lateapexer wrote:
Could we have some statistics about age and accident rates instead of anecdotal evidence. I am confident that you won't find much to support your statements. What I do know is that the fatality rate for older drivers is higher, I believe that this is because accident trauma takes a higher toll.
Here you go.
From here. https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/olddrive/pub/Chapter1.html
I admit, I didn't have time to read the entire report, but it looks like the up tick is at 85 years. Apparently every one under the age of 70 should be tested annually.
The elderly do crash more per miles driven, but they drive less and crash less.
I just had an extensive post about this on another forum, but I'll post cliffs here:
My dad has muscular dystrophy. He should have had his license revoked many years ago. Even with DMV involvement, testing, and a doctors recommendation, its really difficult to get the state to revoke someone's license.
I hope autonomous cars fix this issue.
I agree that driving car through lane is only way to go.
Thank you Toyman. I knew that this was likely to be the case. I would love to see rigorous driver education and regular retesting at set interviews. I'm pretty sure that this would cause open rebellion though, even in Canada.
ProDarwin wrote:
I just had an extensive post about this on another forum, but I'll post cliffs here:
My dad has muscular dystrophy. He should have had his license revoked many years ago. Even with DMV involvement, testing, and a doctors recommendation, its really difficult to get the state to revoke someone's license.
I hope autonomous cars fix this issue.
It is really hard emotionally for a person to give up their license. My brother in-law had MS. He was a firefighter and EMT before the disease got so bad that he couldn't do it. Despite the training and knowledge he kept driving until he'd had several accidents and the state took his license away. Even then he went through the process to get it back before he stopped driving. He really needed to give it up on his own terms.
As an aside, I'm really sorry about your dad. That's an insidious disease.
My brother has a friend.
History of seizures, she still had her license. (I was shocked and asked my brother about it, but nothing came of it. I live several states away and am not really involved in his life)
Well, she had a seizure while driving. Hit a car with a pregnant lady in it and flipped it over. Thankfully the pregnant lady is ok. Friend broke her arm as well as other things.
NOW, she is finally without a license. I am flabbergasted that she still had it to begin with. She has disability for her seizures!
Now shes upset they took it away.
glad I live far away...
In reply to Apexcarver:
That's the states fault. A seizure diagnosis in SC means 6 months loss of license, minimum. Then you must be without a seizure for at least 6 months before you can apply again.
Toyman01 wrote:
Here you go.
From here. https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/olddrive/pub/Chapter1.html
I admit, I didn't have time to read the entire report, but it looks like the up tick is at 85 years. Apparently every one under the age of 70 should be tested annually.
The elderly do crash more per miles driven, but they drive less and crash less.
Interesting and against common (and my) understanding. I"d lvoe to see it shown as accidents per miles driven though. Right now with me at 48 and my wife at 50 we do a combined total family mileage around 40-45K a year. I very much doubt we'll be doing even half of that by the time we retire.
Chart for accidents per miles driven is similar but begins to go upwards for the 85+ group. Fatality rate for older drivers is almost the same as teenage males though.
I certainly see a lot more young(er) people crashing than older, no doubt. Lots of reasons for that, mainly because older people don't drive as much. And they're much more conservative drivers. However, the sad part of it is that when they do make mistakes, they are far too often big ones. Younger people rear end other cars (not necessarily at high speed), sideswipe people while changing lanes, etc... Too often, seniors go the wrong way on a one way road, pull out in front of fast moving cars that they never saw, hit the gas instead of the brakes...then panic and stay on the gas. Doesn't mean older people never have minor accidents, they certainly do. But there is a decent number of seniors making those types of mistakes.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
The per miles driven rate does go up for the elderly, but doesn't really jump until after age 80. At the 80 to 84 group, they are no worse than a 20-24 year old.
From the same source.
I think the elderly stand out because they are frequently the slow, timid, drivers that we frequently mutter swear words at.
In reply to lateapexer:
Their fatality rate is actually a good bit higher when considering miles driven. They are also much more fragile and unlikely to heal after major injuries.
Again, same source. It's an interesting read BTW.
