On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 6:56:01 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 12:07:30 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"ceg" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:37:55 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/...s-507057219572


http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/...s-of-this-year
On the other hand, a growing number of states are raising speed limits,
and everywhere drivers are distracted by cellphone calls and text
messages. The council estimated in a report this spring that a quarter
of all crashes involve cellphone use. Besides fatal crashes, that
includes injury-only and property damage-only crashes.

If a quarter of all crashes are "related to cellphone use", then
why aren't accident rates going up by a quarter?

You're assuming that all those new purchasers are drivers. I think that's
definitely not the case. Absent that correlation, cell phone sales can
skyrocket, but if they're mostly second lines or phones for non-drivers,
then those sales will have little statistical effect on accident rates.

--
Bobby G.



The other assumption here is that whatever the increase in cell phone
usage has been, that it has to produce a huge, readily observable
effect on the gross accident numbers. That is a false premise.
There are about 11 mil auto accidents
a year in the USA. Suppose the ones caused by cell phone usage over
the past 25 years went from 500 to 50,000. That's certainly "skyrocketing".
But you wouldn't even see it in the noise in the 11 mil a year number,
which the census bureau says is estimated and should be used for year to
year comparison with caution. That doesn't mean that the effect doesn't
exist, that it's not a growing safety problem, that we can't prevent
accidents and loss of life by doing something about it.

Are all the people causing an accident by being distracted by their cellphone admitting to being distracted by their cellphone? How would anyone know unless a law is passed ordering the surrender of cellphones belonging to those involved in an accident for examination by law enforcement? The person being struck could have been driving in a manner that caused the collision. O_o

[8~{} Uncle Curious Monster

Uncle Monster used his keyboard to write :
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 6:56:01 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 12:07:30 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"ceg" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:37:55 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/...s-507057219572

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/...s-of-this-year
On the other hand, a growing number of states are raising speed limits,
and everywhere drivers are distracted by cellphone calls and text
messages. The council estimated in a report this spring that a quarter
of all crashes involve cellphone use. Besides fatal crashes, that
includes injury-only and property damage-only crashes.

If a quarter of all crashes are "related to cellphone use", then
why aren't accident rates going up by a quarter?

You're assuming that all those new purchasers are drivers. I think that's
definitely not the case. Absent that correlation, cell phone sales can
skyrocket, but if they're mostly second lines or phones for non-drivers,
then those sales will have little statistical effect on accident rates.

--
Bobby G.



The other assumption here is that whatever the increase in cell phone
usage has been, that it has to produce a huge, readily observable
effect on the gross accident numbers. That is a false premise.
There are about 11 mil auto accidents
a year in the USA. Suppose the ones caused by cell phone usage over
the past 25 years went from 500 to 50,000. That's certainly "skyrocketing".
But you wouldn't even see it in the noise in the 11 mil a year number,
which the census bureau says is estimated and should be used for year to
year comparison with caution. That doesn't mean that the effect doesn't
exist, that it's not a growing safety problem, that we can't prevent
accidents and loss of life by doing something about it.

Are all the people causing an accident by being distracted by their cellphone
admitting to being distracted by their cellphone? How would anyone know
unless a law is passed ordering the surrender of cellphones belonging to
those involved in an accident for examination by law enforcement? The person
being struck could have been driving in a manner that caused the collision.
O_o

[8~{} Uncle Curious Monster

I was wondering if anyone would bring this up.

If the mobile phone technology related distraction accident statistics
declined due to laws being passed which thwart law enforcement's
ability to check to see if the device was in use just prior to the
accdent, would the overall accident numbers necessarily have to decline
in order to avoid another paradox?

--
....
For long you live and high you fly
But only if you ride the tide
And balanced on the biggest wave
You race towards an early grave.

On 08/22/2015 11:40 AM, Uncle Monster wrote:
Are all the people causing an accident by being distracted by their cellphone admitting to being distracted by their cellphone?

Things you'll never hear at the accident scene:

"Yes Officer, I was speeding when I ran over the 5-year-old that chased a ball into the street."

"Yes Officer, I was busy texting when I crossed the centerline into oncoming traffic."

"Yes Officer, I was tailgating when I rear-ended the other car."

"Yes Officer, I was drunk and should not have been driving."

"Yes Officer, my date was fellating me when I ran through the red light."


Well, ok, ya might hear the last one but definitely not the others.