Another person killed by an elderly driver

People too old to drive are one of my Major social pet peeves.
Let me throw this out there as well:
Last year here we had an older couple, the woman was in her 80s and wasn't able to drive, so she had he husband, who was described as having "severe" Alzheimer's Disease, drive her around.
They drove to the Christian Bookstore one day. While she was browsing, he walked out the door, got in the car and left. They found the car three days later 80 miles away on a logging road. He was found about a 100 yards away in some brush, frozen to death.
Now I know this may sound unpopular, but I argued for days the wife should be charged with a crime, perhaps negligence for allowing her husband, whom she described as having "severe" Alzheimer's letting her drive her around.
I find this happens a good deal, older people will allow the lesser of two evils drive, in this case a lady in poor health defers to man with Alzheimer's. She knew he of his condition and allowed him to drive anyway.
I think she should have been charged.

Also last year, we had two cases about a week apart of older men, both over 85, driving the wrong way on a 4-lane highway in broad daylight. One caused two accidents and kept on going. Police caught him the next day and he got off scot-fucking free.

Rant over

 

Wait a minute.

Why in the world would you require people who drive, presumably every day, to retake tests if they haven't wrecked, caused accidents, gotten a shitload of tickets?

Jesus, some of you seem hell bent on letting the government make it so driving is a miserable, pain in the ass experience.....

 

Only if you are from New Jersey or Ohio!

 

My point is -- some around here don't want people to text while they drive, talk on cell phones while they drive, use their GPS devices while they drive, if they are under 18 have passengers in the car while they drive, if they are older than 70 drive unless they take a dementia test every six months......

When does it end?

Accidents happen, yes we should take SOME precautions to prevent them, but this is getting ridiculous.

I mean, sometimes accidents even happen to 35 year olds who have never had a ticket, have both hands at 9 and 3 on the steering wheel and wore their seatbelt as well.

 

Slippery slope arguments are still fallacious.

 

I'm not making a slippery slope argument.

 

Just because you've never gotten in an accident, never gotten a ticket, etc., doesn't make you a good driver.

Example: Today I was stuck behind a minivan driven by an elderly person that was traveling 45 mph on a 60-mph two-lane highway. He used his turn signal when appropriate... except it was the wrong one. The way laws are enforced now, he'll never be ticketed unless he causes an accident.

Which brings me to another argument -- in addition to changing driver testing (I'm for retesting everyone every, say, five years, and making the test much more rigorous), change the way traffic laws are written and enforced. Raise the speed limits to what people actually drive, and do more patrolling for actual dangerous behavior.

 

Let me help you out.....

When does the WHINING AND BITCHING AND CRYING ABOUT WHAT THE FUCK OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING IN THEIR CAR BY A BUNCH OF WHINERS WHO CAN'T STAY THE FUCK OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE'S LIVES end?

 

Let me help you out:

When you ask that question in the context of a specific proposal, such as regulation of slippery slope drivers, it is by definition a slippery-slope argument.

(And the answer is, as long as societies get more complex, it never will).

 

It's one thing to stay out of other people's lives and another to make my life safer. I was nearly killed TWICE by elderly drivers. I think they should be tested. Now, what some are proposing, about rigorous testing every five years? I'm not on board with that.

 

So you want to raise speed limits, but you are concerned about making roads safer so you want people to retake driving tests?

And no doubt it would cost another, what $100 or $200 to retake tests and get your license?

That is silly.

You shouldn't have to prove you are competent at something you do every day unless you give an actual reason - i.e. a rash of wrecks or tickets -- for someone to question your competency.