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 <Hank@nospam.invalid>
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: <utg40t$1r4u5$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ut4s0v$9ei$1@toxic.dizum.net> <ut5bef$353ou$2@dont-email.me>
 <ut5s9m$3bjd7$2@dont-email.me>
 <MPG.4060b42225f15ccb9902c4@news.individual.net>
 <ut7mbt$rvh$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <094rckx2ui.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <utevke$1id06$1@dont-email.me>
 <mkdrckxdio.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <utf822$cvc$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
 <r5prckx0d.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <utflkn$30fj$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
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: <utflkn$30fj$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
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!