The age debate/driving/retesting

[blas87]

My boyfriend told me last night that his younger sister is more or less screwed for the rest of her life.

His two younger sisters were driving along, each had their own vehicle, the youngest one was behind the other, and they came to an intersection, where within moments, they got the green arrow to go.

As they were turning, the first sister made it across, and as the second one was turning, an old lady totally blew through a red light and smashed into the youngest sister's car. Younger sister got away with no injuries.

The cops came. The old lady insisted SHE had the green light, and the girls were the ones who blew the red light, even though it was clear this woman ran into the youngest girl. The girls insisted they had the green light. The cop apparently said "You two would claim that. You're sisters." So he cited the youngest sister for failure to yield right of way. She didn't have insurance.

It didn't end there. The old lady claimed to have gotten injured, and SUED my boyfriend's 21 year old sister for $160,000! Supposedly if you don't have insurance and something like this happens, they can suspend your license until you pay the money owed.

It's just a story, I'm not a lawyer, there may be bits and pieces missing...just telling it how I heard it. I'm thinking it's somewhat failure on the legal system's part....because they could have gone back and looked at the tape of the light to see what color it was.....there are cameras in all stop lights around here. Second of all...the damage proved who ran into who.

What do you guys think? Who drives worse? Do you think cops automatically believe old people? Do you think it's worse to drive recklessly (as young folk do) or is it worse to drive impaired (can't see/hear/decipher green from red, can't hit the brake in time, etc etc)??

Should we re-test seniors?

[Boozy]

Regardless of who is right or wrong in this particular incident, one thing struck me:

Why the hell didn't she have insurance?

What if she had hit someone and paralyzed them for life? Who's going to pay for their lifelong care?

Driving without insurance is self-centred and illegal.

[Greenday]

I think the cop in that situation just had something stuck up his ass. But as with Boozy, I don't know why she didn't have insurance. In my state, you can lose your license for driving without insurance.

A lot of times I think cops have it out for older people. My grandfather drove into construction zone, that wasn't active, and really had no work done on it. Apparently, there were signs saying "Do Not Enter" but he missed them. A cop noticed him, pulled him over, and threatened to take away his license and make him take a re-test. We went out and looked for that sign, but there was none to be found. Needless to say, we were furious and reported the cop to his superiors.

A lot of times, I really do feel he shouldn't drive, and not too long ago, he realized that himself. With his trouble breathing lately and stuff, it just wouldn't be safe. And I think a lot of older people think that driving is a right, not a privilege. But the older you get, the slower your reflexes are, and your sight and hearing start going too. It sucks, but if you can't be safe on the road, you shouldn't be allowed to drive, plain and simple.

[Pedersen]

Three things:

1. The way the cop acted was wrong. If there are lights at the cameras, have the records subpoenaed, report him to his superiors, and fight back. Don't let it end this way.

2. Driving without insurance? Pisses me off to no end. Been hit by someone who not only was driving without, but possessed fraudulent insurance cards/etc, so they got away clean and free, and I got a $500 repair bill for my vehicle. Of course, I did get lucky. Only the vehicle was damaged. What would have happened if the accident had hit me, and hurt me? Both myself and my wife would have been fucked.

And nothing I could do about it. Quite frankly, driving without insurance was irresponsible at best. Self-centered at worst. And she does deserve some noticeable punishment for it.

3. I'm not in favor of mandatory retesting of seniors. Make it mandatory retesting of anybody who has reason to be impaired, and age is just one of the possible reasons for it.

[the_std]

My mother and I have often discussed mandatory retesting, but we've often said that it should be for everyone. Every five to ten years, or some period of time like that. Too many people get into bad habits in their driving and it can cause lots of problems.

I know all about feeling the age bias, by the way. In the part of my city that I grew up in, some 40% of the population was senior citizens because of the enormous amount of old-age homes that were there. It made life very interesting.

[Norton]

I think if re-testing were to happen, it would have to be for everyone, like the_std said. I imagine if only the elderly were subjected to mandatory re-testing, there would be a cry of "age discrimination".

I mentioned in a similiar thread a while back that mandatory re-testing would only weed out those people truly incapable of driving safely (mostly the elderly). The average jerk who speeds, tailgates, passes illegally etc. will shape up just long enough to pass the re-test, then go right back to driving like a jerk.

[protege]

I just have to ask...what the hell was she doing driving without insurance? That's just asking for trouble, IMHO.

Quite a few seniors shouldn't be driving. However, just as many of younger people shouldn't be as well. I'm talking about the kids in Daddy's Mustang who do 90 in school zones and the middle-aged idiots in Cadillacs who do 35 in 65 zones.

My grandmother had been driving since the 1950s, and only had 2 accidents. First one, in '94 wasn't her fault. Some dumbass (who was in his late 50s) in a gravel truck, rear-ended her car...pushing it into the path of a semi coming the other way Second accident, was after she'd fallen in a parking lot. She couldn't reach anyone to drive her, so she attempted to drive herself to the hospital. On the way, some blood got in her eyes, and she'd hit a car. Luckily, nobody was hurt. After that, she voluntarily gave up driving.

I know that most younger people think that giving up one's license is no big deal. However, to many seniors, it is. Think about it--you've been independent your entire life; gone to the store, to work, etc. and now you can't do that. You have to deal with someone else's schedule or depend on public transit, which is damn near impossible in some areas.

[Shangri-laschild]

Did she get a ticket? If so she ought to start by trying to get that thrown out and then use that to get her stuff paid for instead of having to pay for the older woman. If there were cameras she should be able to.

And I agree about the retesting for everyone, but as busy as the DMV is right now they would have to put a whole lot of resources into being able to do something like that.

[powerboy]

Yes, there should be retesting done for everybody.

[tropicsgoddess]

Quite a few seniors shouldn't be driving. However, just as many of younger people shouldn't be as well. I'm talking about the kids in Daddy's Mustang who do 90 in school zones and the middle-aged idiots in Cadillacs who do 35 in 65 zones.

Yes! You took the words right out of my mouth!

Why was she driving without insurance? That's illegal and really setting yourself up for disaster. If I was the young girl, I would fight the case since the cop went about it the wrong way and the fact that the older lady was the one at fault.