Get rid of older drivers off the road

Submitted: Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 13:15
ThreadID: 99764 Views:3364 Replies:13 FollowUps:46
This Thread has been Archived
Here is the reason to get us off the road and about time.



Ra.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: KSV - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 13:31

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 13:31
All of us (well, as least those who lucky enough) eventually became Old Farts - some yet have long journey, while for some it is around the corner.
But...........

I personally will strongly support periodic reassessment of physical ability of elder people to drive car - things like eyesight, reaction, ability of concentration and general physical strength. Say each two years after 60 - only wine getting better with age. And for those who fall short special rules must applies. For example they must display "S" sign (Senior, like "P" or "L"). Then other (well, I will indeed) can simply give the way instead of getting frustrated. And for those who fall really short there is probably time to relay on relatives rather then induce havoc on the road. No, I am not talking BS - I have first hand example with my in-law. He was all his life an professional driver, but now he can easy drive on red light (happens few times already) and cannot see that well in dusk and dawn. Good on him - he recognized his limited ability and used public transport whenever he can. Unfortunately I cannot say so for well so many other drivers.
YMMV
AnswerID: 501521

Follow Up By: Notso - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 13:55

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 13:55
Mate, I would have thought that weaving within our lane, wearing berets and peering out through our bottle end glasses would be enough to tip you off that we were getting on in years a bit.

Anyhow you should be nice to all drivers on the road old, young, even females!
0
FollowupID: 777705

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:00

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:00
Sounds reasonable - until you examine the statistics that is. The vast majority of serious accidents are caused by people with (relatively) good eyesight, reactions, and strength (?) - lack of concentration by young and old is already a shared failure but I'd bet my last dollar that older more experienced drivers are generally far less distracted than their younger counterparts. There are exceptions of course.

There comes a time when all drivers should 'hang up their boots' but targeting older citizens will do sfa about reducing the personal and financial costs of road trauma.

0
FollowupID: 777707

Follow Up By: KSV - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:24

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:24
Bazooka posted:
Sounds reasonable - until you examine the statistics that is. The vast majority of serious accidents are caused by people with (relatively) good eyesight, reactions, and strength (?) - lack of concentration by young and old is already a shared failure but I'd bet my last dollar that older more experienced drivers are generally far less distracted than their younger counterparts. There are exceptions of course.

There comes a time when all drivers should 'hang up their boots' but targeting older citizens will do sfa about reducing the personal and financial costs of road trauma."

I hear what you saying, but it does not make me agreed. Young have their own problem, but frankly those problem targeted very vigorously by police. While it seems like elderly problems bother no-one. For example there is significant proportion of elderly people who run on pedestrian (including small kids on their own driveway) while reversing - proportion far bigger then proportion of elderly drivers on the road. Also smacking fatalities aka hit car with 8 teen passengers at pole is surely happens more often with "P" platers, while "insignificant" accidents that lead to"just" few bones been broken more often happens with older drivers. 25 y.o. will forget about broken arm in 3 month, while for 80 y.o. it may be 3 years affair. As far as I can feel (as active daily driver through city) old ladies give me most grief and burdens on my daily trips. I would LOVE to see "S" (or whatever else) on their cars - this pretty much like "P" that allows me to avoid them thereby making their life easier as well.
This problem with elderly drivers is long time overdue, but no-one like to touch it - you know they vote.
Oh, BTW I am "around the corner".
0
FollowupID: 777709

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:40

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:40
I think you're just stirring the pot. If not I'll say it again - the facts simply don't support your opinion.
0
FollowupID: 777711

Follow Up By: Notso - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:41

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:41
What I'd really like to see is a statistical backup for what you claim re older drivers running over children in driveways and other such incidents. Most driveway accidents involve parents. Now as I said lets have statistics to back up claims like this.
0
FollowupID: 777712

Follow Up By: Member - David M (SA) - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:52

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 14:52
Disagree with everything you say KSV except the " No, I'm not talking BS" part.
Dave
0
FollowupID: 777714

Follow Up By: KSV - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:03

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:03
"Notso posted:
What I'd really like to see is a statistical backup for what you claim re older drivers running over children in driveways and other such incidents. Most driveway accidents involve parents. Now as I said lets have statistics to back up claims like this."

