60 Comments

1.   Hip (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 2:45 am) # 

   To make things worse, insurance is actually lower for these rotten old buggers. Ever wonder why?

   We old farts may well annoy the piss out of you, but it’s the other end of the age range that’s filling the morgue. Twerp.

   
   
2.   Bridgit Gread (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 8:00 am) # 

   Try reading all of the post, Hip, not just the parts that irritate you.

   
   
3.   keri (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 8:52 am) # 

   If he’d been a yougner driver he would have been charged with running a red (turns out he mistook red for green) and dangerous driving at the very least.

   We’re introducing rules to make it tougher for younger drivers to get their license and new restrictions on what they can do once they get it.

   It’s about time we look at the other end of the scale.

   
   
4.   Vernon (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:05 am) # 

   I’m amazed this doesn’t happen more often. I walk to work through the CBD and I nearly get run over at crossings by oldies on a daily basis.

   
   
5.   John Surname (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:14 am) # 

   At a major city crossing two weeks ago, an old man stopped at a red light, like you’re supposed to, before comically taking off and almost ploughing into innocent students crossing the road. That could have been ugly.

   “The students! They jumped in front of my car! I’ve been driving for 65 years and that has never happened before!”

   
   
6.   The Editor (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:18 am) # 

   No student is innocent.

   
   
7.   keri (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:20 am) # 

   Plus, aren’t they worth a hundred points?

   
   
8.   Wah (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:24 am) # 

   Did he have a green light? That makes things a little different I guess.
   But my understanding was the kids were on the footpath waiting to cross.

   
   
9.   John Surname (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:28 am) # 

   “Plus, aren’t they worth a hundred points?”

   There were too many of them to be worth that much. Maybe 10 points each. Bastard only scored 50 points.

   
   
10.   keri (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:30 am) # 

    Obviously wasn’t trying hard enough.

    
    
11.   Dave from Albury (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:34 am) # 

    We are regularly told that older drivers are safer, have fewer accidents etc, while younger drivers are over represented in accident statistics. However, I’d be interested to see those stats shown against the total number of kilometres travelled.

    Using the small sample size of my Nana, she covers very few kilometres each year, trips to the shops once or twice a week, and yet she has had three or four serious accidents in the last six years. While I’m happy to concede she may just be a shithouse driver, I suspect that if you looked at accidents vs kilometres you’d see a similar pattern elsewhere.

    
    
12.   keri (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 11:37 am) # 

    Dave, the pattern is that more fatalities are caused by young people or feature young people.

    There are more accidents (but less serious) caused by older people.

    
    
13.   Ray Dixon (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 12:49 pm) # 

    “Me, I’m a good driver for 35 years . . . 35 years I’ve been driving,” said the 82 year old.

    Maybe the problem is that this guy didn’t learn how to drive until he was 47.

    
    
14.   magic bellybutton (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 12:52 pm) # 

    Unless he’s added up all his hours behind the wheel and they only come to 35 years.

    Which would also explain it.

    
    
15.   Will (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 1:55 pm) # 

    Maybe he learnt to drive when he was 16 but now the Alzheimer’s makes him think either a) he’s 51 years old; or b) 82-35= 16

    
    
16.   Hip (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 3:23 pm) # 

    Sorry Bridgit, even to my old grey eyes the rest of the post doesn’t get you out of trouble. Had I published this post using a Female stereotype my mob would’ve mugged me shitless, as would you. I hate the word “ageist”, but this post certainly gives it a respectable handle: Grow Up!

    
    
17.   Ray Dixon (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 4:35 pm) # 

    Whoa, I think you’re asking for a classic Bridgit payout there Hip. You might deserve it too. I can see a tiny bit of “ageism” in Bridgit’s post as well, but everyone’s opinion is influenced by their stage & position in life.

    
    
18.   Bridgit Gread (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 4:57 pm) # 

    “Twerp”? “Grow up”? Hip, your manners are atrocious. Old people today… sheesh.

    My post is not ageist and it doesn’t condemn all old people, only one (and even then only because of his pig-headed indifference to what his own driving has done). People can drive until they’re 110 for all I care, provided their faculties are in order and they are regularly scrutinised.

