Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Cyclist run over three times...but it was an "accident".

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Cyclist run over three times...but it was an "accident".

Old 10-20-21, 08:17 AM
  #1  
JW Fas
Cop Magnet
Thread Starter
 
JW Fas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 175
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Liked 115 Times in 49 Posts
Cyclist run over three times...but it was an "accident".

https://www.ksl.com/article/50264472...ple-times-dies

ROY A bicyclist who police say was run over several times by the same car has died from his injuries.

Now police say they will meet with the Weber County Attorney's Office to determine what, if any, criminal charges should be filed.

Warren Yoshio Watanabe, 62, was riding his bicycle on the sidewalk in Roy on Sept. 20 and was passing Warren's Family Restaurant, 5523 S. 3500 West, when a car pulling out of the parking lot hit him, according to police.

The woman driving the car backed up, paused, then drove forward and struck the bicyclist again. The woman again backed up, paused "and then drives forward and at this time, she runs over Warren who is lying on the ground directly in front of the vehicle," according to a search warrant affidavit.

The woman then put her car in reverse for a third time and ran over Watanabe one more time going backward, the warrant states. It was then that the woman got out of her car and saw Watanabe on the ground and called 911.

The incident was recorded on the restaurant's security camera. The restaurant's general manager said it appeared the driver did not realize she had hit a bicyclist.

Watanabe suffered "14 broken ribs, a shattered kidney, a damaged liver, and was unable to breathe on his own," according to the warrant. He died from his injuries on Sept. 25.

Watanabe was born in Oregon and graduated from Roy High School in 1978, according to his obituary.

"He was an avid fisherman and he loved to watch his war and Western movies. He also loved spending time with his family," his obituary states.

Roy police do not believe the 77-year-old driver of the car intentionally ran over Watanabe. Investigators believe the woman did not realize she hit a bicycle, but apparently knew she had hit something and kept trying to drive around or over it by backing up and going forward.
Yet another example of why recurring road testing should happen once you reach a certain age. Sure, the driver may not have intentionally hit the cyclist, but it shouldn't take running someone over three times before you realize you hit them.
JW Fas is offline  
Likes For JW Fas:
Old 10-20-21, 09:41 AM
  #2  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,001

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12095 Post(s)
Liked 3,716 Times in 2,559 Posts
Well heck... obviously the cyclist's fault for cycling on the sidewalk. Was he even wearing a helmet.
genec is offline  
Old 10-20-21, 01:29 PM
  #3  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 26,876
Mentioned: 213 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15655 Post(s)
Liked 3,115 Times in 2,319 Posts
There may well be a 77 year old driver that is not safe on the streets.

Hard to say if there should be criminal prosecution (assuming she didn't know the victim or have a beef with him), but she should have her driver's license permanently revoked, and all vehicles taken away and disposed of.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 10-20-21, 01:42 PM
  #4  
Bald Paul
Senior Member
 
Bald Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 798
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 375 Post(s)
Liked 688 Times in 323 Posts
There would probably be more outrage had it been a young mother pushing her child in a stroller.

Some people, no matter what age, just shouldn't be driving.

Bald Paul is offline  
Likes For Bald Paul:
Old 10-20-21, 02:16 PM
  #5  
Daniel4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,912

Bikes: Sekine 1979 ten speed racer

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1178 Post(s)
Liked 364 Times in 250 Posts
Originally Posted by Bald Paul View Post
There would probably be more outrage had it been a young mother pushing her child in a stroller.

...
I don't think so.

Here's a story where a couple of kids were run over by a driver using an SUV. It was in a ward where the councillor was one of three anti-cyclist councillors.

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5681983

The headlines are filled with these types of incidences and yet, little is done except the business as usual debates about road safety.

However, we all know there is an unofficial heirarcy of priority in police enforcement and traffic justice.
Top priority goes to those in private motor vehicles. Lowest priority are pedestrians and cyclists.