I LOVE to see raw (RAW, unprepared) statistics by myself, but somehow it is not that easy to obtain. But last 3 times in Melbourne when newspaper reported run over toddler in driveway exactly elderly people been involved. But somehow they steer all issue that more reverse cameras required. Yea, as usual - lets cure sequences, not problem.

And meanwhile population became older and older. I saw by my own eyes (and bet ALL, ABSOLUTELY ALL of you seen something similar!!!) when old lady has whole affair to get out her car. And indeed getting back. Now try to convince me that she fit to drive.

You indeed may disagree - anyone here entitled on his/her own opinion.
0
FollowupID: 777716

Follow Up By: Member - John and Val - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:04

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:04
Hi KSV

"old ladies give me most grief and burdens on my daily trips".

Not sure what trip you were on when you tried to write your post, but this "mature age" lady really hopes that you drive better than you write, as what you have written is so poorly expressed as to be barely comprehensible.

Cheers,

Val.
J and V
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."
- Albert Einstein

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 777717

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:23

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:23
Yep KSV, that's the thing about forums, you can't stop people from holding certain opinions but, speaking generally, when they're ill-informed they aren't entitled to have those opinions respected.

In regard to this topic, as you say there are occasional problems with certain older drivers (which authorities are well aware of) but they pale in comparison to the real issues confronting road users. There's fact and there's fiction, there are mountains and there are molehillls.
0
FollowupID: 777719

Follow Up By: Ross M - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:25

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:25
G'day John & Val
The forum does show up the relative educational levels of the general population.
I have red some posts on hear and on uther fourems were I can't decifer wot is ment and the spaling can mean sumfing else altogether.
Sum tims the one getting back tome carnt even undastand wot Imean.


Have you worked out the following situations?

Did the Melbourne newspaper run over the toddler? or did the reporter run over the toddler? or someone else?

What is an "exactly elderly person? I'm unsure.
IS the old lady having an affair in the car? Unlikely.

Now my hed is hurtin

0
FollowupID: 777720

Follow Up By: KSV - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:26

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:26
"Member - John and Val posted:
Hi KSV

"old ladies give me most grief and burdens on my daily trips".

Not sure what trip you were on when you tried to write your post, but this "mature age" lady really hopes that you drive better than you write, as what you have written is so poorly expressed as to be barely comprehensible.

Cheers,

Val."

Hi Val,

Do not worry - I thick-skinned animal and used to such attacks. FWIW English is not the language that my mom told me night stories. I first started to learn it after 30. So I am more then happy to challenge you in foreign language that you study at school.

And policy on this site with editing posts really and truly SUX. Period. Even if I found misspelling or unclear expression I cannot fix it. And indeed sometime I need to re-read my typing few times and sometime I do not have enough time to do it before pressing "post" button. I am apologize for that.
0
FollowupID: 777721

Follow Up By: Notso - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:21

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:21
The thing is that we shouldn't make wild generalisations about who should be allowed to drive on our roads and who shouldn't. Our views are coloured by our own experiences and experience.

I'm sure if we witnessed a young person driving like some of em do then we'd say they should be banned from driving till they were 26 or so. And perhaps we shouldn't allow people to drive big trucks on the road because of the way we may or may not have been treated by a particular truck driver.

So really the only thing we can do is to have a realistic method of assessing an individuals ability to drive a motor vehicle in a manner that respects other road users and doesn't put themselves or others at risk.

Unfortunately most young drivers get taught how to get a licence, not how to drive a car. Most older drivers probably didn't even get taught how to get a licence. So at the end of the day lets have a common system that sorts out those of us who can and cannot drive and/or behave on the roads like a civilised thinking creature.
0
FollowupID: 777726

Follow Up By: KSV - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 18:38

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 18:38
"Bazooka posted:
Yep KSV, that's the thing about forums, you can't stop people from holding certain opinions but, speaking generally, when they're ill-informed they aren't entitled to have those opinions respected.

In regard to this topic, as you say there are occasional problems with certain older drivers (which authorities are well aware of) but they pale in comparison to the real issues confronting road users. There's fact and there's fiction, there are mountains and there are molehillls."

