All too often I think the discussion misses the fact that there is no alternative to driving for the vast majority of US citizens. Busses, trains, walking, biking, etc are not viable options because US infrastructure & city planning overwhelmingly neglects everything but the automobile.
It is supposedly a personal moral failing every time someone drives too old, too tired, or too impaired, but if trains, busses, & walking were the default ways to get around then this chronic societal problem would diminish dramatically. Incompetent driving is rooted in systemic failures, not personal moral ones.
The moral failing is that of personally encouraging, supporting or defending car dependency, along with the other more failing of not trying anything to reverse it.
Heck, I’d support regular testing for everyone. Laws change, best practices change and regular testing is a good way to keep most up to date. It would cost, be a hassle and extremely unpopular. But if it saves lives and/or make traffic softer it is worth it.
Oh I know man, I know
I recently saw some numbers, published by an automobile club, that suggested drivers over the age of 70 are involved in only 13% of crashes. My first thought was, that number is only that low because every other driver is already very cautious around old people in cars. And they usually drive rather slow. Still no reason to defend older people in death machines.
also probably they drive less, as they’re likely to no longer be working for a living and so don’t commute?
Yeah, that number is kinda meaningless without the context of how many road kilometers/hours people over 70 are doing in comparison to the number of crashes
Yep. To the supermarket twice a week, and to church on Sunday, and that’s it. No commute, no mom-bus, no driving for work. Basically off the road for good, and still involved in 13% of all accidents.
You are right! I didn’t even thought that far. It just made me kind of mad.
Just put them into relation with factors like “distance driven”, and the picture turns upside down.
Suddenly, the old people who don’t commute daily or drive children around to school and other activities like younger people do, but only drive to the supermarket twice a week and to church on Sunday end up in a different place on the statistics.
Accidents per 1000km would be a much better metric. Or km/accident. Both say pretty much the same thing but have different readability.
A paying customer is a paying customer
What are they going to do instead. Apparate?
In the Netherlands you are tested every 5 years after the age of 70. So many people lose their licence and end up stuck in the middle of nowhere because there is no public transport and most affordable retirement homes have been shut down. So my dad, who is in his eighties and has passed his tests so far, drives around looking after them.
Them not driving is a small inconvenience compared to the risk of killing themselves or someone else. Driving is not a right, it’s a privilege with real and dangerous consequences. The ability to do it safely needs to remain the most important factor when distributing licenses.
If there were other options that would be great.
That’s what we’re all about. We should build cities to allow alternative options besides cars
deleted by creator
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
@starlinguk @veganpizza69 the village I live in has a on-demand shuttle bus for seniors. This is not hard to solve for.
I thought cities in the Netherlands were required to have public transit?
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
