XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android
From: nospam@nospam.invalid
In article <566883a0$0$9125$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei wrote:
>
> > a person using a cellphone while driving can toss the phone on the seat
> > if conditions warrant.
>
> When 1/10 of a second reaction time makes the difference between a
> collision and avoiding accident, then that phone starts to matter a LOT.
it's the same reaction time if there was a person sitting in the next
seat or if nobody was in the seat.
banning cellphones will *not* turn that to a zero reaction time.
> When you have one hand on phone to ear and drive with other hand, your
> reactions cannot be as agressive when you have to violently swerve
> because your body won't be anchored to the steering wheel to counter the
> sideways G force.
nonsense, and plenty of people drive with one hand *without* using a
cellphone.
> Anyone who argues that holding a cellphone to ear makes no difference in
> driving safety is a fool. This is banned in many jurisdiction because
> they got stats to prove that using a phone while driving represents a
> significant percentage of *today's* accidents.
they're banned because it plays into people's emotions.
nobody bans eating food, fiddling with the cd/tape player, reading
newspapers or maps, screaming babies, etc., which are just as
distracting as cellphones, if not more so.
> Comparing today's accident rates to long term ones is not proper
> comparison because car safety has improved over the years. So cell
> phones may simply be keeping rates at same level when they should have
> dropped.
except that cellphone use has *skyrocketed* while automotive safety
measures have slowly improved.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
