Yeah they should stick to politics where they belong.

No argument here, there needs to be standardized age-based testing for drivers licenses, as well as freely accessible and highly available transport for senior citizens who have had their drivers licenses revoked.

However, this was also a really bad idea from the start. Rollerblading across America, on its roads?!?!

What are the the odds anyone could complete that task without being hit by a motor vehicle, especially a European not used to the car-centric nature of American roadways and traffic?

I'm born and raised, and I am positive that I would at least be clipped by cars multiple times, but more than likely I'd eventually get pasted into a red smear.

That shit sounds terrifying.

One of the greatest downfalls of design in America are Stroads. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad They're anti pedestrian.

“82 year olds shouldn’t be driving”. — THIS one shouldn’t have been; some people enter their90s with sight, hearing and reflexes intact.

Personally, I think that starting at 70, drivers should have to take the written test and screening every 5 years. If they fail to pass it they have to re-try until they do pass, and then take the practical exam again.

How does one even roller blade across the continental divide? I guess you could take I 10 thru thru the desert but that is equally crazy.

Every six months or so I pull up to a light next to someone with oxygen tubes in their nose.

If you need oxygen you should not be driving.

But I get why. Around here a ten minute trip by car is easily an hour on public transit, followed by walking miles. Ain’t nobody got time for that, especially if you have to haul your own O2.

I love driving, especially in my car, but we need better solutions for people who shouldn’t or don’t want to drive. I see them every day on the road.

It would at least mean I’m dealing with a professionally trained, drug tested bus driver instead of someone who may not even know where they are.

(Which is how they drive.)

The article doesn't say which side of the road he was on.

When I was a kid in scouts, we were taught that if you have to walk on the edge of a highway then it is best to walk on the opposing side of traffic (the left). This way if a vehical is veering off and might hit you, you have some time to react and step off. Rather than them hitting you from behind.

It sounds like the biggest issue here might be that the driver didn't do her due diligence to check what she hit. Maybe if an ambulance had been called sooner then he might have survived.

which way's country kitchen buffet?

Or MIT prof, Seymour Papert, who was visiting Hanoi for a conference and had been discussing how to build a mathematical computer model of Hanoi's notoriously chaotic traffic to present at the end of it. He ended up getting hit crossing the street and ended up in a coma for weeks. Complications from it eventually killed him.

Amtrak is pretty safe

There was somethi g about drone striking brown children and the pressident dissolving children after some rape.

Was going to comment that this sounds exactly like america.

If you hit a human sized object without seeing it, turn around and still don't see it and only see the damage at homw which makes you call the cops? That's pretty insane.