    As for young whipper-snappers making up most of the road toll, that’s not in dispute. I support tougher restrictions on their licensing and driving too. It should be noted though that while you can legislate for impairment, you can’t legislate for stupidity - and that’s what kills more P-platers than anything else.

    
    
19.   Bridgit Gread (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 5:01 pm) # 

    As a follow-up to Dave’s post, my grandmother was also a woeful driver. Although she only drove every 2-3 days, on shopping trips or errands, she averaged about one accident and several near misses each week. Fortunately she only ever hit lamposts, bollards or other cars, however she lived near a school and I believe that sooner or later she would’ve backed over a toddler strolling home, had she not passed away suddenly a couple of years back.

    
    
20.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 5:15 pm) # 

    you know, in a former life I was a nurse, I remember on more than a few occasions meeting these decrepit old road menaces, but worse, do-gooding “advocates” who not only defend and uphold these old goat’s “right” to drive, but actively encourage them to get behind the wheel.

    How is that NOT being an accessory to manslaughter when one of these embalmed specimens eventually runs over and kills someone?

    
    
21.   magic bellybutton (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 5:26 pm) # 

    My grandmother actually handed her license in because she knew her driving was being affected due to her ageing. They (QLD Transport) were actually wanting her to renew!

    
    
22.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 5:30 pm) # 

    In fairness, a lot of older people drive well past their capacity to do so safely because of limited access to community support and transport options.

    It’s not a valid reason to keep them on the road, it’s a valid reason to provide adequate community support.

    The ones who keep their licences through out and out obstinance I think should face criminal charges when they injure or kill people.

    The police and prosecutors seem to go deliberately soft on these old turds.

    
    
23.   Hip (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 5:38 pm) # 

    Please excuse my use of the lesser word “twerp”. (Though why you find it offensive is beyond me.)
    “Grow up” is a respectable response to a clearly ageist approach.

    Krypto, I hope that wasn’t pointed at me, it would be a logical fallacy to interpret my grumble as open slather support for incompetent fools, old or otherwise, behind the wheel. The post makes a good point, but it’s cheapened by this pointless attack on a minority you neither understand nor listen to. What about Volvo drivers, people who wear hats, or Asians or women?

    You are better than that.

    
    
24.   joe2 (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 6:25 pm) # 

    If I were the parent of a six year old and a three year old I would never even consider allowing them to enter any kind of pedestrian crossing before I had seen the situation to be safe for crossing.

    
    
25.   Dave from Albury (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 6:34 pm) # 

    As a parent of a four and a two year old I wish you all the best.

    
    
26.   joe2 (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 6:38 pm) # 

    Dave, we are talking Sydney Road here not Dean St.

    
    
27.   Dave from Albury (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 6:49 pm) # 

    Point taken, but I’m yet to meet a parent, short of those who put their kids on a leash, who can honestly say that they have complete awareness or control of what their kids are doing in every situation.

    Then the problem remains that even once you have taught your kids to look for the pedestrian lights etc you are still at the mercy of random drivers. This guy believed that a green light meant he had an unfettered right to enter the intersection, despite there being pedestrians he should have given way to. It’s hard to teach kids to watch out for people ignoring the rules which are supposed to protect us all.

    
    
28.   Bridgit Gread (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 6:52 pm) # 

    The post makes a good point, but it’s cheapened by this pointless attack

    It’s not an attack: I’m suggesting a hardening of policy on a range of driver categories, including the aged. It’s not pointless: it’s to reduce the likelihood of the kind of accident referred to above.

    …on a minority you neither understand nor listen to.

    How have you reached the conclusion that I don’t understand or listen to them - on the basis of one post about elderly drivers? That’s rather a wild presumption on your part, Hip (or should I call you Mr Replacement?)

    What about Volvo drivers, people who wear hats, or Asians or women?

    Once it’s clinically proven that Volvo drivers, Asians or women have declining sensory skills that impact on their driving, I’ll throw them into the mix too. As for ‘people who wear hats’, well they’re usually just old men too, so it’s a moot point.

