got hit by a car today

[PhilB]

Originally Posted by blurr

Actually no its not, I lost track of how many links I posted up that you refused to acknowledge on this subject. So much for data eh? ...

You have *never* posted any link that shows phoning to be the same as any other distraction. Go ahead and be ornery all you want, bub, but don't insult my intelligence, and don't lie to me.

PhilB

[blurr]

Originally Posted by PhilB

Self-delusion is a powerful thing. And people have a natural tendency toward the "I'm special; it won't happen to me" attitude. Although this is usually stronger in younger people, it appears to persist into older people on this subject.

You recommend adding it to the drivers ed class and handbooks as a solution to the problem, even though those classes are attended by invulnerable teenagers who are barely listening anyway. Meanwhile here we have a direct conversation among older responsible adults, who simply continue to deny reality and refuse to learn when directly addressed with the truth. This indicates to me that a half-assed educational approach will be highly unlikely to have any useful effect.

Oh well. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, this is exactly why a law IS needed -- too many people think they are exempt from the basic laws of biology and physics, and won't be persuaded to behave responsibly and not endanger other people.

PhilB

Actually you are falling exactly in the catagory you insist upon, after countless links proving other factors being equally dangerous you still refuse to acknowledge them based upon your own bias, the simple fact of the matter is you are promoting the Impossible task and allowing the government deeper into the micromanagement of the American citizen thus increasing the already problematic police state and forfeiting yet more rights all in the false pretense of safety. So now probable cause is yet again narrowed "I thought she was on the cell phone" how do they know that? now they are what looking at speaker phones in your car, checking to see when the last call was made, and instead of focusing on real crimes, they are again, taking away your ability to exist and to function in a free manner.

[PhilB]

Originally Posted by blurr

Actually you are falling exactly in the catagory you insist upon, after countless links proving other factors being equally dangerous you still refuse to acknowledge them based upon your own bias, the simple fact of the matter is you are promoting the Impossible task and allowing the government deeper into the micromanagement of the American citizen thus increasing the already problematic police state and forfeiting yet more rights all in the false pretense of safety. So now probable cause is yet again narrowed "I thought she was on the cell phone" how do they know that? now they are what looking at speaker phones in your car, checking to see when the last call was made, and instead of focusing on real crimes, they are again, taking away your ability to exist and to function in a free manner.

You don't have the right to wilfully and callously endanger other people. Period.

PhilB

[kat9908]

Originally Posted by JulesAZ

The funding would be needed for the printing costs to add the page. My thoughts are that if the page essentially says "No extended phone calls, emergencies only recommended, and hands free only." .... it wouldn't be too effective and is much less than educating people on the effects of cell phone use and how to drive while talking...

If it were effective to do that then they would put verbiage in the book saying don't drink and drive. I would think it would need the same type of campaign as drunk driving is campaigned probably.

I'm all for having information in the drivers book ... they should also add information about how to share the road with motorcycles.

JulesAZ not sure about Florida but I know Michigan puts in all its drivers manuals Don't drink and drive, so a "be safe don't phone" message would be equal. The cost would be far less to add this type of verbage then to spend tax dollars passing a law.

[blurr]

Here, now go sit in the damn corner, IM tired of this fucking argument.

Car Accident Causes

However, regardless of whether or not the driver was drunk, car accident statistics show that many car accidents (81%) were at least partially caused by the driver talking with other passengers in the car.

The statistics also show other significant causes of car accidents are listening to or changing the radio stations (involved in 66% of all accidents) to talking on cell phones (25%).

What Causes Car Accidents? - Smart Motorist

The 6 Most Common Causes of Automobile Crashes

1. Distracted Drivers

Mark Edwards, Director of Traffic Safety at the American Automobile Association stated, "The research tells us that somewhere between 25-50 percent of all motor vehicle crashes in this country really have driver distraction as their root cause."

The distractions are many, but according to a study conducted by the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), rubbernecking -- or slowing down to gawk at another accident -- caused the most accidents, accounting for 16 percent of all distraction-related crashes.

"I've had as many as three accidents at one scene, at one intersection," says Officer John Carney of the Fairfax County Police. "Rubbernecking is the most dangerous distraction, in my experience."

After rubbernecking, other common driver distractions included:

*

Driver fatigue (12 percent, see below)
*

Looking at scenery (10 percent)
*

Other passengers or children (9 percent)
*

Adjusting the radio, cassette or CD player (7 percent)
*

Reading the newspaper, books, maps or other documents (less than 2 percent)

[blurr]

Originally Posted by PhilB

You don't have the right to wilfully and callously endanger other people. Period.

