It happened around lunchtime. We heard the whipping of the blades. First the news copter, then the Medevac. Thirteen-year-old boy on a bike. “A tan- or gold-colored wagon, possibly a Volvo,” we heard later. Hit & Run.
For two weeks the story was in the papers and on the evening news with pleas for information. The police searched, following false leads. The boy lay in the hospital. Possible brain damage. Two weeks.
Finally, an anonymous tip led to the car — a Volvo with a hole in the windshield — parked in the garage of a 75-year-old woman.
She says she thought she’d hit a deer. At noon, at a busy intersection. She says she didn’t see anything about it on the television news or in the papers. She’s now out on bail. The boy is “recovering at home.”
There will be outrage based on the woman’s age, calls for testing older drivers, for revoking licenses. And probably, there should be. But someone who could run down a thirteen-year-old boy on a bike and then hide for two weeks amid a public clamor for information? I don’t want her likes on the road, regardless of age.
Posts
Nor would I want her living on my street!
ReplyDeleteI saw on the news last night that an elderly man was making an illegal left turn and a semi-truck hit him. The man died, his wife in the passenger seat survived, and the trucker was ok. It is a real problem deciding when older drivers are no longer safe on the road. We don't have a very good national mass transit system so not being able to drive takes away many peoples' mobility.
ReplyDeleteI don't buy the woman's story, but I also strongly believe in innocent until proven guilty. A few things: I thought I heard on the news that the boy was doing well now (no brain damage). Also, time of day and location of intersection has nothing to do with deer sightings. I nearly hit one in the middle of the afternoon on a well-traveled street in Allentown's west end many years ago. A few weeks ago I nearly hit one (probably not too far from where this incident occurred) also in the middle of the afternoon.
ReplyDeleteI don't see anything wrong with a healthy 75-year-old driving. However, an 85-year-old recently smashed into my friend's car in a parking lot, then smashed into the apartment building (I think she was probably trying to flee when she hit the building). She struck a gas line, which thank God only caused the hot water to be out for a few weeks as opposed to blowing the place up. At some point, for public safety, shouldn't we test reflexes? If an 85-year-old passes, God bless 'em and keep driving!
Hello, all --
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comments. Yes, indeed, we do very much need more public transportation, for a whole lot of reasons. And we certainly need retests for older drivers. Deteriorating driving capacity in their parents is a real problem for the children of older drivers. If the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania revokes a license, it avoids some messy family rows.
I agree people should be tested when they get to an advanced age and have deteriorating vision and reflexes that affect their driving. But why stop there? There are plenty of people of all ages on the roads who really are unfit to drive. Retesting everyone every few years (4, 6, 8, 10 years: chose your interval) would be a great way to keep our roads safe.
ReplyDeleteKristen --
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely! Let's do it!
It would be helpful if the Commonwealth made it mandatory, so the family is blameless, as Trina said. My stepmother's very elderly (over 85) father INSISTED he could drive right up until his death (from unrelated causes). My dad actually disabled his car in some way so it wouldn't start, but he tried all the time. Then he was after my dad to fix it. It's upsetting to the elderly person in question and does create conflict.
ReplyDeleteAnd I forgot until just now about the older lady who hit my car in a mall parking lot and fled the scene! So I got to call 911 and say I was looking for a short, elderly lady wearing purple pants!
Jenn --
ReplyDeleteThe anecdote about the purple-panted lady is funny -- except it's not and I'm sure it wasn't funny for you. Fortunately, my father died (at 88) before we really had to have "the conversation." Not being able to drive would have killed him. How would he have escorted his lady friends or gotten to the meetings of the numerous boards and committees on which he served? He was still very much with it mentally, but his driving was scary. There ought to be better modes of transportation for independent people like him and your step-grandfather.
In all these stories - the woman who hit the boy and said she thought it was a deer; the Media Proofreader's 85-year-old that hit the car, then the apartment building trying to flee; and Jenn's elderly woman that hit her car and fled the scene - I find it extremely annoying that these people didn't own up to what they did! Did they simply panic then get in over their heads? I know when I simply scratched another car I hunted down the person to let them know, and they ended up telling me not to worry about it. If I hadn't gotten that reassurance, I would have worried about it the rest of my life. How could someone hit a kid and then try to hide it?
ReplyDeleteMemoirs --
ReplyDeleteThat's what had me outraged: to run down a kid, leave the scene, and then hide. Perhaps she did panic and perhaps momentary panic is excusable (although we all know that ethically, morally, and, oh, yes, legally, you're supposed to stop when you run into anything/body). But for two weeks?! I expect a lot of older people are afraid of losing their licenses, for which, read independence. In a culture/environment that's highly dependent on cars (personal, independent transportation), that's understandable. We need to find alternatives.