I've been saying that for years. There are lots of elderly folks who have decent reflexes and have their wits about them to keep driving but we should definitely start testing again and test every 5 years once they get to retirement age (65).

Do the same 5 year testing for anyone under 30!

Perhaps somebody needs a refresher course in READING. The original story was that while Reese Witherspoon was jogging she ran across an UNMARKED crosswalk. However, being the driver was 84, and Ms. Witherspoon is an Oscar winning movie celebrity, it clearly must be the fault of the driver, right?

Hollywood police are naturally going to issue a citation to the driver. Afterall - Pedestrians have the right of way. Regardless of whether they, themselves, are paying much attention to where they are walking or jogging, or even aware of their immediate surroundings due to the possibility that they may be tuned into their favorite iPod tunes or not.

Too bad the driver doesn't have the luxury of having her own spokeswoman to speak for her, huh?

I doesn't matter if the crosswalk was marked or unmarked. If she was crossing at the corner she had the right of way. Human body trumps car in this instance.

I was waiting at a red light the other day in the left-most left turn lane with a truck to my right. After the left-turn light changed to green, a pedestrian started running across the intersection, past the truck to my right and I luckily saw the truck slam on his brakes so I did, too. The man made it but I could have hit him if I hadn't followed the truck's lead.

As a driver, you ALWAYS have to be aware of your surroundings. If you know your reaction time is not what it used to be, you have to be doubly careful and I agree with Joanne that a driving test should be required at some age. I'm 59 and I would gladly submit to one rather than risk my life, my passengers', other drivers' or pedestrians' lives.

onewoman,

You are a moron. Crosswalks are there for a reason stupid.

Discrimination lawsuit awaits you.

onewonan: I take issue with your statement. The law doesn't allow a pedestrian (or jogger) to step into the path of a moving vehicle at will. The law does say that a driver must make every attempt to avoid hitting a person, but when they jump or run into your path 10 ft away what can you do? Unless this driver was running a stop sign or speeding, and if the obstruction was indeed there (the tree) I'd hire me a lawyer just for the principle of it. Chances are the offender or the cop won't even show up for the trial.

I wonder if the impact knocked Ms. Witherspoons headphones off! Just askin.

ThunderProof and Reba are only posts so far that make sense. What's with this attack on ANYONE because of "age" when Reese of the Withers was NOT legally crossing the street and JOGGING as well???

Does it occur to anyone here that the older driver was probably one heck of a lot more skilled and intelligent than the brain-dead Withers who runs off a curb in the middle of a street obviously without bothering to look right or left first?

onewoman... you are WRONG. If a crosswalk is not marked at "a corner" (btw.. corner of what.. a cow patch?) the pedestrian is REQUIRED to stop, look, and pay attention first. This is not a mind-reading culture at last look. In this case she was NOT on a crosswalk, and NOT at a corner, and she was running outta left field.

Quit with the discrimination against older drivers. Don't even think of prattling on against older people on any level (unless it is Olympics basketball... and even then, watch your step). I am getting fed up with these holier than thou attitudes towards older citizens.

I will bet each and every one of you that my mom, age 81, would not just beat you on drivers tests, but in IQ from the git go.

You folks should lay off: the driver was a thoughtful movie critic with a wee bit of initiative.......

I think every 2 years. 5 years is too much... your body goes through a lot of changes at that age.

Once you turn 65, you need to take a road test every 2 years. I would rather take a test and be safe, then to be senile and stubborn and say "I've been driving for 50 years!" and hit Reese Witherspoon. Or anyone else, for that matter.

