Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 08:23
"Bazooka posted:
A few points about those stats which may help you interpret these stats better:
-they don't include general accidents, they're primarily about serious injury and death, not property damage;
-they don't attribute blame (apart from single vehicle accidents obviously);
-the high death and serious injury risk for older drivers is entirely understandable. Their bodies are less able to cope with high trauma so they spend longer in recovery or they don't recover at all, unlike younger, healthier people;
-a significant number of the elderly injuries are pedestrians;
-they are from just one jurisdiction.
As I'm sure you know there's a big difference between being the primary cause of road incidents (as you seem to be suggesting in the case of elderly drivers) and being a victim, and these stats don't tell us anything in that regard. They do however tell us that if you are 75+ and involved in a crash which causes you significant injury then you're statistically (per km travelled) at greater risk than other age groups. "
All your reason prove nothing and easy can be used as double-edge sword:
- I can state (and actually do believe so) that older people contribute far more to insignificant accident when only property damage involved. Prove is damn simple - try to make online quotation when everything the same and just driver age differs. You find that premium going up from 20 to 40 y.o. and then going down to 60 and then suddenly jump up. Your know - those insurance companies give a flick about all published statistics and used their own, based on actual claims.
- as I said somewhere above - I LOVE to see raw statistics where I can figure out "blame factor". But I have indirect prove - insurance premium.
- correct, older body far more fragile and actually cost society far more to "fix" it and permanent injuries more common. Therefore it is very important to prevent this to happen and if we cannot do much about pedestrians we surely can do about drivers.
- again, it only prove my POV - does not matter they pedestrians or not, they are not as agile as younger and simply cannot do thing quick enough (like jump out from car). Add impaired vision, slow reaction and dull concentration and you have result.
And last paragraph is spot on - I do not have such statistics, but absolutely sure that elderly people spend far less behind wheels then middle-aged ones. So if they still managed to make significant number, it only means to me that they relatively incredibly bad drivers (i.e. per kilometer traveled). We need protect them. Purely on basis that we will be there sooner or later (as least those of us who lucky enough).
And you welcome to find better statistics. But so far I read nothing from you except of reasoning based on your personal believing and blaming others being "ill-informed". Surely you can have own POV and it may differ from
mine, just do not pretend that it is absolute.
Cheers
FollowupID:
777777