Category - World

I mentioned in a recent post an ongoing case where Keisha Bianca Wall crushed an elderly pedestrian against a wall. It is said that she received a text immediately before the accident occurred.

In an update to the ongoing case, it is reported that:

A Jury will be asked to decide whether a young driver responded to a text message on her phone at the moment her car veered off the road and killed a 63-year-old woman.

The evidence given says that:

…Wall had been sent a text message – “If you can think of something to do, we will do it” – at 12.39.04pm.

The first 999 call to the ambulance service was timed at 12.40.06pm.

Mr Ward-Jackson said when the police seized Wall’s phone later it was clear the text had been read, but there was no way of knowing at what time that had happened.

British law is full of loopholes. Witnesses to the accident also gave evidence:

[witness Melanie Duggan] said: “She said something about a black car swerving. ‘Did you see the black car? It was driving in towards me’.”

She had also seen Wall using her mobile phone after the collision, she told the court.

Mrs Duggan’s sister Kay Grigg was a passenger in her BMW and she described what Wall said at the scene. She said: “She said numerous times ‘Did you see the black car, I need a witness. I swerved from the black car’.”

However, Wall’s evidence given in Court doesn’t mention the black car. The case continues.

And there is another story – this one from America – of an accident where texting has also been cited as the cause. Read some of the comments people have left against the story.

Don’t worry – it’s a story from Ottawa, Canada on CBC News.

It appears that Canada has the same problem we do here in the UK. Namely, inferior politicians trying to jump-start their careers.

In a nutshell, people who live near a test centre have complained, Councillor Maria McRae has listened, and she has tabled a motion to ban driver training near to the test centre in question. It could be taken straight off the noticeboard in any test centre in the UK, couldn’t it?

Mind you, another thing Canada shares with the UK is the attitude of many of its driving instructors.

Local driving instructors were sent a notice from the city to stop driving in the area last month — something they said is unfair.

“Other people practice with their kids without a roof sign,” Rite-Way Driving School instructor Jamal Kassabry said.

“How are they going to stop that, too?”

That one could come straight out of an ADI association’s meeting minutes, couldn’t it? We have them over here where if there is a request not to use a certain area or location posted at the test centre, some ADIs will go there deliberately. We don’t help ourselves, sometimes.

The best quote comes in the comments at the bottom (and there are 10 pages of them):

I live in this area, in fact I live on a street which I drove on during my G2/G driving tests taken at Walkley. There are, without-a-doubt, A LOT of driving schools practicing in the neighbourhood – while waiting on the street corner for the little one’s school bus I’ll quite often count as many 1 in 3 cars being driven by new drivers.

In spite of this, I wouldn’t by any means consider it a problem. Sure, there’s arguably more traffic than there should be, but these drivers drive extremely slow (at times half the speed limit) and are barely dangerous. The only traffic I ever see is caused by the dozens of parents dropping off and picking up kids from school. With all of the gang-filled-ghettos that border this neighbourhood, kids practicing their driving is the least of our worries.

That sums up the whole issue in one. When Councillor McRae refers to “residents’ complaints” she actually means “very few residents” or “not a high percentage of residents”.

EDIT 18/3/2011: There’s an updated story at yourottawaregion.com.

I have to say, the combination of the typical intellect and attitude of a driving instructor and the career aspirations of a no-name local councillor is a potent one indeed. It seems to be the same the world over.

This one reads like a Monty Python sketch. The Union Leader online newspaper reports that there is a bill in New Hampshire, USA to end tests of suitability on older drivers.

But perceptions that older drivers have more accidents are not supported by some statistical studies.

Note the word “some”. This means that “some” studies show categorically that older drivers ARE a greater risk to themselves and others.

Rep. Bob Williams, D-Concord, doesn’t like the law.

“This is pure age discrimination,” said Williams, 84. “There are no other classes of drivers we make do this. There is no evidence that older drivers are less safe than other drivers. In fact, if you look at the statistics, drivers over age 75 in New Hampshire are safer drivers than the younger age groups.”

Read that again. Bob Williams doesn’t like the law which says those over 75 must re-take their suitability tests. He is 84. His wish is that there would be no re-testing at all on the over 75s.

Just imagine these two scenarios:

1. Those between the ages of 30-50 can drive without the need for any sort of retesting
2. Those between the ages of 75-105 can drive without the need for any sort of retesting.

Doesn’t one of them sound ludicrous? Yet that is what the bill is effectively proposing.

Everyone knows that as people get beyond a certain age an increasing number of them become slower and more prone to confusion. Also with age comes the increasing risk of dementia and other age-related conditions.

And people like Williams want these significant dangers and risks to be ignored.

Hey, while we’re at it, why not remove the early age bar to driving? Why not grant licences to people on the day they are born? But people like Williams would probably consider this as being unfair, too, and lobby for the effective date to be the point of conception instead!

EDIT 10/3/2011: Oregon is now getting in on the act after an 87 year old man and 74 year old woman drove into stationary buildings in separate incidents. A bill is being considered that would require over-75s to renew their licences every 2 years and be required to pass a driving test each renewal.