Cannot agree more with your sentiments about "ill-informed". However could your bother yourself to have a look here: http://www.tacsafety.com.au/statistics/age-group-statistics According to this statistics 70+ is biggest group by number of death on the road. Understandable that not all of them drivers, but keep in mind that there is no statistics how many been killed or injured by drivers of certain age group. Also please keep in mind that proportion of elderly drivers on the road is not that big and yet if they manage to hit good numbers they are true "winners". All statistics what I read so far shows that only age group below 26 can "beat" older people. So you may rethink who is "ill-informed".

But perhaps government give a flick on this statistics - really it is tragedy when someone get killed at age of 25 - just been invested in terms of education and viola! not only will not repay HECS, but will not even pay any tax! And 80+ is just burden required massive medical expenses. This is perhaps why they do not care about this statistics and this is why they planted "insignificance of the issue" in some brains. (All this paragraph been written with tongue in cheek)
0
FollowupID: 777739

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 23:47

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 23:47
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.
0
FollowupID: 777770

Follow Up By: KSV - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 08:23

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
0
FollowupID: 777777

Follow Up By: Notso - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:06

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:06
So here are some stats. Age distribution from the ABS, Fatalities in MVAs from TAC.

Age Grp % Population % Deaths
16 - 25 12.9 25.7
70+ 12.4 15.2

Definitely indicates oldies are safer than youngies EH. Of course that fact that a few of us Oldies are only driving wheelchairs might influence the data. The only thing worse than lies damn lies and statistics is figures plucked out of the air.
0
FollowupID: 777780

Follow Up By: KSV - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:16

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:16
"Notso posted:
So here are some stats. Age distribution from the ABS, Fatalities in MVAs from TAC.

Age Grp % Population % Deaths
16 - 25 12.9 25.7
70+ 12.4 15.2

Definitely indicates oldies are safer than youngies EH. Of course that fact that a few of us Oldies are only driving wheelchairs might influence the data. The only thing worse than lies damn lies and statistics is figures plucked out of the air."

Did you carefully read what I posted somewhere above? Only group below 26 can "beat" 70+ one! % of population is cool one, but now many of those % actually on the road?

You may believe in whatever you like to believe. Though to make thing fair it would be nice to include all age groups.
0
FollowupID: 777782

Follow Up By: Notso - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:40

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:40
Like most older blokes, I'm always happy to please.

Age Grp % Population % Deaths
16 - 25 12.9 25.7
26 - 39 21 21.9
40 - 49 14 12.2
50 - 59 12.9 12.7
60 - 69 10 9.9
70+ 12.4 15.2

All things considered, the oldies don't do too bad.
0
FollowupID: 777785

Follow Up By: KSV - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:59

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 09:59
"Notso posted:
Like most older blokes, I'm always happy to please.

Age Grp % Population % Deaths
16 - 25 12.9 25.7
26 - 39 21 21.9
40 - 49 14 12.2
50 - 59 12.9 12.7
60 - 69 10 9.9
70+ 12.4 15.2

All things considered, the oldies don't do too bad."

Your very statistics disprove your statement. 70+ are worse that any other group except below 26. And significantly worse against best group being 40-49. Now put into consideration that far less percentage of 70+ being on the road (comparing to 40-49 for example) and you get the picture. This group is second worse after youngest below 26 - I always thought so, always feel so on the road and all statistics that I ever seen only prove it.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 777787

Follow Up By: Notso - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:23

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:23
No, you see statistics don't "prove" anything. They are just used by people to support a point of view.

You can use the stats I've just shown to support your point of view, others can use them to support theirs.

Any good statistician can make figures say anything they want.

I was involved in a study a few years back where a group of phDs were attempting to develop an objective based system to sort out whether older folk were still capable of driving a vehicle in a safe manner.

They were attempting to come up with an "objective", rather than "Subjective" way of assessing the skill and cognitive level of a driver. I never did see the study published so maybe they decided it was all too hard.
0
FollowupID: 777792

Follow Up By: KSV - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:39

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:39
"They were attempting to come up with an "objective", rather than "Subjective" way of assessing the skill and cognitive level of a driver. I never did see the study published so maybe they decided it was all too hard."

