Statistics Make a Case For the Older Driver

It is difficult to understand the logic of The Times story (Nov. 20), “Older Drivers: A Dangerous Dilemma,” which relates the procedures involved when an older driver has a serious traffic accident, even though the article states that those drivers are not the most likely to have accidents.

When an elderly driver has an accident, he or she may be required to be retested for the right to retain a license to drive.

However, when a driver between the ages of 20 and 24--the age group with more serious accidents than any other age group--is involved, there was no mention in the article about a retesting requirement. Why not?

The facts clearly show that the juniors are the greatest hazard on the road. They make up 12.7% of all drivers but they are responsible for 40% of all fatal and injury crashes.

On the other hand, seniors make up 10.3% of all drivers but they are involved in only 11.6% of such accidents. If they were as reckless or careless as the young group they would have scored about 30% of the serious accidents. Obviously, the seniors are more careful and it is strange that they are subjected to a retesting routine.

This appears to be an unwarranted discrimination solely on the basis of age. Law enforcement personnel should shift their emphasis and crack down on the drivers who are causing the most damage to life, limb and property--the 20- to 24-year-olds.

DOREEN BLAIR

Laguna Hills