    
    
29.   Ray Dixon (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 7:10 pm) # 

    What about Volvo drivers, people who wear hats,(etc)

    One in the same.

    
    
30.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 7:18 pm) # 

    Hip I was actually refering mostly to a uni lecturer I had, and a few other folks I met during my time WORKING IN AGED CARE!! but if you want to defend the “right” of people to endanger all and sundry on the roads by driving past their capacity to do so safely, then the shoe fits I would suggest.

    I would assume that at the very least we can agree that older people are at least as diverse a demographic as any other (arguably more so) and as such it’s reasonable to assume that their capacity to operate heavy machinery like a motor vehicle is similarly diverse.

    In plain english, there are some that can drive safely, and some that can’t.
    There’s more than a few that have enough trouble managing their own continence much less a vehicle.
    That’s not “age-ist” it’s a quantifiable fact.

    
    
31.   joe2 (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 7:33 pm) # 

    “Then the problem remains that even once you have taught your kids to look for the pedestrian lights etc you are still at the mercy of random drivers.”

    Dave, very little kids are difficult to see and it is up to their parents or Holden Caulfield to enter any crossing first.

    
    
32.   Hip (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 8:19 pm) # 

    Krypto, agreed. Totally.
    Now, please explain to Brigit (for the edification of others) where I’m promoting the idea that incontinent geriatrics should be a protected species.

    Brigit, my complaint is about holding millions of very experienced elderly drivers up to ridicule on the basis that a few of them are clearly dangerous. I’m not defending old drivers, I am not offended by you concern, just your cheap tactics. So, you think you have the experience of a 70-year-old? You understand all the various manifestations of wisdom over the decades? You don’t see this post as an attack? Intellectual arrogance, in spades.

    Bloody hell, the kid swiped my Geritol, again.

    
    
33.   Bridgit Gread (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 8:50 pm) # 

    Hip, I’ve laid it out on the table very clearly; it’s not my fault if you cannot or will not read. I don’t hate the elderly and I don’t oppose them from driving if they can meet certain physical benchmarks and pass a test. I think that driving is a privilege, not a right, always have done. If you see that as an ‘attack’, it says more about you than I.

    Incidentally, I find it arrogant in the extreme that you complain about ‘ageism’ then you cough up this nonsense about me having/not having “the experience of a 70-year-old”. Experience, wisdom and insight are not relative to age, just as they are not relative to gender, race or religion. There are 70-year-olds who are as thick as a brick with less life experience than some of 30 - and vice versa. Don’t insult our intelligence by suggesting that numerical age implies some innate superiority.

    
    
34.   joe2 (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 9:37 pm) # 

    “As for Mister Citino, meet Senator Bronwyn Bishop; she’s got a special bath for you.”

    Bridgit Gread, I would thought that one is still innocent till proven guilty. Your comments are quite scary to me.

    
    
35.   Hip (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 9:38 pm) # 

    Brigit, I didn’t suggest you “hate” the elderly. I didn’t suggest that “numerical age implies some innate superiority”. Your suggestion that “Experience, wisdom and insight are not relative to age” is patently false. You reckon I can’t read (like the oldies in your stereotype).

    Is this a classic Brigit payout? In 40 years of having been on both sides of this argument, I’m not impressed, but thank you for your time.

    
    
36.   Bridgit Gread (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 9:50 pm) # 

    If you could read then you’d spell my name right. And no, that wasn’t a ‘classic payout’; I save those for more worthy causes.

    
    
37.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 9:53 pm) # 

    Hip, obviously you aren’t suggesting “geriatrics should be a protected species”, nonetheless, that’s just how it’s panning out it seems.

    The old coot that ran down Sophie Delezio was handed a get out of jail free card (because of his age), ANY other driver in Australia would face the full penalty of law.

    I’d be willing to bet this old buzzard hands in his licence, goes to his grave (hopefully sooner than later) protesting his innocence and how it was all the fault of the kids they had to scrape off the bloody road with a freakin’ shovel without a single charge being brought against him.

    If it was some young hoon they’d throw the book at him (and rightly so) but because it’s some stupid old bastard too obstinate to accept he’s past driving, he gets a walk.

