Car flip trio escape serious injury

“I am not a troll...unlike you.”

“Blairhunters....I am here !!!!”

“Incredulous 2, I was not using these deaths in any way to make a point, and frankly it is offensive of you to suggest such. I clearly said that. Please read my posts with greater care before commenting. I have merely been making observations upon the posts about this subject. I have avoided becoming involved in the personality issues, and merely putting forward a perspective.

The further point I make is simple. When the slower car had a major impact with a lamp post and overturned, the occupants survived with minor injuries. The faster car did not have that fortune.

Fact. The driver of the slower car was maintaining the speed limit of 30 mph when the
accident occurred.

I do not believe that to be the case in the second accident. But I do not know for sure.

There is no getting away from the tragedy of what happened yesterday and my thoughts and condolences go out to their family and friends, unreservedly.

But I also have sympathy for ALL the occupants of the car last week in Torquay. Given their ages it must have been very distressing for all of them.”

“1RTEatsea - hardly comparable, a car travelling at, or about 30 MPH hits a lamp post (which will 'give way' and absorb some of the shock) compared to a car in a 50MPH limit (possibly exceeding this) hitting a tree, which is a far more substantial object. Age is the one factor that is not likely to be relevant here - it is likely to be speed and the objects that were hit.

I am disappointed in your attempt to use the death of others, without consideration for their families, to try and support your argument”

“But to comment on this crash, the three elderly persons involved received only minor injuries. Where-as another car involved in a crash yesterday, the 3 fatalities and 1 critically injured were all under 25. In both cases no other vehicles involved.
I infer no comment in any way on the causes of either accident, but the age difference MAY prove to be a significant factor.”

“Oh, David_David, David_David, David_David; you really should learn to read posts properly before you comment on them. Neither I or 1RTEatsea have made specific reference to this 'crash', we have merely commented about standards of driving. I also stated that exceptions do not prove the rule - so your 'examples' of Paddy Hopkirk, or "the guy driving the 'c' type Jaguar" do not add anything (I'm surprised you didn't throw Stirling Moss into the argument as well).

Well done on being able to find Google and look up bell-curve distributions - you are a clever chap after all, aren't you. You will no doubt have also found that this distribution is often attributed to IQ. I would guess you would judge yourself as being somewhere in the middle?”

“1RTEatsea - I still do not see how re-testing drivers makes them better - they behave for the test then revert back to type. It is something I see in my work every day - people perform their roles to the required standard while being assessed for a qualification, then go back to doing it the 'easy way'.

A test (be it the first or subsequent) only shows that people have the ability, not that they use it all the time.

As for using mobiles - perhaps young drivers see it as being OK, when they often see older (not elderly) drivers using mobiles while driving - possibly even having seen their parents do it while they are driving. If a young person re-took their test knowing using a mobile was illegal, they are hardly likely to have it turned on, let alone use it while they are being re-examined. But 5 minutes after the examination it may be a different story......

Testing does nothing to improve a persons ability - it only measures the ability they have - as with SATS in Primary schools, it is a measure of ability, not a learning/teaching process.

In terms of misplaced confidence, that can be said of almost every new driver. There confidence increases until they have the 'accident' or 'near miss' that brings them back to earth. Even 75 year-olds, in there Teens when they started driving, would have been 'over-confident' at some point. As I said earlier, teens are older drivers that haven't go their yet.

If you are familiar with Bell-Curve Distribution, then plotting ability with age describes this almost perfectly - if you are not, it is worth looking into.

Blairhunters - look at the post above your last one - and it would be really useful if you could tell me where I cut and pasted from........”

“Incredulous 2 - sorry but you seem to be as bias any some of the other contributors.
My point was clearly that all new drivers be retested. No reference to age. Purely to experience, or lack thereof. Most new drivers appear to gain substantial misplaced confidence with their test pass. They have had no time to develop bad habits. Who would be mad enough to teach anyone to drive and let them chat on the phone while driving during the lesson, for example. Things like failing to look in mirrors, taking risks etc, etc, are learnt behaviour after the initial test.
My point was to start with this group, and not exclusive to them.
I hold a USA licence and I must attend for an eye test when renewing the licence. No such system applies here and that is a problem. Some form of medical competence test is what perhaps what is needed on a regular basis. As all pilots have to do to retain their licence. Regardless of age.”

“Here we go yet again.

Fact - young drivers do have more accidents because they are inexperienced - re-testing them doesn't give them that experience, only spending time on the road and gaining experience makes them safer drivers.

Fact - older drivers (anyone over 30, for example) tend to be safer drivers as, when they were younger and inexperienced they had accidents or near misses while gaining the experience needed to become competent drivers.

Therefore, young drivers are just old drivers that haven't got there yet!

It should also be borne in mind that driving conditions today are worse than they have ever been - more cars on the road means more hazardous driving for young and old alike.

Once past the age of retirement, drivers generally tend to do less miles, venture onto unfamiliar roads less, or drive in poor conditions less - because they don't have to. Therefore, they do have less accidents - but in terms of miles per accident covered, this tends to decrease, which is the only accurate measure of safety.

Fact - as we get older, our faculties gradually decrease (and we are often not aware of the gradual decline). I am in my 50's and, although my reaction times are not as quick as when I was in my 20's, they are still at a level (in my opinion) where I do not present a danger to other road users. In time, I am aware that they will deteriorate further and the day will come when I need to stop driving. I would like to think that I will know when this time comes, but there is a very real risk I will not. It would be comforting for me to know that once I reach a certain age (for example, 70) I have my faculties/reactions/perception objectively tested (say, every 2-3 years) so that someone who is independent is better able to judge when I am becoming too dangerous to be on the road - not just a danger to others, but a danger to myself also.

Re-testing young drivers does nothing to improve their ability - all they need to do is 'step up to the mark' on the days they are assessed - proving they still have the faculties/reactions/ability to do this. They can then revert to their poor driving until the next assessment, if they chose.

Testing elderly drivers (not a full driving test, but an assessment of their abilities) is a valid assessment of their safety to be on the road - if they can 'step up to the mark' on the day then also revert to their poor driving habits, it shows they are still capable. if they are unable to make the grade, it shows they should not be on the road.

There will always be the occasional 100 year old who can still drive competently (and would pass an assessment). because this one person can, it doesn't mean that all 80 year-olds, for example, are automatically safe drivers.”

“shame ageism isn't as much a crime as sexism, racism etc. Have a field day on here! Glad to read none of those involved are seriously injured. You'll all be old one day so don't be so judgemental- look it up if you don't know what it means!”