bashing seniors. The accident rate is much higher for those in the 18 – 25 category. I do believe that EWVERYONE should have vision testing tho. We know a twenty-something who is too dumb to wear his glasses when he drives.
Little darlings? Ha ha.
Listen, I understand that elderly drivers only account for a smaller percentage of accidents. The fact of the matter though is that at least it is a preventable measure. 18-25 year category is just careless. You can’t test for that. That is a harder group to combat. But for the 75 year plus category, the reasoning is more obvious.