Or may be they found something that someone dislike to be published? LOL

Problem is NOT simple - there are plenty of capable drivers of advance age, there is no doubt about it. Also there are plenty of morons of middle age in perfect health state that just cannot drive. But when I see old grey lady that have problem to walk and to stand (forget about came in into car and came out of it!) and yet she is considered fit to drive ORDINARY car on PUBLIC road, I think that something wrong in our system.

And statistics actually proves something and in fact proves a lot. For example it undeniably proves that relatively more older people dying on road then middle aged ones. But surely no statistics can show cause of this - special study required. All my conclusions are indirect or based on own observation, but so are yours. Although I love to see any explanation to why insurance companies put more charges on advance age drivers. You know mine.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 777796

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:41

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:41
I'm not pretending anything KSV. You're the one pointing the finger, so it's up to you to provide evidence. Your gut feelings, experiences and obvious prejudices have absolutely no relevance. What these very limited Victorian statistics show is that you should actually be agitating to get 18-25 year olds off the road (I'll take an educated guess and suggest that this age group will be over-represented in general crash stats as well). Or perhaps just removing all male drivers would suffice, statistically speaking of course.


But as I've already pointed out these Vic stats don't tell anywhere near the full story (including the very critical issue for you of 'blame'/responsibility), which you would understand if you bothered to digest what that site actually says - and probably more importantly, doesn't say.


Just to test your theory regarding insurers and crash statistics I plugged in some data to a couple of online quotation generators. Look away now because you won't like the result - the AAMI cost for a 60yo was $45 cheaper (about 10% of the premium) than a 57yo, and the rate for a 70yo was $2 cheaper than both. NRMA's figures were all within $5 of each other (57yo- $545, 60yo - $543, 70yo- $550). Go figure. Of course we know insurance is FAR more complex than that but as it's the only basis for your assertion it seems you either need to modify your thinking or chase up some new statistics.


Driving and ageing are complex issues and your anecdotes do nothing to advance the discussion in my opinion. I'm taking another punt here but I have little doubt from the tone of your comments that I could find many 60+yo drivers who would be far better road users than you - or me for that matter.

0
FollowupID: 777797

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:02

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:02
JSV said: "Your very statistics disprove your statement. 70+ are worse that any other group except below 26. And significantly worse against best group being 40-49. Now put into consideration that far less percentage of 70+ being on the road (comparing to 40-49 for example) and you get the picture. This group is second worse after youngest below 26 - I always thought so, always feel so on the road and all statistics that I ever seen only prove it."

I've already explained the reason for the higher serious injury and fatality rates for older people to you but you clearly don't follow. You're also making the huge error of allocating blame where none is stated or implied. In short, you either don't understand how to interpret statistics or you're misrepresenting them to try and validate your own prejudices.

Let me make it simple for you. The Vic stats make no comment whatsoever about the RELATIVE competency, or otherwise, of older drivers. Other statistics might well do, but so far we only have your unconvincing misinterpretations and gut feelings to go by.
0
FollowupID: 777801

Follow Up By: KSV - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:02

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:02
" You're the one pointing the finger, so it's up to you to provide evidence."

I DO NOT NEED to prove anything to anyone. You are welcome if you like. But do it for yourself first.

FWIF. Unlike some others blaming opponents of "ill-informing" without any support, I actually went and test it with AAMI on line. This is my results and I give a flick what you found:
All being equal for new Toyota Camry in low risk suburb:
1. Born 1 1an 1980 $653.72
2. Born 1 Jan 1970 $657.64
3. Born 1 Jan 1960 $630.21
4. Born 1 Jan 1950 $616.22
3. Born 1 Jan 1940 $630.87

I tired of this discussion (I new upfront that I will not have many supporters here for obvious reason) and I will not post in this thread anymore - seems like all argument been said and no-one will change anyone else opinion (such a revelation!)