The "what age" argument is ridiculous. Initial training and testing needs to be overhauled in its entirety. Driver ability is horrendous in America...at least it is where I commute. Also, I have a hard time believing that its easier to stay certified as an automobile operator than it is to stay certified as an elevator owner?!?! Why arent rigorous and routine (every 5 years at least) drivers tests a real thing? Not written either, but in car. Someone explain that to me.
And, its not just that drivers these days seem incompetent, drivers around me exibit a blatant disregard for the well being of themselves, or anyone around them. One day Im going to be in the news for intentionally sideswiping a driver who was tweetfacing his skypebook at 11mph under the limit in the left lane of the freeway.
I also stand by my statements that the most horrifying things I can imagine are being buried alive, being killed in my sleep by a bear while camping, and driving on the same road as a middle class highschool/college girl: oblivious to their surroundings, and seemingly unable to grasp the serious and permanent outcomes that can arise from irresponsible driving. Its just like anything else in life "I can bat my eyes and pout, and daddy will make the bad things go away". I will admit that the fear I feel is directly correlative to the number or heinous pop culture doo-dads that are littered about the rear deck lid and rear view mirror.
please get off my lawn as I wind up my victrola
Fear not all, this will soon be a hypothetical conversation about the past. There are massive upsides to autonomous cars just around the corner. No this post is not in jest. It's going to be seriously interesting and I think good news when we see accidents and fatalities per X miles 30- 40 years down the road.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
You are probably correct, but I hope not. I'd rather die in a fiery crash than be a bored passenger in my own vehicle.
In NYS, all I need is a vision test and a check.
We still haven't brought up "unintended acceleration"
I think there's a great deal of hard evidence that supports raising the legal driving age to 30.
Toyman01 wrote:
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
You are probably correct, but I hope not. I'd rather die in a fiery crash than be a bored passenger in my own vehicle.
That's the big plus of this country. A movement to ban driving here will be met with solid and valid resistance. I've said it on here many times and honestly believe it, but I bet by 2050 major European and Asian cities (London, Paris, Rome, Frankfurt and the big 10-50 Chinese Mega Cities) will be taking steps to outlaw human directed vehicles. That will not fly here where freedom really still has a meaning. What will happen here is that over the next 70-80 years driving yourself will become less and less practical to the point that by the turn of the next century human directed cars will be the horses of today. Play things for the wealthy in private settings that are still technically legal, but impractical to use on public roads.
1988RedT2 wrote:
I think there's a great deal of hard evidence that supports raising the legal driving age to 30.
I can see 17, 18 or even 19. But if you really suggest you need to be 30 when you can do absolutely anything else legally by 21 then you are really making an argument for banning human directed vehicles altogether, right now.
In reply to 4cylndrfury:
I've begun putting it to people like this: If I gave you a loaded, fully automatic assault weapon, with no safety, a hair trigger, a full magazine, and one in the chamber and put you in a crowded room full of people, how would you treat it? You would be scared to death and treat it with extreme caution right? Your vehicle is no less deadly.
Toyman01 wrote:
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
The per miles driven rate does go up for the elderly, but doesn't really jump until after age 80. At the 80 to 84 group, they are no worse than a 20-24 year old.
From the same source.
I think the elderly stand out because they are frequently the slow, timid, drivers that we frequently mutter swear words at.
here is another graph of the same data by the Federal Highway Administration
LINK
and here is a more appropriate graph. A crash doesn't have to kill someone to be bad. And just because a age group is not involved in a lot of fatalities, doesn't mean that they are not involved in a lot of fender benders.
LINK
News just broke that the driver of the SUV in the accident was operating on a suspended license. Let's see where this goes.
Mazdax605 wrote:
News just broke that the driver of the SUV in the accident was operating on a suspended license. Let's see where this goes.
Ouch. I suppose it will depend on why the license was suspended... and it's quite possible that if the auction was on private property that it wasn't technically illegal for him to be driving around on it. It does certainly LOOK pretty bad- and even moreso depending on the reason for the suspension.
License has been suspended 4 times apparently. Currently it was permanently revoked.