The Boston Globe reports that 19 percent of drivers admit to carrying out internet-related activities whilst driving.

…including:

• Finding/reading driving directions
• Reading e-mail
• Composing/sending e-mail (texting)
• Reading/scanning sites such as Facebook and Twitter
• Looking up specific information

Many said they engage in these activities when stopped in traffic or at red lights as well as when driving alone or on long trips on interstates.

The article says that 40 percent of Americans own a smartphone – so that means they must have around 25 million people surfing as they drive!

Don’t think it is only an American problem. It is already acknowledged that people use Facebook and Twitter whilst driving here in the UK. I’ve reported on more than one occasion previously about seeing people texting whilst driving. I’ve pointed out at least three times to pupils this week alone – it really is a growing menace.

An interesting story in The Vancouver Sun claims that tests used to assess older drivers’ fitness to keep their licences are flawed. The same story is covered in News 1130.

Psychology Professor Allison Sekuler of McMaster University says:

…the doctor’s office is a setting with no need to make instant decisions, to see through “clutter,” or to concentrate on one thing and still notice a pedestrian stepping off the curb.

But she then goes on to claim that old people can be taught to multi-task as well as teenagers, thus cancelling out part of what she initially said.

Some of them might, but not all of them. And far fewer overall than in the teenage group.

And if it were that easy, older drivers wouldn’t be getting in an age-related tangle in the first place.

This story in the Daily Mail makes interesting reading.

The Milwaukee woman is believed by police to have pressed the gas pedal instead of the brake, and the car shot across 6 lanes of busy traffic and rammed into the window of a house opposite. Three quarters of the car ended up inside the house, which was fortunately unoccupied at the time.

There’s an interesting comment by a British ex-pat, living in the USA. He says:

The plague of the elderly driver is very common here in the USA. Its strange because at home in England you don’t see many crumblies behind the wheel. Here they are everywhere and can always be counted on to drive the largest cars available.

I’m not sure what planet he’s on, but one can only assume that when he says you don’t see many old people behind the wheel over here he is simply talking in comparitive terms.

The case is ongoing and no final conclusions about the actual cause have yet been drawn by police.

The issue of older drivers and road safety seems to be a big topic in the US at the moment. Several stories have cropped up recently.

This one is a letter written to lohud.com – an online newspaper serving part of New York. A commonsense opinion, I would say:

I am approaching my senior years and have many senior-citizen friends who insist on driving their cars well into their 80s. I do believe that some of my dear friends should not be on the road. My position is, anyone who wants to continue driving should take a repeat driver’s test after the age of 75. I don’t think I am taking away any of their rights; I am just thinking about safety on the highways and streets.

A friend of mine is having eye surgery and is well into her 80s. She is still driving her car, partially impaired. I think she should take a cab. Another older man has a truck that he insists he will drive until he dies. I think this is wrong. Give senior citizens an exam to test their ability to follow the rules of the road. Some seniors are terrific drivers, but some are not.

We worry about drunken drivers; let’s take good care of our senior drivers by protecting them too.

One of the comments posted made me laugh:

My uncle is 99, still drives his SUV and hasn’t had an accident in 6 weeks…

Seriously, though, the author makes a good point. The problem is often attitude – just as a young person thinks it is their right to drive and to go fast, older drivers think it’s their right to keep on driving even though they simply can’t see or think properly.

As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, my dad has macular degeneration (MD). He’s over 80. And before he finally admitted he couldn’t see well enough to drive (he can’t tell the difference between a pigeon and a pheasant 30 metres away) I had to threaten to report him to police if he even tried to drive – as he was planning a 400 mile round trip!

I noticed this story in the Napa Valley Register, which includes a local man suffering from the condition.

The NHS gives a useful explanation of the problem:

Macular degeneration is a painless eye condition that leads to the gradual loss of central vision (the ability to see what is directly in front of you). Central vision is used while:

• reading
• writing
• driving

Macular degeneration occurs when the macula (the part of the eye that is responsible for central vision) is unable to function as effectively as it used to.

Macular degeneration does not affect the peripheral vision, which means that the condition will not cause complete blindness. The peripheral vision, sometimes known as “side vision”, is the outer vision.

This sums up my dad’s condition perfectly. It is also worth pointing out that one form of it is progressive – it gets worse as you get older. And it affects about a third of the over-75s.

The guy in the Napa story is 85 and has diagnosed MD. That’s important: HE HAS MD . As a result he was required to take a driving test to assess his ability to drive, and he failed. He believes he was failed unfairly and was discriminated against based on age. In his own words:

They’re thinking it’s an age problem and eye problem. I don’t think it’s so much of an eye problem as an age problem.

Sometimes, words almost fail you. He can’t see what is directly in front of him – and it will get worse – and he claims he doesn’t have an eye problem! He claims age discrimination.

Just remember that Napa is in California. Birthplace (allegedly) of such concepts as suing people for serving you hot coffee, suing software companies for packing disks in “too large” boxes, suing Disneyland staff for taking their masks off, and so on. This is where lawsuits of the future come from. Allegedly.

People with MD shouldn’t drive.