Look at that ethical dilemma in which a driver or a self-driving car has to decide to kill a rich executive at a bus stop or a group of 5 kids in a bus. No one has ever considered that the car can collide into an inanimate object thus saving everybody (including the driver). Cars nowadays are so full of safety features, there's no way the driver would die. Yet, damaging a motor vehicle over saving the lives of pedestrians and bus riders are out of the question.
Daniel4 is offline  
Old 10-20-21, 04:16 PM
  #6  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,148

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 901 Times in 599 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
Look at that ethical dilemma in which a driver or a self-driving car has to decide to kill a rich executive at a bus stop or a group of 5 kids in a bus. No one has ever considered that the car can collide into an inanimate object thus saving everybody (including the driver). Cars nowadays are so full of safety features, there's no way the driver would die. Yet, damaging a motor vehicle over saving the lives of pedestrians and bus riders are out of the question.
A real person died as a result of this incident. I suggest sticking to what is known about this incident and save the fabricated scenarios for an appropriate location.
The Using Your Imagination thread is a couple of threads below this one.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Likes For I-Like-To-Bike:
Old 10-22-21, 09:53 AM
  #7  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,418

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6474 Post(s)
Liked 6,160 Times in 3,477 Posts
Originally Posted by cubewheels View Post
There should be mandatory driving test for 60 year old drivers and every 10 years after they hit the age of 60. They lose their license if they flunk it. Simple common sense.

Why 60? Why every 10 years?

60 is too young, so you're going to end up testing a huge number of people for no real benefit, and every 10 years means no tests between the ages of 80 and 90, and between 90 and 100, so every ten years is so long that it pretty much defeats the purpose of repeated testing.

Testers cost money, btw, which is why road retesting generally isn't the rule in most places.

Illinois has an interesting system--road test at 75, one at 81 and every two years until 87, then once a year. That makes a bit more sense than 60 and every ten years. Illinois is also the only state in the US that requires routine retesting for senior citizens. New Hampshire used to but changed that a while ago.

Last edited by livedarklions; 10-22-21 at 10:08 AM.
livedarklions is offline  
Likes For livedarklions:
Old 10-22-21, 07:18 PM
  #8  
Daniel4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,912

Bikes: Sekine 1979 ten speed racer

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1178 Post(s)
Liked 364 Times in 250 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
Why 60? Why every 10 years?

60 is too young, so you're going to end up testing a huge number of people for no real benefit, and every 10 years means no tests between the ages of 80 and 90, and between 90 and 100, so every ten years is so long that it pretty much defeats the purpose of repeated testing.

Testers cost money, btw, which is why road retesting generally isn't the rule in most places.

Illinois has an interesting system--road test at 75, one at 81 and every two years until 87, then once a year. That makes a bit more sense than 60 and every ten years. Illinois is also the only state in the US that requires routine retesting for senior citizens. New Hampshire used to but changed that a while ago.
How about a road test for every incidence you're involved in? Get a ticket running a red light, speeding or parking, get retested. Get into a collision, get retested. This won't be so high as covering specific age group but enough of the population to get the problem drivers. And if you're a good enough driver you may never have to be retested. So that's an incentive to drive well.
Daniel4 is offline  
Old 10-22-21, 07:45 PM
  #9  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 26,876
Mentioned: 213 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15655 Post(s)
Liked 3,115 Times in 2,319 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
Why 60? Why every 10 years?

60 is too young, so you're going to end up testing a huge number of people for no real benefit, and every 10 years means no tests between the ages of 80 and 90, and between 90 and 100, so every ten years is so long that it pretty much defeats the purpose of repeated testing.

Testers cost money, btw, which is why road retesting generally isn't the rule in most places.

Illinois has an interesting system--road test at 75, one at 81 and every two years until 87, then once a year. That makes a bit more sense than 60 and every ten years. Illinois is also the only state in the US that requires routine retesting for senior citizens. New Hampshire used to but changed that a while ago.
I agree, 60 is before many problems set in, although things like flexibility issues may start setting in, and failure to look around or back.

That is a lot of tests for drivers in their 80's and 90's.

As far as the cost of the testing system, a lot can be charged to the people getting tested. It could be a rough transition going from the Silent generation to the Boomer generation.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 10-22-21, 09:47 PM
  #10  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,974

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1855 Post(s)
Liked 2,948 Times in 1,222 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
Look at that ethical dilemma in which a driver or a self-driving car has to decide to kill a rich executive at a bus stop or a group of 5 kids in a bus.
Rich executives hang out at bus stops? And, cars have software that can identify them? Amazing stuff.
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 10-23-21, 05:30 AM
  #11  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,418

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6474 Post(s)
Liked 6,160 Times in 3,477 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
How about a road test for every incidence you're involved in? Get a ticket running a red light, speeding or parking, get retested. Get into a collision, get retested. This won't be so high as covering specific age group but enough of the population to get the problem drivers. And if you're a good enough driver you may never have to be retested. So that's an incentive to drive well.