Have a safe drive.
0
FollowupID: 777802

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:31

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:31
Those numbers and the numbers I got (the ones you "give a flick") show only one thing - your conclusion regarding insurance costs and driving ability is grossly inaccurate. Either that or 72 year-olds are, overall, better drivers than 30-40 year-olds.
0
FollowupID: 777809

Follow Up By: KSV - Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 20:16

Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 20:16
Ok, mister Bazooka. My son been just knocked of from his motorbike by some "safe" driver at 65+. Thankfully everything ok - just few scratches. His ("safe old fart") excuse was "I did not see you" - pretty ordinary story. Now if he was displaying sign "Caution - Old Blind Deaf Fart With Paralyzed Arm and Leg Behind Wheel", my son could give him a way (even actually old fart should give way).

I DO NOT NEED all those statistics (that actually support my point of view anyway), I JUST KNOW.
0
FollowupID: 779635

Follow Up By: Bonz (Vic) - Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 21:45

Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 21:45
Gents, youve been swinging the axe enough on this thread, let it lie now please.

KSV, we are sad to hear your news. Theres a few on the forum with even worse experience of road accidents, so all please measure your comments.
.
Time is an illusion produced by the passage of history
.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 779642

Follow Up By: KSV - Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:13

Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:13
I just remember funny story that explains all what this thread about:

One fellow came to doctor and said "Doc! Do something - I cannot DO IT more then once per week!". "But how old are you?" doctor asked. "65". "Well, at this age you doing damn well, what you complain about?". "Yeah" said fellow "but my buddy is 70 and he saying that he can do it 3 times per week!". Doctor answered "Then say to him that you can do it 5 times per week!".
0
FollowupID: 779644

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:19

Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:19
Even if we were to believe your story, the "I didn't see you" line is the most common reason given my motorists of ALL ages in regard to motorcycle accidents. And, as a motorist and bike rider myself I can say that in many instances it's a justifiable comment because of the poor positioning some riders consistently put themselves in. When you're on a motorbike you need to make yourself as visible as possible simply because of your vulnerability and the fact that you are indeed a lot harder to see than a car or truck. But irrespective of that, a sample size of one is absolutely meaningless (I can quote you 10 more serious accidents not involving old drivers which would be equally as irrelevant), unless of course you have an axe to grind, a bee in your bonnet or a chip on your shoulder. Judging from your comments on here you have all three. I JUST KNOW it.
0
FollowupID: 779645

Follow Up By: KSV - Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 09:50

Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 09:50
Yeah, Bazooka, your doctor most generous block - he allowed you saying that you can do it 7 times. Keep up.
0
FollowupID: 779663

Reply By: Member - Terra'Mer - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:20

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:20
I had an incident with an old driver last year. Pulled up at an intersection to cross a highway but it was really busy so I decided to turn into the traffic instead. The intersection was one lane, not designed for other cars to squeeze up the left side but one had. Because there wasn't another lane to my left I turned left as soon as there was room in the traffic only to discover a car so closely squeezed in on the left and in my blind spot. Don't you just hate that horrific sound of metal scraping on metal.

He was 78yo! Was handing in his licence and on his way to the scrap yard to sell his old car.

I think he wished he had handed in his llicence a day sooner.

We were very lucky, only $600 damage between us and no mechanical problems.

My Dad keeps his car clean these days after he got fed up with me writing graffiti into the dust on the back window like "You have just been passed by a senior" or this one always got a reaction "Honk if you love seniors" because they live in the retirement capital of NSW.

;)
Have you seen my marbles?

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 501537

Follow Up By: get outmore - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 20:12

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 20:12
Ok so you were driving decisively and not looking where you were going..... I wouldn't put all the blame on the old guy
0
FollowupID: 777749

Follow Up By: Member - Terra'Mer - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 20:53

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 20:53
Yup! That's why I walk. Old people not taking responsibility for breaking the law :P
Have you seen my marbles?

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 777756

Follow Up By: Rockape - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 21:06

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 21:06
Terra,
you make sure when you are walking not to speed up until you hit the 100 zone. LOL.

RA.
0
FollowupID: 777758

Reply By: fairdingkum - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:49

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:49
There car is my crumple zone! LOL!
AnswerID: 501539

Reply By: Member - wicket - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:54

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 15:54
And they should learn the difference between the brake and the accelerator to stop them continually running through shopfront windows in shopping centres
AnswerID: 501540

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:40

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:40
The shiny button factor strikes again. Every such case (a handful at best every year) is reported whereas tens of thousands of other incidents pass by with nary a mention.
0
FollowupID: 777729

Follow Up By: Rockape - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 19:39

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 19:39
Wicket,
They are not running through shop windows they are ram raiding. LOL.