PhilB

Again subjective, no two people are the same which is a FACT, as posted up YET AGAIN, Multiple things lead to accidents, the number one cause is INATTENTIVENESS be whatever caused said distraction.

we willfully and callously endanger other people every time we eat like shit, every time we dont feel good, every time we have an argument, every time we look out the window, every time we adjust the stereo, every time we talk on the cell phone, every time we look for something that dropped, every time we look at the passanger, every time we dodge an animal that we should have hit, every time we let our dogs loose, every time we have some sort of internal illness which effects our response and on and on and on.

bottom line, until there is an actual DANGER, then it is subjective as to whether or not there will be a something dangerous that happens.


THE END

[JulesAZ]

Originally Posted by blurr

I know from your many posts that you stronly depend on the government to help control your life, that is all I need to know in regards to this conversation.

Really? Do you have some facts to back up that statement. No you don't know me at all ... pretty ignorant to say that you do.

I could probably say from your posts that your an idiot (which would probably be agreed upon by many others) but I don't because actually I don't know you and there have been a few times that we actually agreed on a topic. Until I meet a person and "know" them I can't possibly state fact about that person.

Just because we don't agree on a topic does not give you the right to make assumptions about my beliefs which you know nothing about. I'm actually quite the opposite of what you say. But if you would rather talk out of your ass.

You do this every time someone does not agree with you and is immature and ignorant. Quit throwing a temper tantrum and RESPECT others opinions because as much as you would like to think so YOU are not right ... I'M not right. It's called opinion.

I respect your opinion and am not trying to convince you that I am right nor am I making assumptions about you personally. NONE of my posts have been a personal attack. Why? because I have respect for the people on this forum and I am using tact and class.

This is the end of my conversation with you ... I know you will have to get the last word in .... so go ahead and knock yourself out.

[JulesAZ]

Originally Posted by kat9908

JulesAZ not sure about Florida but I know Michigan puts in all its drivers manuals Don't drink and drive, so a "be safe don't phone" message would be equal. The cost would be far less to add this type of verbage then to spend tax dollars passing a law.

Maybe ... but which one would be more effective in saving lives?

Note: I don't have any data to back up whether is does or not ... just posing a QUESTION so consider.

For gods sake I don't want an argument

PhilB is the only one that has posted actual FACTS regarding this topic

[JulesAZ]

No one is arguing that there are not multiple causes for distractions.

Not questions directed at you personally .... just questions that I ask myself and are something to think about ... not asking for answers ... just throwing out something to think about...

If there are say 8 things that could be a distraction ... would removing one of those 8 things reduce the chances of causing an accident?

If a person is in their car for an avg of one hour, is it so hard to not talk on the phone for one hour?

Are you willing to risk causing injury to yourself, being the reason for the death or injury of another person, a law suit, damage to your car, higher insurance premiums for 3 years ... just to talk on the phone about nothing important?

If you answer yes to 2 & 3 then go on with your bad self

[PhilB]

Originally Posted by kat9908

JulesAZ not sure about Florida but I know Michigan puts in all its drivers manuals Don't drink and drive, so a "be safe don't phone" message would be equal. The cost would be far less to add this type of verbage then to spend tax dollars passing a law.

Less cost, yes, but also zero effect. And the cost of passing and enforcing a law against phoning while driving is tiny compared to the literally thousands of lives it will save. It's very cost-effective lifesaving.

Originally Posted by blurr

Here, now go sit in the damn corner, IM tired of this fucking argument.

Car Accident Causes

What Causes Car Accidents? - Smart Motorist

The 6 Most Common Causes of Automobile Crashes ...

Yeah, you've posted these links before. None of them provide enough data to actually support your claims. Just like the last time you posted them. You pick out a few phrases that support your pre-determined conclusion, ignore the ones that don't support it, and unilaterally declare victory. Perhaps you should change careers; with that skill set you could have a long and illustrious career as a "creation scientist".

Originally Posted by blurr

Again subjective, ...

Fail, yet again. The risk studies are not subjective. The reaction time studies are not subjective. The brain studies are not subjective. That's WHY the studies are done -- to find non-subjective data to determine what the reality is. And the results are in -- driving while phoning increases your risk of an "accident" by about 400%, increases your reaction times by more than other distractions do, and engages your brain in a different manner than local distractions, in a way that explains the higher reaction times and accident risks -- and is therefore very dangerous to other people.

You still don't have the right to wilfully and callously endanger other people. Period.

PhilB