It's a known fact that as we get older our reflexes our sight and hearing as a general rule deteriorate. The posts advocating testing of the elderly is not an attack on them because no one is saying they are evil monsters out to get us. All we are saying is that stats show that drivers 16-24 and drivers 75 and older are the groups most likely to be affected by car crashes.

http://www.autos.com/driving-and-safety/car-crash-statistics-based-on-age-and-location

No one even mentioned that the reason they are saying to test has anything to do with Reese Witherspoon (whom I can't stand anyway). Further none of the previous posts advocating testing were being holier than thou. Your post on the other hand might qualify with the whole "look at me I'm defending the elderly bit." The suggested testing would most likely save some lives.

Guess what? If these tests would be age discrimination then so are the existing laws which only let you drive once you get to a certain age! I know 13 year olds who are able to pass the written and practical driving test and they are not allowed to drive because they are too young. I am NOT advocating letting a 13 year old drive just making a point that age factors into your ability to perform certain functions and that's why there are laws and policies in place to regulate same. Ask some cops, firemen, pilots etc.

She said a tree obstructed her vision....hahaha...that was no tree..THAT was Reese.

People who don't like Reese Witherspoon, meet People who don't like Elderly Drivers. Now have fun, and behave yourselves.

Given what I see other drivers of all ages doing on a daily basis, I would venture we should all be retested at license renewal.

smoother... your sentence is ... intriguing. The way you express it is that an "elderly person" was jogging when you were hit?

and to complete the sentence, you were on his hoodie while he was jogging around the corner?

LOL Yea... naughty elder person... It wouldn't occur to you to stand back and let him go first, would it. Manners are certainly going down the tubes these days... (as is grammar 1A-1B)

What too many do not seem to realize is that good manners have been around for millennium (for civilized people, at least). There's a reason for that. Without good manners, you become savages... jogging determinedly backwards with your "me-first" attitudes into primitivism and extinction.

correction i was jogging and got hit by elderly person. This should have been obvious but since u id not get i am informing u!

Perhaps it would be better to have markings placed on the front fenders like they used to do with ace fighter pilots of yesteryear. That way people would know who to stay clear of. Can't you just see it now? ... Vehicle fenders displaying symbols of male or female pedestrians, joggers, dogs, deer, horse-drawn carriages, etc., etc.. At least that would give a pretty good indication of who the 'Aces' of the roadways are. C'mon people! ... Isn't it about time for us all to embrace change? : )

You are suggesting that we risk our lives, and theirs, because they chose to live in an area that does not have viable public transportation and because their family left?

Quite a silly premise. I love these pseudo-liberal touchy-feely types.

especially when u have been hit and almost seriously injured by an elderly driver like myself my first thought was oh my god if this guy does not notice that i am on top of his hood i could fall off and get ran over and DIE!

Stay out of the street idiot.

dude i was crossing the crosswalk u know the one that has several white lines that is supposed to say to drivers hey watch out for the non drivers!

its in the test to get your license look it up.

because they chose to live in an area that does not have viable public transportation

Choose to live...? With the cost of housing what it is these days, more often than not there is no choicce.

Say, you're just filled with compassion, aren't you?

Choose to live...? With the cost of housing what it is these days, more often than not there is no choicce.

You don't think much, do you? We are talking about the elderly here. Why would they be moving "these days," especially if they don't have enough money, based upon your premise?

Ten to twenty years ago housing was significantly cheaper. People who look only at the "here and now" are mainly the ones who find themselves stuck in situations down the road.

Say, you're just filled with compassion, aren't you?

I tell it like it is, which is far more compassionate than telling people what they want to hear, that "everything is fine, and you can continue driving safely.” You just seem to have a problem with that reality of the situation. Like I said above, I love you touchy-feely types. You make all the wrong decisions just because you don't want to hurt someone's feelings.

By looking at one of your posts below, you don't even understand what the issue is. Your post indicates that you think that people are merely discriminating against older drivers for no reason (#6.4) other than age discrimination.

I absolutely have sympathy for seniors who have lost their independence. HOWEVER, their plight does not justify putting others at risk if they are legitimately losing their ability to drive safely; it's dangerous for them, too. Ever seen the kinds of injuries someone in their 80s can end up with from a relatively minor crash?