RA.
0
FollowupID: 777748

Reply By: Lyn W3 - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:04

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:04
Perhaps we should all sit back and relax when you consider the statistics.

in NSW last year there were 370 persons killed on the road. this was the 2nd lowest since 1932 beat only by 2010 with 364 fatalities.

This is WAY DOWN from the peak in the 1970's of around 1,300 deaths per year.

Until the authorities can inforce a "Being Stupid" law I think the road toll will remain pretty static at its current levels.
AnswerID: 501542

Follow Up By: KSV - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 18:44

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 18:44
Personally I would contribute all this achievements to far more safer modern cars and drink/drug-driving program - IMHO ONLY useful things what they doing
0
FollowupID: 777740

Reply By: MEMBER - Darian, SA - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:35

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 16:35
Have to confess that its true Rocky :-o) - one of life's simple motoring pleasures is to pedantically obey every speed restriction, especially on those trips where you have all day to get somewhere nearby. Denying various governments the chance to fine me and then squander my money on stupid funding programs is another. As for stopping others from behaving irresponsibly ? No way - I always let them through soon as, hoping that they are the ones to get pinged.
AnswerID: 501546

Reply By: racinrob - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 17:31

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 17:31
Another good reason to support compulsory euthanasia for all those aged 75 or 80 years of age......with the exception of me of course LOL.


rr
AnswerID: 501550

Reply By: "crack-a-tinnie" - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 19:00

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 19:00
Well i reckon Rockape should either take up fishing for the amount of bites he got or waited untill friday funnies to post this clipping.

Good one Rockape..............a few people need to relax a bit on this forum
AnswerID: 501564

Follow Up By: Rockape - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 19:37

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 19:37
Mate,
just set a tri-net off the back of the trawler and by the catch I will have to shot a few shots as it looks promising.

In reality this problem is going to come up more often, so a bit of discussion doesn't hurt as long as people don't get to serious.

One interesting thing is they stated that older drivers between 40 and 59 have more accidents than the 17 to 25 range. Go figure that one out.

17 to 25 inclusive 9 years.
40 to 59 inclusive 20 years.
That don't seem to be quite fair in my books.

RA. Master fisherman
0
FollowupID: 777747

Reply By: Member - Keith Berg - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 20:54

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 20:54
I think the notion of an "S" plate for old timers is a great idea. We could all cut them a bit of slack without being tempted to become impatient.

For a lot of old folks, surrendering their license is a heartbreak. In NSW at least, they have distance-from-home restrictions for elderly drivers.

But I do like the "S" plate suggestion
Keith (aged 63)
AnswerID: 501577

Reply By: Axle - Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 22:10

Thursday, Jan 03, 2013 at 22:10
JEEZ!..RA. You got me worried mate i have to hit the freeway in the old landrover tomorrow,..might have to try and reach the speed limit, hope she dosen't blow up ..lol.



Cheers Axle.
AnswerID: 501580

Follow Up By: Rockape - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:08

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 11:08
Axle,
stopping it will be the biggest problem.

Have a good one
0
FollowupID: 777805

Reply By: Penchy - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 18:23

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 18:23
Hi Rockape,
Great idea for this post when I would assume the majority of members are seniors, and seeing as old people love a whinge, this is a popular thread.

My 2 cents.
Being an ex motorcyclist in Sydney metro and Brisbane metro, you get a gut feeling for who the good and bad drivers are. I dont need statistics to tell me who is and who isnt a good driver, but older people (male and female) top the list for poor motorists. Now when I say poor motorists, I dont mean folk that are involved in accidents, or who have aquired the most traffic infringements. I mean people that cannot contribute to the safe flow of traffic in any direction. Examples: not indicating for turns, turning left from the middle lane (you just blocked 2 lanes and your not driving a truck), driving 10k p/hr below the speed limit, not looking over your shoulder before changing lanes, planning your turn in advance so you're not in the right hand lane when you have to turn left in 500 metres. Ect. You would think these and others are common sense, turns out common sense is not that common. Just because you haven't received any tickets or had any accidents does not qualify you to be a good driver. How many accidents have you caused? If other drivers abuse you, flash or tail gate you, then they may not be the only ones with a problem.
BTW, I'm a 35 yr old male with a clean licence. I have accidents and loads of tickets in the past, all were my fault, and all I was the only vehicle in the accident. I have learnt my lessons and paid my fines.
AnswerID: 501658

Follow Up By: Rockape - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 18:53

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 18:53
Penchy,
I like your post. Very honest.