That may be the most unrealistic idea I've ever heard on the subject. Do you have any idea how many tests that would be? Retest for a parking ticket? Are you joking?

The political opposition to this idea would be absolutely impossible to overcome. Hell, I'd be against this. It's a colossal waste of resources. You might as well propose prison for going 5 miles over the speed limit.

Last edited by livedarklions; 10-23-21 at 05:44 AM.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 05:40 AM
  #12  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,418

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6474 Post(s)
Liked 6,160 Times in 3,477 Posts
Originally Posted by cubewheels View Post
Wow, I didn't know such thing already exist!

I suggested 60 years old from local knowledge. We have poor healthcare system in this country unless you're rich. The majority would have much higher chance of impairment that can affect driving by the age of 60.

And I don't think, the USA is an exception. I think there are demographic groups within USA with higher mortality rates and increased chance of impairment by the age of 60. Many from those groups have limited access, ill-informed about quality healthcare or pursue unhealthy lifestyles. Many here just may not be aware as I noticed many BF members are pretty well-off, living in nice neighborhoods, etc. Elsewhere in the USA, conditions are not different from a poor, 3rd world country.

The problem with your idea is that I don't think there's any statistics that suggest that someone as young as 60 is more likely than average to be an impaired driver. Actually, statistically, 60-69 is the safest age group overall, with fewer crashes and casualties per mile than any other age group in the US. So basically, you'd be enlisting the political opposition of a group that generally drives safely, is a huge demographic, and votes.

A lot of states require eye tests for the elderly, no idea if that's actually effective.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 05:53 AM
  #13  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,418

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6474 Post(s)
Liked 6,160 Times in 3,477 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK View Post
I agree, 60 is before many problems set in, although things like flexibility issues may start setting in, and failure to look around or back.

That is a lot of tests for drivers in their 80's and 90's.

As far as the cost of the testing system, a lot can be charged to the people getting tested. It could be a rough transition going from the Silent generation to the Boomer generation.

I think what happens every time this idea gets floated is that senior lobby gets fired up and kills it. It doesn't help that overall, the stats don't support the idea that older drivers are generally a high risk group, at least until they get to their 80s.

https://aaafoundation.org/rates-moto...tes-2014-2015/

If you look at the stats, 60-69 is the lowest risk group overall, and 70-80 is actually comparable or better than most demographic groups in accident rates. 80+ drivers' accidents have a higher fatality rate, but I'd bet that's an artifact of their age making them more likely to succumb to their injuries.
livedarklions is offline  
Likes For livedarklions:
Old 10-23-21, 07:37 AM
  #14  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,148

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 901 Times in 599 Posts
Timely article on this subject:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/18/w...d-drivers.html

Extract:
But new research suggests it may be time for everyone to breathe a little easier and maybe worry instead about young drivers who, as a whole, are more likely than us old-timers to speed and multitask.

Although there are now more older drivers than ever before on American roads, it seems there’s never been a safer time for those in the upper decades of life to drive a car. A recent study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that drivers aged 70 and older were less likely to be involved in a fatal car accident than those 35 to 54.

The study, published in June in the Journal of Safety Research, recorded a 43 percent drop in fatal accidents among drivers 70 and older from 1997 to 2018. For middle-aged drivers, the decline in fatal accidents was half that, 21 percent. Although seniors rarely drove as far as younger drivers did, older adults had better safety records per mile driven. In 2017, for the first time ever, drivers 70 and older had fewer crashes reported to the police than middle-aged drivers, the institute found.

Older adults benefit from years of driving experience that usually translates into better risk assessment and the ability to navigate challenges. Compared to young drivers, they are less likely to drink and drive, speed, ignore road signs, drive in bad weather and drive at night.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 08:12 AM
  #15  
grizzly59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 710
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 281 Post(s)
Liked 262 Times in 164 Posts
My mom is 90. I took her keys away at 89 as she was a danger to every living thing on the planet. Did not go over well, understatement. State dmv refused to help, no driving test needed for a license renewal. She can’t see very well, minutes long reaction time. DMV coached her through the eye exam, reissued a new drivers license, what a joke. Called auto insurance company to get her insurance stopped, they explained all the rights senior citizens have and that they wouldn’t cancel her insurance on my say so, even with a POA. Doctor can’t take it away. All up to the family to physically take her keys and car away. I won’t be surprised if the Sheriff arrests me for GTA.
grizzly59 is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 08:59 AM
  #16  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,148

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 901 Times in 599 Posts
Originally Posted by grizzly59 View Post
My mom is 90.
90 year old woman is not a 60 year old; just as a 12 year old girl is not a 23 year old woman. The same rule, law or standard of behavior towards them does not, and should not apply.