I know i have been hit while jogging and the elderly gentleman did not even notice that i was on his hood!

There have been numerous incidents in California where people over 80 have plowed into entire outdoor resturants and cafes and injured more than 100 people while killing more than 20. One had a heart attack, another just got confused and pushed the accelerator instead of the brake, and so on.

Anyone over 75 should be required to retake the DRIVING and the WRITTEN exams every other year to prove they still have what it takes to drive any ALL conditions or everyday driving.

more2bits

exactly what i was thinking!

If we're going to be safe, we should ban all drivers over the age of 60.

If we're going to be safe, we should ban all drivers over the age of 60.

Sure.... except now that Social Security is going the way of the dodo, that means I will have to work until I am 72. Am I supposed to go 12 years walking to work?

if it means saving lives instead of risking them YES!

This is something I have talked about with my friends before. Why don't we get tested by the DMV every ten years? Many people get so used to driving as an everyday thing they feel they don't need to pay attention to what they are doing out there. Nothing like a cold hard stare and a failed score to force the average joe to realize he isn't as skilled as he thinks he is!

Oh, come on. An "unmarked" crosswalk. While I'm not declaring open season on pedestrians, it's time they took some responsiblity. If you don't want to get hit, you'd better watch for traffic as much as drivers watch for you and everything else going on out there. Over the years, I've had fools amble, stroll, walk, saunter, jog, run -- you name it -- in front of my car, either completely unaware, or outright daring me, any number of times. I've managed to avoid hitting anyone, but there have been two close calls. Okay, so legally I probably would have been at fault. But the perdestrian could have dead. Do you know what a moving vehicle can do to a human body?

There was a time when we taught our children to look both ways, and then look again. Seems like there are adults, a lot of them, who either weren't taught or decided that doesn't apply to them and that's just flat stupid.

Then move. My in-laws lived with my grandma-in-law for 20 years because she could not drive and needed help with things like groceries. If that is not an option, there are lots of wonderful retirement homes that seniors can move into. I know my grandma's was fantastic! Bingo every night, weekly shopping trips to the mall, and really decent food. People have this fear of giving up their "independance" but my fear is being killed because some family feared upsetting grandma by taking away her license. Sorry, but my life and the life of my child are more important than grandma's independance.

I guess it is only the elderly that live in that town. Young people don't always get to to drive or the handicapped. Wonder what they do?

Young people can walk, ride with friends, or bicycle. If you're 75 years old walking any distance might be difficult, and bicycling is problematic. And it's possible that all their friends have died.

And there are more transportation options available for the handicapped than for the elderly.

Earlier this week in my state--Arkansas--an 85 yr-old hit the gas instead of the brake, running through the wall of a store (how many times have u heard this one?), hitting a 45 yr-old woman pushing her 20 month-old granddaughter in a stroller and killing the child.

Something similar happened her in Colorado about a year ago. The driver was 20.

"I can't wait for the car to drive me around"

It's conveniences like that which open whole new worlds for hackers and terrorists. Hackers could send you anywhere and lock you out of your own car, or have it drive itself to a chop shop. Terrorists could send bombs without having to strap it to themselves.

Yeah, that's off the primary topic, but there are severe consequences to the enhancements in technology you're speaking of.

The automated braking systems could be nice, but if falsely triggered, they could also cause major traffic accidents.

Personally, I don't even trust anti lock brakes. Under a trained foot, brakes without them are far safer and superior. ABS is great for somebody who will panic, but is that really the kind of person who should be driving to begin with? Everything is computerized. It makes us comfortable and complacent, and imo, far more dangerous in the real world when faced with the real world.

I do however, understand that people don't always like to drive, or feel comfortable driving in some conditions. Be it a long commute, age, whatever, for some driving is a real task.

I will not submit to an age discriminatory road test. Test everyone or no one.