We have to share the road with all users and ages. As people age they do slow down and don't react as quickly. The younger ones are more intent on getting to the red light first.

Bikes scare the hell out of me as they come out of nowhere and accelerate that quickly they just appear. They don't have to break the speed limit, one minute they are in your mirror and the next they are past or in your blind spot. Not having a go at bike riders it is just fact.

I am a great believer in defensive driving courses for all, but that ain't going to happen.

Yes! I have made some poor decisions on the road. I once used to refer to my licences as bank books because years ago they would enter all the bad things on the back of the licence.

45 years one accident that was my fault and a million near misses touch wood.

Have a good one,
RA.





0
FollowupID: 777859

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 22:07

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 22:07
Rode bikes for decades myself Penchy and in my experience no age-group has a mortgage on foolishness, lack of awareness, or discourtesy for other road users. Things that an old timer might do (wrong) are different from a testosterone-fired 20-something or a self-centred person in the 30s or 40s. When you've ridden and driven long enough you'll have cursed them all on numerous occasions - and you'll probably have been (rightly) cursed at yourself more than a few times when you've misjudged something while behind the wheel. Personally I'm most cautious when in the vicinity of a city driver of any age wearing a hat or cap - probably wrongly, but it's a gut feeling.
0
FollowupID: 777877

Follow Up By: Rockape - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 22:13

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 22:13
Bazz,
you aren't wrong. Anyone in a built up area with a hat on, scares the hell out of me.

RA.
0
FollowupID: 777879

Follow Up By: Penchy - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 23:38

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 23:38
+1 for hats
0
FollowupID: 777886

Follow Up By: Member - Scott M (NSW) - Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:46

Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:46
Beware the '8' in the plate......
0
FollowupID: 779649

Reply By: Member - Jim - Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 19:24

Friday, Jan 04, 2013 at 19:24
Some of this stuff is "leaked" out to the press to suit a future need. More likely than not by insurance companies.

Now the press wouldn't know "sh!t from clay" nowadays so they just put a headline on it and stick it in the paper or the internet.

For those of us old enough to remember:
when we were 17 years old there was a premium to be paid because we were under 18
at 18 we were under 21
at 21 we were under 25
at 25 we were under 29

Now, in 2013 wouldn't it be good to get those that are over 60 (and there are a lot of them) and they have already been through all the insurance company levies for all of the above.

It all just goes round!

Jim

AnswerID: 501662

Reply By: mikehzz - Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:43

Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 22:43
Should we ban them from walking as well? Some old ladies held me up on the footpath the other day and I am way too important to have my ambulatory progress impeded by old codgers. One of them swerved into my imaginary footpath lane causing me to foot brake quite heavily.....I blew my nose very loudly at her. Alas, she didn't hear it.
AnswerID: 503045

Follow Up By: landseka - Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:50

Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:50
At last...I think someone (Mikehzz) actually got the original post's meaning. Everyone else just read the headline!
0
FollowupID: 779671

Follow Up By: Rockape - Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:02

Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:02
Thanks fellas, glad to see some are light hearted.

I am going to hand my trolley jack licence in, as I ran over my foot with one this morning. Bugger

I can't wait to get a mobility scooter. In fact I might get a ride on with a 48" cut. I should be able to cause some havoc with one of those. Better still I will get a zero turn one.

Have a good day,
RA.

0
FollowupID: 779675

Follow Up By: mikehzz - Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 13:40

Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 13:40
I had a great tussle with a mobility scooter not long ago. It was doing well until I shouldered charged a granny coming in the other direction as she passed between us. The scooter took out a rather large advertising stand in front of a chemist as I power walked off. I have to admit though, some grannies can take a hit. :-)
0
FollowupID: 779679

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)