Sklansky wants elderly drivers to post a warning on their cars

[JohnCommode]

Druff, nowhere in your latest post do you mention the most dangerous person in the entire United States, the American male teenage driver. This is indisputable. The reason why drivers your age and younger seem to single out a low risk group like seniors is because of their experience with elderly drivers. They drive too slowly and that is annoying to young people with their "busy" schedules. What you don't seem to grasp is that Delaware, BetCheckBet, and myself have already been your age and we know what bothers you because it bothered us at your age. We also remember the reckless behavior of our own youth. Finally, bizarre and grotesque accidents involving seniors make good media stories. The old guy who ploughed into the LA Farmers Market about 20 years ago and the senior in Florida who hit a cyclist and drove home with him lying on the hood are great stories but statistically insignificant. With regard to Crow Diddly, texting while driving, substance impaired driving and deliberate recklessness are areas where younger drivers particularly excel. If you think that is silly, I am not sure what I can say that wouldn't be insulting. Also, I guess you don't frequent public transportation much. I have my senior pass do you have a public transportation pass?

[Dan Druff]

Druff, nowhere in your latest post do you mention the most dangerous person in the entire United States, the American male teenage driver. This is indisputable. The reason why drivers your age and younger seem to single out a low risk group like seniors is because of their experience with elderly drivers. They drive too slowly and that is annoying to young people with their "busy" schedules. What you don't seem to grasp is that Delaware, BetCheckBet, and myself have already been your age and we know what bothers you because it bothered us at your age. We also remember the reckless behavior of our own youth. Finally, bizarre and grotesque accidents involving seniors make good media stories. The old guy who ploughed into the LA Farmers Market about 20 years ago and the senior in Florida who hit a cyclist and drove home with him lying on the hood are great stories but statistically insignificant. With regard to Crow Diddly, texting while driving, substance impaired driving and deliberate recklessness are areas where younger drivers particularly excel. If you think that is silly, I am not sure what I can say that wouldn't be insulting. Also, I guess you don't frequent public transportation much. I have my senior pass do you have a public transportation pass?

But again, you can't test for bad behavior exhibited by drivers when they think nobody is watching. I am not trying to attack elderly drivers here, or say they are the cause of most deaths on the road. I realize that young male drivers are the most dangerous in that respect.

But again, this isn't an age competition.

I am only mentioning the elderly (the ones over 80) because they have a different situation going on.

The reckless young male drivers CAN drive well, but often choose not to. That's very hard to test for, so there's not much we can do, other than get tougher with suspending licenses for drivers caught being reckless.

The over-80 driver often WANTS to drive well, but physically can't. That CAN be tested very easily, which is why I advocate more frequent testing.

[hutmaster]

[Crowe Diddly]

With regard to Crow Diddly, texting while driving, substance impaired driving and deliberate recklessness are areas where younger drivers particularly excel. If you think that is silly, I am not sure what I can say that wouldn't be insulting. Also, I guess you don't frequent public transportation much. I have my senior pass do you have a public transportation pass?

I don't think that's silly, I think its silly that you use such obvious examples and act like anyone was arguing otherwise. Of COURSE younger drivers do those things. Nobody's defending young drivers, that's why I thought your examples were silly. Problem with older drivers who have their skills go is they ar ebad ALL the time. They're a danger as soon as they pull out of their driveway. Once the senses and skills go, they're gone forever. They're not distracted for a minute, they're impaired the entire time, in some cases. These are things that are easily resolvable. Eye and hearing tests every few years would be a great start, with some sort of easy test that just ensures they are not completely out of touch with reality.

Yes, I do take public transportation. Yes, its full of old people. And yes, I was overly broad about elderly giving up their licenses. The people I described are probably a lot lower % of the whole than I gave you oldies credit for. I probably only notice the stubborn ones, as nobody tells stories about how grandma was so reasonable about giving up her car. Perception bias of sorts.