Considering that the rate of accidents increases markedly above a certain age due to age-related degeneration, then your objection is quite misplaced and selfish.

It is silly to engage in such a "nuclear bomb" method of screening everyone when the issue is quite clear and due to certain factors. That's just nonsense to make a certain group not "feel bad" that the issue has to do with aging.

Screening people with a tumor for cancer is not a tumor discriminatory test, just like screening old people for age-related deficiencies is not a discriminatory test.

It is a public safety issue, and clearly you only wish to be part of the problem.

Celebrity, please.

So your saying give 5 year olds the right to drive? Their minds are too ill formed yet to make valid decisions as are most early teenagers. Not until we are over 18 do most people mature enough to drive safely which is why the accident rates and insurance rates for 16 to 18 is the highest. Well, almost the highest. Accident rates for those over 80 is actually the highest which is why they need to be re-tested to verify they still have the skills, motor skills, reactions, and memory to make valid decisions quickly as required of any driver.

What a narrow minded person you are.

Not until we are over 18 do most people mature enough to drive safely

Thank you for the laugh.

It's all aspects of driving including backing up. My daugher had her disabled car backed into on a side street because the 73 year old woman said " I have lived here for 30 years and no one has ever parked there."

Seriously, all drivers should be retested periodically. However, old drivers (70 and older) are not the threat that the media, including this story, make them out to be. The statistics are that per 100 million miles they do have 4.8 times the wrecks as 40 year old drivers, but they drive 1/6th the distance per year and there are far fewer on the road. Also the average speed driven is much less. Thus per hour behind the wheel, the old are no greater risk than young male drivers (18 - 22).

In addition, I have never observed road rage in an old driver.

In addition, I have never observed road rage in an old driver.

You obviously have never heard of my 82-year-old dad, and believe it or not, the older he has gotten, the worse he has become.

Stay out of the middle of the street. 8 year olds know that. Maybe she's not that old yet.

I think Obama is becoming the next "#BARROWMAN! (shakes fist)," only not in the funny way that John Barrowman is. People are freakin' serious about how he's to blame for everything from China (NAFTA and Clinton, anyone?) to outsourcing (which started in the '60s). Guess it's time for "#OBAMA! (shakes fist)."

@StandUpJokeOff

I blame Twitter for your post.

No charleyb,

It's YOUR fault.

Of course not. She's too special. Maybe that Oscar went with her. Worst performance ever.

You don't see too many people who are hit by cars stopping and asking how the driver is.

The fact that you would pose such a silly question in such a condescending manner portrays your bitterness and your unresolved emotional issues.

Great two more people on the road causing accidents by people trying to get around them! I have had to endure elderly people driving 40 mph in a 60 mph zone, one using the white line as a guide and driving down the middle of the road, the always popular turning left from a right hand land or right from a left hand lane. The turn signal indicating one turn and going the other way. They stop completely instead of merging onto the highway and block traffic during rush hour. I could go on and on and it is ALWAYS the older drivers with the problem.

that's terriffic thay are still active and getting around on their own. In colorado to pass the reissue test you read a couple of dotts in a eye test and pay your $21. You can look between 75 and 200 take 30 minutes to walk up to the counter, but as long as you pass the (eye) test and have the $21, you are good to go.

So if we're going to base driving test requirements on age-related risk, let's be fair about it; and do so for the youngsters as well as the seniors!

Sure, why not.

But the fundamental causes are different. It is not that age itself is the issue, but rather the seniors have their skills degrade with their health as they age, whereas the younger drivers has maturity- and experience-related accidents.

LOL, I was actually reminded of this while reading over my bit about elderly driving.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_25wxC7ol0U

If you need assistance walking you need assistance driving.

So let's deny licenses to the handicapped too?

If one's handicap happens to be a vision impairment, then yes, they should be denied a license if they cannot drive.

And I write as someone with a lazy eye who may get macular degeneration in the future.