BTW, has the POA over your mother's affairs actually been transferred to you, or does it transfer such power to you contingent on her signing off on the transfer or some sort of official determination of her inability to make her own decisions?

Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 10-23-21 at 09:10 AM.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 09:00 AM
  #17  
Daniel4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,912

Bikes: Sekine 1979 ten speed racer

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1178 Post(s)
Liked 364 Times in 250 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
That may be the most unrealistic idea I've ever heard on the subject. Do you have any idea how many tests that would be? Retest for a parking ticket? Are you joking?

The political opposition to this idea would be absolutely impossible to overcome. Hell, I'd be against this. It's a colossal waste of resources. You might as well propose prison for going 5 miles over the speed limit.
Maybe, maybe not.

First, the fact that you think testing for every traffic violation is excessive indicates how widespread and excessive traffic violations are and how they become so commonly acceptable. Cost of testing would, of course be paid by the violator. Why are other road users always subsidizing drivers?

Secondly, it seems as if people tend to always target a specific group when in fact it's all of them. Don't insurance companies also have their data showing those under 25 are a high risk group as well?

That leaves the 26 to 60 who are supposed to be safe drivers. But that's also the age group commuting to work every day and causing all those collisions during rush hour every day.

So in reality, every driver needs to have regular retesting. Driving isn't a right. It's a privilege.

Last edited by Daniel4; 10-23-21 at 09:15 AM.
Daniel4 is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 09:26 AM
  #18  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 26,876
Mentioned: 213 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15655 Post(s)
Liked 3,115 Times in 2,319 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
I think what happens every time this idea gets floated is that senior lobby gets fired up and kills it. It doesn't help that overall, the stats don't support the idea that older drivers are generally a high risk group, at least until they get to their 80s.

https://aaafoundation.org/rates-moto...tes-2014-2015/

If you look at the stats, 60-69 is the lowest risk group overall, and 70-80 is actually comparable or better than most demographic groups in accident rates. 80+ drivers' accidents have a higher fatality rate, but I'd bet that's an artifact of their age making them more likely to succumb to their injuries.
Interesting study. I might have to try to dig up the raw data to confirm.
The study uses data from this AAA study:
https://publicaffairsresources.aaa.b...Survey2015.pdf

The study is a retrospective study, i.e. going by self reported responses and memory.

The age groups in the study for driving preferences don't align with the age groups in the crash study. Now, it is possible that unpublished raw data was accessed, but it isn't mentioned.

We know that driving changes significantly from age 60 to age 100 or so. Thus weighting driving for a 75+ age group for driving in the 80+ age group may not be appropriate.

Of course the driver above was age 77, so not quite 80.

What we do see from the data is that the driving for the 80+ crowd more or less mirrors the 20-30 age group. And it is possible that it is even worse.

Another interesting study. The charts are difficult to read, but I believe show percent of all accidents by age group, and percent of population by age group.
https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api...ication/810853

So, traffic crashes are male dominated, but by age 65, the women start catching up quickly. And for women, the crashes per population of women is higher in the 65+ group than any category other than 16 to 20.

It may be that in families, driving is male dominated, up until the 60's or 70's when either women become the primary drivers, or the men pass away. Also commuter driving may be male dominated. A shift of driver responsibility may be tough for some women.

I thought I'd look up Illinois.
https://qconline.com/life/illinois-h...dcccd2a7b.html

They have some of the toughest driving laws for elderly, but unfortunately they aren't keeping the statistics to really know if it is helping.

About 20 percent, or nearly 25,000, of the estimated 130,000 Illinoisans age 87 or older have valid driver licenses, according to last year's figures. There were about 117,000 licensed drivers ages 81 to 86, slightly more than half the estimated total of 228,000 Illinoisans in that age range.
So, by age 87, the number of drivers are dropping rapidly. Not all because of failed tests, but perhaps some choose not to take the test, whereas they might continue driving in other states where no test is required.

Not all 70+ or 80+ drivers are unsafe. And they may make choices to make their driving safer such as local driving only, and fewer, slower miles. But, there are some that have deteriorating driving skills.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 09:53 AM
  #19  
late
Senior Member
 
late's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,779
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11146 Post(s)
Liked 1,038 Times in 760 Posts
Originally Posted by cubewheels View Post

There should be mandatory driving test for 60 year old drivers and every 10 years after they hit the age of 60. They lose their license if they flunk it. Simple common sense.
Absolutely.