[JohnCommode]

Sorry BetCheckBet, I'm a Patriots and Celtics fan and I assume that this is probably a hockey player like Hull, definitely not Orr or Howe. As for you Druff, your much beloved grandmother was no threat to anyone, a self- regulator in her own way. People who want to test elders say that that they want to be tough on all drivers but the catalyst for their ire is almost always the same whether they will admit it or not, interaction with slow driving seniors and stories about crazy accidents involving seniors. If anyone thinks that that I am going to make a survivor of Omaha Beach at Normandy or of the Bataan Death March, undergo the indignity of having their competence tested while some stoner punk drives around looking to score, they are as crazy as the depraved Sklansky.

[Jayjami]

What's the big deal? Everybody in Kentucky and West Virginia does too.

[Salty_Aus]

Sorry BetCheckBet, I'm a Patriots and Celtics fan and I assume that this is probably a hockey player like Hull, definitely not Orr or Howe. As for you Druff, your much beloved grandmother was no threat to anyone, a self- regulator in her own way. People who want to test elders say that that they want to be tough on all drivers but the catalyst for their ire is almost always the same whether they will admit it or not, interaction with slow driving seniors and stories about crazy accidents involving seniors. If anyone thinks that that I am going to make a survivor of Omaha Beach at Normandy or of the Bataan Death March, undergo the indignity of having their competence tested while some stoner punk drives around looking to score, they are as crazy as the depraved Sklansky.

Smoking pot makes you drive slower and more cautiously. There is a peer reviewed study that concluded cannabis users are less likely to have an accident while under the influence.

Whenever I smoke bud and drive, I never exceed the speed limits and I'm naturally extra cautious, when I'm straight I drive much faster and I'm less patient.
I do believe my reflexes are impaired to a slight degree, but slowing down more then compensates.

Just on a side-note.

[JohnCommode]

Sorry SALTY AUS, it may be both a generational thing combined with my limited experience with marijuana in the 70's, but I don't think I can get behind the notion of marijuana as a safe driving product. Even in states where it is legal, I don't think you will ever be able to buy an ounce of Acapulco Gold at Pep Boys or Napa.

[Salty_Aus]

Sorry SALTY AUS, it may be both a generational thing combined with my limited experience with marijuana in the 70's, but I don't think I can get behind the notion of marijuana as a safe driving product. Even in states where it is legal, I don't think you will ever be able to buy an ounce of Acapulco Gold at Pep Boys or Napa.

First time I ever got smashed and hit the roads, I sat in the slow lane doing 80 KPH in a 100 KPH zone, hanging on to the handlebars of my bike thinking 'fuck I'm going fast'

Booze makes you feel confident and you drive fast and reckless, pot slows me down and I drive extra cautious without doubt.
Not that I make a habit of driving smashed, it's been at least ten years since I last did this.

Agree, would be a hard concept for many to accept and there certainly is a degree of impairment. And of course some folks would react differently.

Worth a read, I'm sure I could find other sites who disagree and are poorly researched, but this is rather well researched and a balanced argument in my opinion.

https://www.erowid.org/plants/cannab...driving7.shtml

[Crowe Diddly]

interesting stat: 5 months of cannabis legalization in Colorado, traffic fatalities are down 9%. Basically,young people are getting stoned instead of getting drunk, and the drunk driving numbers are down accordingly. Beer sales are also down some amount, though this article didn't say how much.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_19437417

"Rees said the main reason for the drop appears to be that medical-marijuana laws mean young people spend less time drinking and more time smoking cannabis. Legalization of medical marijuana, the researchers report, is associated with a 12-percent drop in the alcohol-related fatal-crash rate and a 19-percent decrease in the fatality rate of people in their 20s, according to the study."

[JohnCommode]

If I had to choose between people smoking weed or people drinking, I would definitely go with weed since people rarely seem to get aggressive as compared with alcohol. My only concerns about weed would be issues like lung damage, weed as a gateway drug, impaired driving, and possible brain cell damage. Even with all of that, weed seems preferable to alcohol when you think about all the mayhem caused by alcohol abuse. It certainly should be legalized.