Category - World

A story came through on the newsfeeds concerning an accident in Australia, where an elderly nun had an epileptic seizure and hit a female cyclist, who was killed.

I think my position on elderly drivers is clear, but in this particular case it wasn’t age that was to blame, but an epileptic fit. However, the website carrying the story is a cyclists’ site – my position where cyclists are concerned is also clear – and it makes a big issue out of calls by the dead woman’s husband for tougher measures against elderly drivers. As I say, it was an epileptic seizure and not specifically an age-related issue which caused the accident.If anything, it should be a call for tougher measures against epileptics!

Moving on, though, I noticed a couple of references to UK incidents in the article. One, from 2011, tells how an 85-year old ploughed through a group of riders, killing one of them, but who apparently didn’t realise anything had happened until his wife told him. Another story, from 2012, tells of an 84-year old who broke the back of a cyclist when he drove into him as a result of defective eyesight.

We need to get some perspective here. I agree wholeheartedly that anyone with poor eyesight or ill-health, and whose driving is affected as a result, should be taken off the road by force. They should not be allowed back behind the wheel unless they can prove their deficiencies have been corrected, and that should apply whether they’re 16 or 86. Ironically, the UK prides itself in allowing disabled people to get a licence earlier than the able-bodied, and in not taking licences off people when the evidence is screaming out that they should not be allowed near anything with moving parts.

But when you throw cyclists into the mix you have a completely different issue, because a large proportion of them are their own worst enemies. In that 2011 story, for example, the group involved was on a sponsored ride from Belfast to London, via Dublin and Bristol. This detail alone means that they would hardly have been riding in what I would call an inconspicuous manner. What I’m really getting at is that their purpose would probably have meant that they were on main roads, at all times of the day, and if they were anything like most of the cyclists I have to deal with they would have been riding at least two abreast. The purpose of their ride would have more than likely resulted in other behaviours likely to obstruct motorists and other road users on such roads.

None of that can possibly justify what the car driver did by riding into them, nor does it put up any sort of defence for his age-related weaknesses. But it certainly provides at least a partial explanation for why it might have happened when it did. After all, if the cyclists hadn’t have been there, the driver wouldn’t have hit them.

While I was out on lessons today, there were cyclists everywhere, and nearly all of them were causing obstructions. In one particular case, two of the idiots were riding side-by-side along the A52 towards Radcliffe-on-Trent on a 70mph dual carriageway. They were completely blocking one whole lane. They ought to have been on the cycle path which was a mere two metres to their left, but that’s not what these morons do. In another example, I was on a single track lane and as I rounded a corner an idiot on a bike came flying round the opposite way on the wrong side. These are not isolated examples, and “sensible” isn’t a word that appears in their vocabulary.

Since the Olympics last year the number of people riding bikes has skyrocketed, and the number of Silver Spandex Boys – middle-aged and elderly riders – has increased dramatically. Of course, no one is demanding that their eyesight or other faculties be tested, least of all the blinkered biker websites. These riders require no training and no licence, so no one can do anything to keep them off the roads. You have to face the fact that the only reason more of them aren’t injured or killed is because of the evasive action taken by drivers when they encounter them. It’s like when you have young children who run into the road without looking – every now and then one gets hit, but most drivers manage to slam the brakes on and avoid them.

Roads are specifically for cars, not cyclists. Cyclists are allowed to use them, but very few cyclists make any attempt to avoid conflict and – either through stupidity or arrogance – put themselves and others in danger. All that matters to the average cyclist is the cyclist!

I saw this on the newsfeeds. It tells how an Australian learner driver was videoed driving with his hands behind his head for a considerable distance (20km). In the video he is seen doing it alongside oncoming traffic (sorry about the advert – you can skip it):

He isn’t named in the article, but I doubt he’ll remain anonymous for long. If he doesn’t get the bright idea of going public about it himself, I’m sure someone else will do it for him.

Police have charged the 20-year old with reckless conduct likely to cause . And so they should serious injury, dangerous driving, and failure to have control of a motor vehicle.

Let’s hope the courts throw the book at him when he goes to court on April 3rd.

This illustrates why young drivers – especially male ones – throughout the world have the most accidents. It’s because for the majority of them, until their brains mature, they’re technically prats.

This story from California is interesting. It begins:

My neighbor said her 98-year-old father was beside himself recently. He told her he had failed his driver’s test. He’d been a Teamster, for heaven’s sake — he drove for a living without an accident — and now some DMV goon decided his driving was unsafe.

“I hear the same story on a daily basis,” said John Locher. “A senior will say, ‘I’m a safe driver. I drove all over Europe in World War II. I’ve driven all over the country and haven’t had a ticket my entire life.'”

In fact, he was failed for macular degeneration – which means he couldn’t bloody well see properly!

In the UK it is a huge issue because older drivers don’t have to take a re-test. All they do is fill in a form once they’re 70 (and every 3 years thereafter) declaring that they’re still medically fit to drive, and back comes the licence. And they don’t even have to pay for it!

The problem is that many septuagenarians just lie so they can keep driving.

I’ve mentioned before about my dad. He has macular degeneration (right now, he’s almost blind) but about 10 years ago when he was having trouble seeing properly he was planning to hire a car and travel 250 miles to Portsmouth (after I refused to lend him mine). I warned him there and then that if he did I would report him to the police. I confess to being selfish – I didn’t want him to kill himself – but having someone who can’t see out in a car or van is a frightening prospect as far as other road users are concerned.

The UK has no maximum age for driving. It should have, though.