We passed a similar law here in Maine, but AARP fought it, and being a well funded national organisation, we didn't stand a chance.

FYI I am 70..
late is offline  
Likes For late:
Old 10-23-21, 09:54 AM
  #20  
late
Senior Member
 
late's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,779
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11146 Post(s)
Liked 1,038 Times in 760 Posts
Btw, good city design makes this sort of thing almost a non-issue.
late is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 12:36 PM
  #21  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 26,876
Mentioned: 213 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15655 Post(s)
Liked 3,115 Times in 2,319 Posts
Originally Posted by late View Post
Absolutely.

We passed a similar law here in Maine, but AARP fought it, and being a well funded national organisation, we didn't stand a chance.

FYI I am 70..
Originally Posted by late View Post
Btw, good city design makes this sort of thing almost a non-issue.
I'm not there yet. Hopefully by the time I turn 70 or 80, self-driving cars will be a reality. However, Mom has now hit 80, is living alone, and still driving.

Of course there is the problem with infrastructure for the suburban-rural communities.

But, the other thing that should be calculated.

Say a person spends $50,000 to drive for 10 years.
Vs paying $100 a week to get a taxi or car service for shopping trips. 52 weeks a year for that same 10 years, it comes out to $52,000...

I.E. One might do just fine with taxi or a car service. Plus, perhaps delivery service for some goods. Big expenses when one hands the driver a payment, but in the grand scheme of things, it isn't that bad.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 01:03 PM
  #22  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,148

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 901 Times in 599 Posts
Originally Posted by late View Post
Btw, good city design makes this sort of thing almost a non-issue.
Does "good city design" include moving everybody's residence and destinations to the city? Or are just the elderly to be subject to this "good city design"?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 02:35 PM
  #23  
mdarnton
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 178

Bikes: nothing to brag about

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked 125 Times in 67 Posts
Coming out of an underground garage, at the pay station, I was behind someone in her 40s whom I don't know but do recognize from my business connections pull the corner into the station too tightly, hop a 10 inch curb with her rear wheel (!) and ram the side of her car into the steel pole protecting the pay box, hard. She backed up about five feet, changed nothing, and did the same thing again. . . twice. Coincidentally, I'd just been in an elevator with her watching her juggle three boxes, repeatedly dropping them, not really changing what she was unsuccessfully doing. The garage was sort of a more dramatic instant replay of the elevator escapade

You don't have to be in your 70s to be a dangerous idiot in a rush.

By the way, I imagine that most of the many people per day who turn right just in front of me without bothering to signal are not in their 70s.

I am 72, by the way. I do signal, and I do not try to run over pay boxes.

Last edited by mdarnton; 10-23-21 at 02:39 PM.
mdarnton is offline  
Old 10-23-21, 07:03 PM
  #24  
late
Senior Member
 
late's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,779
Mentioned: 126 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11146 Post(s)
Liked 1,038 Times in 760 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post

Does "good city design" include moving everybody's residence and destinations to the city? Or are just the elderly to be subject to this "good city design"?
Walkable Cities
late is offline  
Old 10-24-21, 05:32 AM
  #25  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,418

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6474 Post(s)
Liked 6,160 Times in 3,477 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
Maybe, maybe not.

First, the fact that you think testing for every traffic violation is excessive indicates how widespread and excessive traffic violations are and how they become so commonly acceptable. Cost of testing would, of course be paid by the violator. Why are other road users always subsidizing drivers?

Secondly, it seems as if people tend to always target a specific group when in fact it's all of them. Don't insurance companies also have their data showing those under 25 are a high risk group as well?

That leaves the 26 to 60 who are supposed to be safe drivers. But that's also the age group commuting to work every day and causing all those collisions during rush hour every day.

So in reality, every driver needs to have regular retesting. Driving isn't a right. It's a privilege.

Your second to last sentence is your real agenda. Good luck with that.

You're really advocating using testing to deter driving. I don't think there's any reason to assume that making testing more widespread will result in anything but watering down the tests. If you want to deter traffic violations, increase the penalties, don't create an industry of most likely useless testing.

And you threw in parking tickets as a reason for retesting. Do you seriously believe not feeding the parking meter has anything to do with the risk of your driving?
livedarklions is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.