Clarks

She thought she hit a deer LOL

https://www.philly.com/philly/news/br.../52090527.html

fordmanvt

She should be retested for her license. Too bad AARP will never let a retesting mandate go through.

gcottay

This has nothing to do with AARP. Everyone who commits any traffic offensive should be subject to retesting, and not at the usual kindergarten level.

In my book, a hit and run driver should have no use for license or car for several years.

smittie61984

I think he meant that old/elderly/numerically gifted people should be retested. If she did retest, then she'd probalby fail and wouldn't be on the road.

But the old people make up a huge voting block and will show up to the polls on a non-presidential election cycle. Plus with the Baby Boomers (aka the "gimmie" generation) so huge right now, no politician in their right mind would go against them.

DX-MAN

The whole system needs overhauled; heck, some places, it's so easy to get licensed, you may as well get your license with a fill-up of gas. (Catch-22 there? lol)

There's nothing 'punitive' about requiring a retest after an accident of a certain severity, say, enough to disable one involved vehicle, or the need for EMT assistance. LET 'EM GO TO THE POLLS -- we can go, too, and we're the ones looking for shelter from these vacant-eyed menaces! (hyperbole? likely so....)

I recall the deal in Germany, while I was in the svc; driver's ed was mandatory for citizens, about 5-6 months long, expensive, and tough. Your license, when issued, never required renewal, but if you lost it, it was GONE.

tadawdy

Besides her hitting a kid on a bike, the fact she was so confused by what happened should be enough to revoke her license. There really ought to be some test of reflexes and awareness involved in testing for licenses; oh, yeah, it's called an actually difficult driving test in traffic.

hurley.girl

Is it normal to continue driving as if nothing happened if you think you hit a deer?

gcottay

Why engage in age discrimination? Start with a rigorous testing program. First, apply it to traffic offenders since they have already demonstrated a deficit. If that does not sufficiently improve the driving breed, test us all every two or four years.

mandovoodoo

I would add a real training program, too. Look at the success of the motorcycle safety foundation courses in getting at least basic skills established in newbies. Periodic retraining should really be mandated. Successful passage of a retraining course as a requirement for license renewal - wouldn't that be a hoot!

Communities with lots of elderly drivers get a reputation. I used to have at least one close call a week when I rode in Oak Ridge, full of the old and infirm. Mixed with the young and stupid. I suspect all that practice has helped my motorcycling - my paranoia level and scanning/searching skills are still very well honed!

Hit a deer. She probably just freaked out and kept going. The kid's fault anyway for being on a road. Roads are for cars and deer only.

unterhausen

too bad we don't have decent mass transit in most places. My dad voluntarily gave up driving when he rear-ended someone while cleaning his glasses. He was 84, and did the responsible thing. Now he wants to get his license again "for an emergency." I told him nobody would fault him for driving without a license in an emergency, which didn't make him happy. But I understand his problem, if he wants go go somewhere he has to get his wife to take him or he doesn't go. Cab service stinks in most parts of the U.S., but so many people would be better off if they would just use that. Why ruin your final years by hurting or maiming someone? Makes no sense.

Speaking of voting, if someone voluntarily gives up their license, in many states now it has become very difficult to vote.

esther-L

Most states have a state id card that is just as official as a drivers license, issued by DMV.

In some states, the doctor or a close relative of a person who needs to stop driving can contact DMV and request an exam of the person. Virginia has this. I know someone who used this to get her mother's license removed for failing the eye test outside of her renewal cycle.

dobber

It's always easy to discriminate against others.

smittie61984

Why test at any age? No, seriously we should test old people becuase their bodies are deteriating and they do not have the same reflexes as younger people do nor can they see as well. Old people cause accidents and as a bicycle rider, motorcycle rider, car driver, and a person who works on the side of the road every day often times flagging traffic, I have the most trouble and close calls (and by close calls I mean me or others getting killed) from old people. When I'm flagging traffic take a wild guess which group of drivers I have the easiest time with. Teenagers, believe it or not! They can see a bagillion miles away and have reflexes and insticts of a cat.

As for testing every 2-4 years. Are you serioius? Our government struggles keeping up with the demand now, imagine 200million people coming at once to the DMV.

60+ would be a good start for retesting. Or we can just set up road blocks at Florida and not let anyone with a Florida tag through. I'm cool with either.

genec

First it would not be 200 million all at once, second, there are DMVs in every state, and usually a couple offices in major cities. Any retesting would be done on a gradual spread out basis.

Last... do real critical testing and charge a real fee for it and we may take some of these bad drivers off the road AND add some revenue to the state coffers. As it is now, driver's licenses are practically given away.

dobber

How about we test short people as they have difficulty seeing over the wheel? How about those under 25 as they're more prone to making immature decisions?

I think you'd be suprised at the number of so called geriatrics who could whop the younger generations.

genec

Test everyone. Forget issues of age or height or whatever discrimination...

Roody

Your attitude toward people who were born sooner than you is pretty negative. I'm betting that attitude will improve as you yourself get older.

fordmanvt

Only problem with everybody is the cost. The driver is this instance would be a candidate for retesting regardless of age.

genec

raise the charge for testing... they give the darn driver's licenses away now as it is... increase the cost so it becomes something of a burden, AND the state makes a buck or two.... Jeeze is it really that difficult to figure out... we "give" the darn things away as it is.

fordmanvt

It is not, but you'll never get liscence fees up to where they "should" be either. Some one will raise a stink about it hurting the lower class, and with our car centric culture, they'd probably be right. People are stuck where they are because they aren't willing to give anything up in order to transition to something better.

genec

if it is government mandated with a "relief system" for those that can prove hardship, then there is no reason not to make license fees pay for the whole license system and charge enough for states to actually have revenue... and to do the job right.

This economy and the current issues are just the ticket for such change.

smittie61984

Here in Georgia for someone to test for their license (like a 16 year old getting a license) there is I think an average of 3-4 month wait period (that was 3 years ago so probably longer now) just to test for your license. I can't wait to see the look on your face when you go back in to test (and take off work) and you are not able to drive for 4 months because your license has expired and you are waiting to be retested. Even more interesting will be the look on your face when you loose your job because you are not able to go to work or for many people drive FOR work.

Our government couldn't handle the "cash for clunkers" for more than 4 days. That's something used care salesmen had figured out for decades. What makes people think that a massive operation such as retesting every driver who is currently on the road is going to work?

genec

How about the fact that we are talking different governments organizations... cash for clunkers is run by the feds and the "couldn't handle it" is basically due to handing out federal monies. Drivers licenses are issued by the state... who already has the systems in place to do the job. As for the idiot that cannot plan ahead to determine that their license expires... tough luck. I have no more sympathy for that idiot than I do for the idiot that says cyclists "force them" to make bad passing decisions.

The country needs to get a clue. Personal responsibility is one place it needs to start.

Roody

These are probably often the same people....unable to plan ahead for a driver's license/unable to plan ahead for a safe pass.

Keith99

Actually yes. Stopping to investigate can be exceptionally dangerous. A wounded deer can kill.

Not knowing the difference between a deer and a kid on a bike is a different question.