Interesting that they are discussing 65 year old motorists and then make these statements:
I wonder if they have considered the judgment of a 40 year old experienced motorist vice that of a 20 year old, the latter who may have been driving for only 2 years."Older drivers who are healthy aren't necessarily any less safe than younger drivers. But many older drivers are likely to have age-related medical conditions that can affect their driving.
A 40-year-old needs 20 times more light to see at night to see than a 20-year-old, Coughlin said. Older drivers generally are less able to judge speed and distances, their reflexes are slower, they may be more easily confused and they're less flexible, which affects their ability to turn so that they can look to the side or behind them."
On the other hand, those motorists that have been on the road for a number of years may not be aware of laws that have changed or been enacted since they last read a motorists handbook. Many states for instance enacted laws pertaining to cyclists in the '70s, where as a 65 year old motorist may have first started to drive in the early '60s.
I recall discussing with my father the fact that it was legal for me to bike on the streets in all 50 states... he had no idea that cyclists had such rights, and thought that motorists were merely doing cyclists a favor by permitting them on the road.
I don't know about the older motorists, but this older cyclist doesn't see as well as I did thirty years ago and certainly has flexibility issues that impact, to some degree, my safety on the road. Maybe it is a good thing I don't drive anymore.
Beware: 100% of Drivers and Cyclists Are Human
Laissez les bon temps rouler
Only some 10 or so years ago the drivers education handbook for CA first started to include information pertaining to cyclists. Only in the past 3-5 years has there been any bicycle related item on the drivers written test.
While bicycles have existed in the US since the 1890s or so, what really was their legal status on the roadways?
And of course you may also be right with respect to what drivers "hear" when they learn the laws when they are learning to drive... that seems to be a continuing issue.
I think you may be wrong about when the driver's handbook in CA began including info on bikes. I left a decade ago and I seem to remember seeing a very small piece on bikes in the mid-90's. Small quibble, your larger point regarding the relative newness of laws regarding our 19th century conveyances seems unassailable.
also: almost half of all drivers have below-average skills behind the wheel.
"have fun and be kind"
- an internet post
If you young punks don't like my driving, GET OFF THE SIDEWALK!
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
Stupidity knows no age bounds. Perhaps an intelligence test should be included with the driver's exam as well:
Even worse than the driver's behavior is the paltry fine assessed.
Night-vision goggles are now on my 40th birthday list...
JF's efforts in the 1970s were to prevent restrictive laws on cyclist from being inacted. He admits to being only partially effective and was able to keep the worst of the proposed restrictions from being included. Other states then put in place much of the new CA cycling restrictions. Prior to 1970 there were few restrictions on cyclist.
There was even a case in the late 1800s or early 1900s that affirmed cyclist rights to use roads. As I racall, that was the case dealing with cyclist and trolly cars.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Of course, once Chipcom got a car none of the cyclists wanted to ride on sidewalks anymore.
And here's a picture.
Ape who drives like 60