Share This Story

Publication

View Another
Letter to the Editor

 

Donald M. Bearup

10:32 am

Editor, The Independent:

The proposed “Ron’s Bill” is a road proposal addressing the question of older drivers being qualified, or not, to be licensed to drive.

It should be acknowledged that seniors are not the only demographic group of drivers, which should be considered when there is a concern for driving qualifications. I can easily imagine the impetuous of youth, or the carelessness of drunkards, or the idiocy of the occasional road-rager, as being worse than danger posed by older drivers.

My mother had a thoughtful, positive approach to courtesy for safety. She decided to quit driving at 83 years of age and sold her almost-new Buick LeSabre. She died at age 92, thoughtful right to the end.

Myself, I will be 84 in July. I consider myself an effective driver – with no mental or physical problems preventing safe driving. I would be astounded, shocked, if I was told I wasn’t qualified. As an older driver, and with appreciation for everyone concerned for renewal of drivers’s licenses after an age of 70 or 75, that it be instead, 80 years of age.

I feel it is fair to assure that those who are age 84 or older should be required to renew in person at a Secretary of State Office every two years. A decision for vision and motor control testing by a doctor should be sought only after an official testing indicates a need for it.

An oldster is not generally impetuous, quite likely not a drunkard and most likely not a road-rager. An oldster is generally a careful driver. Statistics would probably prove it. It would be unfair for oldsters to be singled out for unreasonable concern. Otherwise, “Ron’s Bill” sounds like a good step in the right direction.

Donald M. Bearup, Venice Township

Donald M. Bearup was last modified: June 24th, 2015 by Karen Elford