    No legal precedent is set, no legislative reforms are made and we wait around with our collective thumbs up our arses for the next senile old wretch to mow down some unsuspecting kid.

    When one generation is being killed because one two or even three generations previous is too pig headed obstinate to accept their own limitations, something is dreadfully, dreadfully wrong.

    I’d bet London to a brick this old bastard gets nothing more serious than a cup of tea and a biscuit, fact is, that wrinkly old crinkly should be in a fucking prison cell.

    
    
38.   Montague "Pitty-Pat" Smythe-JeJones (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 9:58 pm) # 

    Victorian Premier John Brumby has ruled out toughening licences for older drivers. He said there was no need for reform.

    Maybe Brumby is afraid of another one of those strip protests. Yuk!

    
    
39.   joe2 (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 10:04 pm) # 

    Looks mighty like “welcome to vigilante world”, via grodscorp, in my opinion.

    
    
40.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 10:05 pm) # 

    tell you what, how about we make the driving test for those over 70 that if you can cross from one side of the raceway to the other at Sandown on race day with your wheely-frame you get to keep your licence.

    
    
41.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 10:20 pm) # 

    joe2 try working in an emergency room treating the dithery old stick too feeble to walk unaided to the toilet who careened straight through a stop sign doing 60kph into a car containing four kids under ten, while at the same time looking after some of those very same kids (the ones that didn’t go straight to the operating theatre to try to stop their massive internal haemorhages) and see if you don’t develop a little righteous indignation at the enfeebled getting behind the wheel.

    
    
42.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 10:26 pm) # 

    or the police who refused to press charges “because she’s an old lady” for that matter.

    
    
43.   joe2 (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 10:32 pm) # 

    “As for Mister Citino, meet Senator Bronwyn Bishop; she’s got a special bath for you.”

    How about we ask the author of this thread why she/he thought the last sentence was acceptable when their have been no charges laid.

    
    
44.   Krypto (Tuesday 24 June 2008, 10:40 pm) # 

    Joe2 did you read what I just wrote? I have personally spoken to a uniformed police officer who despite filling out an accident report for an accident in which a driver went straight through a stop sign at 60kph into another car, the occupants of whom (four of whom were children under ten) sustained life threatening injuries, as witnessed by a number of people REFUSED to press charges because of the driver’s age.

    Clearly an offece was committed, no charges were laid.
    In the case I am referring to, the absence of charges does not indicate the absence of culpability.
    While one does not automatically equal the other, it certainly should give you pause to wonder if the absence of charges equates to an absence of culpability in this case.

    
    
45.   Bridgit Gread (Wednesday 25 June 2008, 4:56 pm) # 

    Joe2, my distant yearning to see Mr Citino take a kero bath was based not on guilt but on his indignant response and complete abdication of any responsibility for hitting two kids on a pedestrian crossing.

    If I had hit those children then I’d be beside myself with remorse and self-loathing - even if it was entirely their fault. I wouldn’t be ranting and raving who was and wasn’t to blame.

    
    
46.   joe2 (Wednesday 25 June 2008, 6:18 pm) # 

    “I was right. It was green so then I turned,” he said. “The parents were on the footpath . . . but the kids ran.”

    Bridgit, I fail to see the “ranting and raving” is in those comments. More like an explanation of what he reckons happened.

    Further, it gets a bit wild to conjure up how you would feel, if this happened to you, and then suggest he did not match up.

    
    
47.   Bridgit Gread (Wednesday 25 June 2008, 6:56 pm) # 

    It might be if we were discussing being short-changed at the local shop or having someone pinch our parking space. But running down a couple of kids, nearly killing one of them? I think any reasonable human being would expect devastation, not indignation. What would you do - shrug it off as ‘just one of those things’?

    
    
48.   Krypto (Thursday 26 June 2008, 11:35 am) # 

    joe2 are you genuinely that linear in your thinking that you can’t grasp this concept?

    Driving is not just a simple matter of obeying road rules, we could have made robots to do that years ago if that were the case.

    Driving is a complex task which requires -among other things- the use of skill and judgement on the part of the person behind the wheel.

