AsstChiefMark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2014 times:
Today, George Russell Weller was found guilty of running down 10 people in a Santa Monica farmers market in 2003. I think he sealed his fate when he commented, "If you saw me coming, why didn't you get out of the way?"
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 22036 posts, RR: 55
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1993 times:
Quoting AsstChiefMark (Thread starter): I think he sealed his fate when he commented, "If you saw me coming, why didn't you get out of the way?"
It is a good question. But a better question would be "why the hell were you driving through a pedestrian area at better than 40 miles an hour?" Or perhaps "if you're pressing the brake pedal and not slowing down, is there a possibility that you're actually NOT pressing the brake pedal?"
How about some yearly road tests for the eldery to make sure they're up to the task?
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
DAL767400ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1968 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 2): How about some yearly road tests for the eldery to make sure they're up to the task?
Would be a good idea, but won't happen for the always popular "discrimination" excuse Ted mentioned. But really, how discriminating would be to have elderly drivers above a certain age having to do a yearly test, that includes checking eye-sight, reaction times, and general way of driving? Heck, I test my eye-sight on yearly voluntary basis, and so do many others, yet to some morons requiring people to do that is discriminatory.
RobertNL070 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2003, 4540 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1955 times:
My father is 84 years old and still drives daily. He was one of the founding fathers of the Institute for Advanced Motorists in the UK. Voluntarily he gets himself assessed every year, because he realises that he might well pose a risk to pedestrians or other motorists, and every time he passes with flying colours.
After passing our driving exams (all of us first time round), he insisted that we, his three children, then followed an advanced drivers' course. In my twenty-six years behind the wheel I've never even had a near miss, let alone an full-blown accident * knocks on wood*. Road safety is one of my 'things'.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13282 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1948 times:
It is sad that this person did this terrifying act. 10 were killed & 63 injured. I suspect that he will go to a hospital or nursing home section of a prison due to his age and probable health.
He probably shouldn't have been driving with the probable mental and physical health one needs to drive a car and worse for one of his advanced age. Problem is that taking away one's license is taking away their personal freedom as well as access to medical services and shopping. Many cannot walk long distances or their homes are just too far from those needs anyway, don't have public transport or don't have or wish to impose upon family and friends as alternative drivers.
I do agree that after a certain age, perhaps 65, some type of eye and health screening should be done when ever the person has to renew their license. You could have a slightly higher fee for covering the costs of such tests ($10?). Renewals should not be beyond a 2 year limit after age 65. It should be easier for Doctors to contact and direct the State DMV's if they believe a person is not competent to drive and have their license revoked.
WrenchBender From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 1779 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1928 times:
Driving is a privilege not a RIGHT. It is not discrimination to require testing of individuals who need to prove their capability to have or regain a drivers licence. The AARP and ACLU can stick it, I am in favour of mandatory testing of every driver at 5 year intervals from the age of 20 to 60 and 2 year intervals after that. Thart is not discrimination that is common sense.
pilots get check rides periodically why not drivers.