Mandated Driving and Skills Tests for Elderly

Re: costs of non-helmet use

Well, since the people previously referred to as "retards" are now safely and tongue-twistingly labeled as "developmentally disabled", allow me to re-purpose the coarse yet illuminating term. But first let me tell a story.

I've racked up 29,000 miles on the two-wheeled odometer in the last 12 months alone. Partly because I love to do it, and partly because half of that time has been spent on the unemployment line.

During that time I've been off the saddle once, but "nearly killed" six times. Three of those near death experiences came as a result of another person's illegal and incredibly stupid driving/riding decisions.

Of the three, the last was the only one I was unable to avoid, and it cost me my bike and, for a while here, my health.

Yes, those three people who drove and rode like morons are dumb, but the other three occurrences came as a result of an even dumber living being. Yes, deer. The last incident had an adult doe, completely hidden in the roadside brush, jumping out in front of me while I was going 60mph, with oncoming traffic. Instead of T-boning the hooved animal, however, she stopped short and whacked her head, mightily, against the unprotected portion of my leg, between the knee padding of my riding pants and the upper calf armor of my A-stars boot. Now that hurt like nothing I've ever felt in my life, believe me.

But that's not the point of this exercise, just supporting commentary. The point is, invariably at some point people who ride motorcycles will have an "incident" that will or could see them separated from their bike and quickly introduced to a hard surface. This is not high science, it's common sense. Something anyone with even negligible intelligence can see.

People who ride their motorcycles on the highways and who do not use appropriate safety gear are in my opinion very slow learners. They see that the machine on which they ride offers no protection from a fall. They know how fast they will travel at highway speeds. And they know how hard, abrasive, and unforgiving asphalt, concrete, ARMCO, trees, signs, and tractor-trailers are. Yet they decide to ride in a T-shirt and jeans w/ no helmet, gloves, etc.

In my opinion these people exemplify a group that should be referred to as the "new retard", someone who sees the danger, has the ability to mitigate the danger, yet in the end decides that they will not benefit from safety gear.

To me the only thing that's worse than the "new retard" is the "new retard" who convinces another human to do the same thing.

I don't think the treatment of the 24 year old and 86 year old are that much different. Stories of strong legal action taken against the 24 year olds in traffice accidents are more common than for the 86 year old because a much greater number of them are due to intentionally dangerous driving. This accident does not appear to be result of intentional, poor driving.



The other comment before mine has brought up a valid point to consider - why aren't all driver's tested periodically? Private pilots must take a flight review every two years. It's not a test, but an opportunity to have your flying skills and habits reviewed by someone of recognized skill (a flying instructor).



The level of skill we require of drivers is laffable compared to that required of private pilots, yet the potential for harming others because your driving mistakes is much greater than for a pilot as a result of his flying mistakes.



My .02.



Tom

Your point about reaction and judgement are good, but your proposal for testing based on reaction time misses this point.



Licensing based solely on reaction time would leave us with a population drivers akin to Play Station players - real fast but a lot of explosions. Driving/riding skill is made of many components, including both reaction and skill. I would much rather be riding with a slower reacting driver whose judgement caused him to drive in accordance with his capabilities. Think about it, this is analogous to driving/riding at a speed that suits the situation.



Driving/riding is a complex set of skills and a test, whether it be for your first license or umpteenth renewal, needs to comprehensively test these skills to be useful.



Tom

My Dad had a severe stroke twenty years ago. He was half-paralyzed. The stroke also wrecked his short term memory, so he couldn't tell you it was Thanksgiving Day but he could tell you al his stories about being in the Air Corps in WWII.



Even though he was unable to move the left side of his body, if you left him in the front seat of the Lincoln unwatched he would push himself over behind the wheel and try to drive the car. He actually got it started once and got it in reverse and ran into a retaining wall.



So we took his keys away. We also had to make sure he didn't steal someone else's keys, or take and hide the spare set because he would still yell at us for not letting him drive. He said all along that he could drive perfectly well and would get really mad at us for not letting him. Even though he was paralyzed and incompetent.



It is hard, but it must be done. Otherwise the consequences to others can be disastrous.

Although the tragedy in Santa Monica involves an elderly person the solution is outside the hallowed halls of the AARP. The problems, as I see them, are threefold:

(1) Driving a motor vehicle is a regulated privelege, but is practically viewed and administered as a right. People are not required to have an adequate knowledge of the law nor solid practical skills. In CA the passing score is 70%, and the written test consists of only 20 or 30 questions.

(2) Regular, periodic skills training and assessment are not required. I've held a CA license for 24yrs and was road tested only at my 1979 application. The successful completion of the written test has nothing to do with the ability to ride a bike or drive a car.

(3) There is no graduated licensing system which only allows people to drive/ride vehicles for which they have proper training. The flying analogy is that a Piper Cub pilot could never get directly into the pilot's seat of a commercial jet just because he can fly a prop plane.

The upshot of all of the above is that the processes of obtaining and retaining one's drivers license are just too easy. Until, and unless, we make it more rigorous we will always have Santa Monicas and the root cause will have little to do with age.