    Many factors make a competent driver, reaction time, reflexes, peripheral vision, judgement and the ability to read situations around them.

    I would suggest in the case of Mr Crinkli, most if not ALL of those attributes are lacking or completely absent.

    Truth is even lousy drivers can get by without an accident for a certain amount of time, it’s only when the situation arises they have to use some of the attributes I listed that it sorts the sheep from the goats as it were.

    Remaining in denial about one’s driving ability even after having been tested in a real life situation-and found wanting- is a character flaw, not a driving skill defecit.

    
    
49.   joe2 (Thursday 26 June 2008, 12:20 pm) # 

    “joe2 are you genuinely that linear in your thinking that you can’t grasp this concept?”

    Not at all and maybe it is up to you to consider where I am coming from, Krypto.

    Cars are dangerous weapons that are killing more of us in Australia, than any terrorist could conceive of, and it is the person behind the wheel that holds the trigger.

    That said,it is over the top to grab a little bit of selected interview material, from the little paper, and use it as a very personal attack on someone who has not even had his day in court.

    And further, Bridget made a most tasteless suggestion of “a special bath” ,for the bloke, that is both unfunny and tacky.

    
    
50.   Krypto (Thursday 26 June 2008, 1:00 pm) # 

    guilty or not he’ll probably never get a “day in court” because he’s an old codger.

    It seems you are deliberately ignoring a number of pertinent points I have made during this thread, specifically relating to age-impaired drivers and their treatment under law.

    
    
51.   joe2 (Thursday 26 June 2008, 7:22 pm) # 

    “While one does not automatically equal the other..”

    Apology, Krypto, if you felt ignored. I have no reason to doubt your anecdotal and quite horrible experience but, as you said, every situation is different.

    
    
52.   Bridgit Gread (Thursday 26 June 2008, 7:31 pm) # 

    I made the comment because I was genuinely pissed off at his I’m-right-they’re-wrong crap when he should have been expressing a bit of regret and concern. As for whether you think it’s funny or not, ego operor non tutela.

    And krypto is right - he’ll probably get off scot free - but I’ll keep an eye on it.

    
    
53.   joe2 (Thursday 26 June 2008, 8:07 pm) # 

    “And krypto is right - he’ll probably get off scot free - but I’ll keep an eye on it.”

    Anyway, I will say this much, Bridgit Gread and congratulate you. You have reached a new mark in blogger paradise, with your post.

    Not too many have actually managed to sensationalise a Sun-Herald item. A feather in your cap for that!

    
    
54.   Krypto (Thursday 26 June 2008, 8:27 pm) # 

    joe2 I relay the experience only to highlight for your information a very real culture of deliberate leniancy which exists within policing towards old drivers despite overwhelming evidence of their culpability.

    
    
55.   Bridgit Gread (Thursday 26 June 2008, 8:48 pm) # 

    joe2, are you here to inspire us with your wisdom or just to run some petty personal agenda and/or push my buttons? Either way, you’re not hitting too many bullseyes.

    
    
56.   Krypto (Thursday 26 June 2008, 9:08 pm) # 

    Bridgit “I work not to protection”? am I missing something in that translation?

    
    
57.   joe2 (Thursday 26 June 2008, 9:56 pm) # 

    Neither, Bridgit @55.

    I was just trying to give my opinion, on a post, that i considered really missed the mark for the various reasons that I explained.

    Anyway, if you do not want to hear anymore, I will happily shut up.

    
    
58.   Krypto (Thursday 26 June 2008, 10:17 pm) # 

    joe2 there’s certinly been more offensive opinions than yours expressed on this blog and I have yet to see anyone banned from it.

    For whatever reason though, you seem to be failing to ingest or deliberately disregarding a few key concepts in this debate.

    It is a little frustrating.

    
    
59.   Bridgit Gread (Thursday 26 June 2008, 10:26 pm) # 

    Well, your opinion is duly noted.

    
    
60.   John Surname (Thursday 26 June 2008, 11:07 pm) # 

    We don’t allow opinions here.

    
    

Leave a reply

Live preview