Path: ...!uucp.uio.no!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Hank Rogers Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone Subject: Re: No fault cell phone law Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:54:32 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 58 Message-ID: References: <094rckx2ui.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 01:54:39 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="960e35ee651a887e6569c55b26929195"; logging-data="1938373"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/4KrR2rx3gCUTNMhrVAKntNJuXvz82O+4=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.1 Cancel-Lock: sha1:qLNVqd9WJjmGy5BZ916dYLaGWGY= In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4080 Andrew wrote: > Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:14:35 +0100 : > >> Thus I am not reading or >> commenting on what you said. > > Doesn't matter. It's all been said before since we've discussed this in the > past in gory detail, where you don't remember anything that was said then. > > The fact remains, everyone thinks that cellphones must raise the accident > rate simply because they're an added distraction, and they are an added > distraction - but there is no reliable evidence that they have any effect > whatsoever on the accident rate in reliably reported USA Census Bureau > Statistics. > > Furthermore, the fact remains everyone thinks making laws to make people do > safe things would lower the accident rate, but again, teh reliable > scientific evidence shows thta also is not the case. > > The laws have no first order effects whatsoever on safety but they do have > a minor but statistically valid second-order effect on length of hospital > stay. > > This was covered on March 16, 2016 on this newsgroup, and again in even > more gory detail on July 6, 2020 on this very newsgroup, Carlos. > > Morons (without a shred of evidence) disputed it then. > Those same morons (with no evidence) dispute it now. > > Morons will always be morons, but the facts remain true. > > The main reason cellphones have no effect on the accident rate is likely > two fold, one of which is there are hundreds of distractions. Adding one is > like adding another hair to your head. It changes nothing in statistics. > > In addition, cellphones prevent accidents, so they have a cancelling effect > on the accident rate because they may prevent as many as they cause. > > It's not clear why cellphones have no effect whatsoever on the accident > rate, but what's eminently clear in the reliable records is there is no > change in the downward trend of accident rates in the USA for decades. > > Just like the first post-Covid should have been a superspreader event if > all the morons were correct (and it wasn't), the facts show that cellphones > do not change the accident rate (neither up, nor down) in effect. > > As with the Fermi Paradox, if you feel otherwise, you have to answer this: > Q: Where are the accidents? > Why not drop it then? Fiddling with a phone while driving is illegal most places, but a real smart guy could figure out ways to get away with it. Maybe even prove how safe it is. Get busy, and do something!