On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 13:57:15 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:35:54 +0000 (UTC), ceg
wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 09:00:28 -0700, trader_4 wrote:

Actually highway deaths have been on the decline going back to the 50s.

First off, we're not talking fatalities.

We're talking accidents.

And, while I agree that accidents have been going down for a long time
(due to a host of unrelated factors) fatalities are affected by an even
larger host of unrelated factors. (In fact, cellphone use can make
fatalities fewer in quite a few ways but I don't want to go there.)

It's complex enough just to stick with accidents, which are going down,
let alone fatalities (which are also going down).

The simple fact is:
1. We believe cellphone use is distracting, and,
2. We believe distractions cause accidents, yet,
3. We can't find those accidents anywhere.

That's the paradox.
Where are they?

It's not a "paradox." And why do you say that accidents caused by
cell phone use can't be found? The are plenty in the news.
Besides, unsurprisingly, they are under reported.
http://www.nsc.org/learn/NSC-Initiat...rash-data.aspx


There is no reason to think that because a driver was using a cell
phone that the cell phone caused the accident. They accident may well
have happened no matter what the driver was doing. Undoubtedly some
accidents are the result of distraction with cell phones being one of
MANY things that distract drivers. But the mere use of a cell phone
is not proof that the cell phone was the cause anymore then the mere
presence of a radio turned up loud is proof that the radio caused the
accident. What you cited is what you would expect to find by any
group that makes their living off "safety". They are going to be
looking for ANYTHING that would expand their empire and control over
others.