Elderly drivers not the issue
Three people were killed and 12 were injured in New Taipei City’s Sansia District (三峽) last week when a car plowed into a group of pedestrians at an intersection near Bei Da Elementary School. Since the driver was a 78-year-old man, the media and online communities have been focused on the dangers posed by senior motorists.
Ministry of Transportation and Communications 2023 data showed that people aged 18 to 29 had the highest accident rate at 2,940 incidents per 100,000 people. In contrast, people aged 70 or older only had about 1,115 incidents per 100,000 people — less than half the rate of the younger group.
Last week’s accident was shocking and its consequences were severe, so it is only natural that it would receive extensive media coverage. Repeated broadcasts easily influence public perceptions, leading many to instinctively believe that all elderly motorists are dangerous. This is a psychological phenomenon known as availability bias: We are more likely to overestimate the likelihood of events that are easily recalled.
However, that is not to say that elderly motorists are entirely without issues. As we get older, our vision, reaction time and physical condition declines, thereby affecting driving safety. Statistics show that older drivers are much more likely to sustain serious injuries or die if they get involved in a traffic accident.
The man responsible for last week’s accident, surnamed Yu (余), passed a license renewal test for seniors several years ago, and was also involved in another traffic accident with a pedestrian in March 2020. If the license renewal system was followed properly, where on Earth did things go wrong? Did Yu’s physical condition suddenly and rapidly deteriorate? Did he experience an unexpected medical episode? Or had he been exhibiting dangerous driving behaviors that went unchecked all this time? These are all questions worth discussing.
The government has not been complacent. Since 2017, drivers aged 75 or older are required to renew their licenses every three years, including passing physical exams and cognitive tests. There has also been a strong push to promote the use of public transportation, in hopes that more seniors would choose to stop driving and voluntarily turn in their licenses. Such efforts are a step in the right direction, but it is unrealistic to expect that any one measure or mechanism would eliminate all possible risks.
This letter is not about defending elderly motorists — rather, it is a call for society to step back, take a deep breath and look at the root of the issue clearly. We will all grow old one day, and the labels we place on others would eventually be placed on ourselves. We must let go of our prejudices and adopt a more well-rounded view of issues related to elderly motorists. Rather than discussing which demographics should be excluded, we should work together to make our roads safer for everyone.
Mo Kei
Taipei
Do not restart Ma-anshan
As a resident of Pingtung County, I hope to offer a local perspective on this significant national energy issue. Growing up in Pingtung, I never experienced the benefits of uninterrupted power supply from the nuclear power plant. During my childhood, power outages were frequent, and while swimming in the bay near Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, I found that the seawater was warm and the corals were bleached. Over the years, I have heard locals mention workers at the power plant dying of cancer and undisclosed nuclear safety issues being concealed. For these reasons, we truly do not wish for the power plant to be restarted.
I strongly oppose any plan to restart the facility. Reopening that aging plant in a seismic zone is not progress, it is a dangerous mistake.
First, the earthquake risk is real. The plant sits on a seismic fault line. In 2006, a magnitude 7.0 quake forced emergency shutdowns. Experts have also warned of worse to come. For local residents, this is not theoretical — it is personal.
Second, decommissioning it is the right path. Restarting it would also require expensive legal, technical and safety reviews. That money would be better spent on future-ready energy.
Third is the unsolved issue of nuclear waste. Spent fuel is still stored onsite, as Taiwan has no permanent nuclear waste solution. Restarting it would only increase long-term danger.
Fourth, restarting runs counter to the public’s will. The public voted for a nuclear-free homeland in the 2018 referendum. Restarting the plant would betray that choice and erode democratic trust.
Lastly, safer, smarter energy options already exist. Southern Taiwan is rich in solar and wind potential. With modern storage and smart grid tech, we have clean and reliable alternatives — there is no need to risk lives for nuclear power.
Huang Pin-chi
Pingtung County
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS